In December 2025, the Department of Interior, in collaboration with the Department of Agriculture, announced a “targeted review” of the Federal Subsistence Management Program (the “Program”) created by the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (“ANILCA”). Under ANILCA, rural residents in Alaska are given priority to fish and game on federal lands in the State. This review came in response to a petition for rulemaking submitted by the Safari Club and is intended to “evaluate the most recent Program review and changes.” Comments are due by February 13, 2026.

Specifically the review will target:

• • Interior Department move of the Office of Subsistence Management to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management and Budget;
  • Criteria for regional advisory council membership;
  • Membership of the Federal Subsistence Board;
  • Federal regulations and State regulations for duplication and inconsistency;
  • Regulations governing special actions;
  • Role of the State and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game in the Federal Subsistence Management Program; and
  • Board’s process for rural determinations.

Of significant note is the review of the 2024 addition of three Tribally nominated seats to the Federal Subsistence Board (the “Board”). Alaska Tribes and Native Corporations fought over many years to have these three seats added to the Board. The Board is the body tasked with regulating subsistence pursuant to ANILCA and is currently made up of five members of the public, five members from the Federal land management agencies, and a chair jointly appointed by the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture. This make up ensures that both federal agencies and the public are given decision-making authority over subsistence on federal land in Alaska.

One of the Safari Club’s requests is to “reduce the membership of the Federal Subsistence Board to the five land management agencies” which, if implemented, would remove all public participation from the Board, including the three Tribally nominated seats. Such an action could result in major negative impacts to subsistence across the state as neither Tribes nor the general public would hold any decision-making authority over subsistence regulations.

Equally concerning is the review’s focus on the criteria for Regional Advisory Council (“RAC”) membership and structure, which signals a potential diminishment of the role RACs play in the federal subsistence framework. RACs were intentionally created by Congress as the primary mechanism through which local and rural users provide meaningful, place-based input into federal subsistence management decisions. While RACs are formally advisory, their recommendations have historically carried significant weight and function as a critical conduit between subsistence users and the Board.

The contemplated changes raise concerns that the Program may be moving toward a more centralized, agency-driven decision-making model that weakens the influence of RACs by narrowing eligibility for membership, constraining the scope of issues on which RACs may meaningfully advise, or reducing the deference afforded to RAC recommendations. If RAC participation is diluted while public membership on the Board is simultaneously eliminated or reduced, the combined effect would substantially erode the locally informed, participatory structure that ANILCA was designed to protect.

Tribal governments and organizations across Alaska have come out against this review and provided comments urging the Department of Interior and Department of Agriculture to leave the current make-up of the Board as is. Many have also emphasized that any restructuring that marginalizes RACs would be inconsistent with ANILCA’s statutory intent to prioritize rural subsistence users and incorporate their on-the-ground knowledge into federal land management decisions. Draft comments from the Alaska Federation of Natives can also be found here.

Comments are due by February 13, 2026.

This article summarizes aspects of the law and opinions that are solely those of the authors. This article does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice regarding your situation, you should contact an attorney.