U.S. Code
»
Title 16
» Chapter CHAPTER 51— ALASKA NATIONAL INTEREST LANDS CONSERVATION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER II— SUBSISTENCE MANAGEMENT AND USE
16 U.S.C. § 3113
Definitions
As used in this Act, the term “subsistence uses” means the customary and traditional uses by rural Alaska residents of wild, renewable resources for direct personal or family consumption as food, shelter, fuel, clothing, tools, or transportation; for the making and selling of handicraft articles out of nonedible byproducts of fish and wildlife resources taken for personal or family consumption; for barter, or sharing for personal or family consumption; and for customary trade. For the purposes of this section, the term—(1) “family” means all persons related by blood, marriage, or adoption, or any person living within the household on a permanent basis; and(2) “barter” means the exchange of fish or wildlife or their parts, taken for subsistence uses—(A) for other fish or game or their parts; or(B) for other food or for nonedible items other than money if the exchange is of a limited and noncommercial nature.(Pub. L. 96–487, title VIII, § 803, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2423; Pub. L. 105–83, title III, § 316(b)(4), (d), Nov. 14, 1997, 111 Stat. 1593, 1595.)Editorial NotesReferences in TextThis Act, referred to in provision preceding par. (1), is Pub. L. 96–487, Dec. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 2371, known as the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out under section 3101 of this title and Tables.
Amendments1997—Pars. (3) to (5). Pub. L. 105–83, § 316(b)(4), which directed the addition of pars. (3) to (5) was repealed by Pub. L. 105–83, § 316(d). Pars. (3) to (5) read as follows:
“(3) ‘customary and traditional uses’ means the noncommercial, long-term, and consistent taking of, use of, or reliance upon fish and wildlife in a specific area and the patterns and practices of taking or use of that fish and wildlife that have been established over a reasonable period of time, taking into consideration the availability of the fish and wildlife;
“(4) ‘customary trade’ means, except for money sales of furs and furbearers, the limited noncommercial exchange for money of fish and wildlife or their parts in minimal quantities; and
“(5) ‘rural Alaska resident’ means a resident of a rural community or area. A ‘rural community or area’ means a community or area substantially dependent on fish and wildlife for nutritional and other subsistence uses.” See Effective and Termination Dates of 1997 Amendment note below.
Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective and Termination Dates of 1997 AmendmentUntil laws are adopted in Alaska which provide for definition, preference, and participation specified in sections 3113 to 3115 of this title, amendment by Pub. L. 105–83 was effective only for purpose of determining whether State’s laws provide for such definition, preference, and participation, and such amendment was repealed on Dec. 1, 1998, because such laws had not been adopted, see section 316(d) of Pub. L. 105–83 set out as a note under section 3102 of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Amoco Production Co. v. Village of Gambell (1987)
scotus · cites it 2×
“Interior analyzed in the EIS the effects that the lease sale, and subsequent exploration, development, and production, could conceivably have on "subsistence uses," as defined by ANILCA § 803, 16 U. S. C. § 3113 . The EIS documented the fish and shellfish, sea mammal, bird, and…”
McDowell v. State (1989)
alaska · cites it 4×
“" ANILCA § 803; 16 U.S.C. § 3113 (emphasis added). Thus, under ANILCA, eligibility for subsistence permits was dependent in part upon one's geographic place of residence.”
Kenaitze Indian Tribe v. State of Alaska (1988)
ca9 · cites it 2×
“” 16 U.S.C. § 3113 (emphasis added). The state has selected an unusual definition of the term rural, a definition that excludes most areas normally understood to be covered by the term.”
United States v. Byron v. Skinna (1991)
ca9 · cites it 4×
“He contends that the Alaska fishing regulations underlying his Lacey Act conviction are invalid because they conflict with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 3113 , 3114. We affirm. *531 BACKGROUND Skinna is a Tlingit Indian who lives in…”
Bobby v. State of Alaska (1989)
akd · cites it 3×
“151, SLA 1978, did not then contain the “rural Alaska resident” limitation which ultimately became a part of ANILCA as now expressed in ANILCA § 803, 16 U.S.C. § 3113 . In retrospect, it is clear that Alaska’s first subsistence law failed in one material respect to anticipate…”
Madison v. Alaska Department of Fish & Game (1985)
alaska
“First, § 703 of HR 39 in its 1978 form did not contain the "rural Alaska residents” limitation now found in 16 U.S.C. § 3113 . Second, the Alaska House floor debate reveals that Representative Anderson, the bill's floor manager, understood the 1978 subsistence law to allow the…”
Alaska v. Federal Subsistence Board (2008)
ca9
“16 U.S.C. § 3113 . The regulations further define “customary and traditional use” as “a long-established, consistent pattern of use, incorporating beliefs and customs which have been transmitted from generation to generation.”
Alaska Legislative Council v. Babbitt (1999)
cadc
“” See 16 U.S.C. § 3113 . If it became necessary to limit subsistence taking of fish and game, the Act provided that the priority would be implemented through limitations “based on the application of the following criteria: (1) customary and direct dependence upon the populations…”
United States v. Byron v. Skinna (1990)
ca9 · cites it 4×
“He contends that the Alaska fishing regulations underlying his Lacey Act conviction are invalid because they conflict with the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA), 16 U.S.C. §§ 3113 , 3114. We affirm. BACKGROUND Skinna is a Tlingit Indian who lives in…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.