Alaska Tribes' Melting Subsistence Rights

Abstract

Subsistence foods are distinct from those that line grocery stores’ shelves throughout the United States. Mother Nature offers no guarantee that a particular kind of food will be available on demand. The Food and Drug Administration does not provide quality assurance. To procure, protect, and store subsistence foods throughout the year, Alaska Native subsistence users must use their traditional knowledge. When the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA) was enacted by the United States Congress in 1971, many Alaska Natives saw it as an encroachment on their subsistence rights. Over the last few decades, another threat to the ability of Alaska Natives to meet their subsistence needs has emerged--climate change. Climate change impacts the availability and safety of subsistence foods, the costs and risks of subsistence activities, and the very knowledge on which subsistence depends. While there are laws and programs in place to address some of the environmental and health impacts related to climate change, there is little to ensure that Alaska Natives will be able to continue their traditional subsistence lifestyles. This article suggests that climate change impacts subsistence-dependent Alaska Natives more than the Lower 48 Natives and other United States populations. The first part of the article discusses research and observations from the 2000s, suggesting that climate change affects the Alaskan environment more than that of any other state. It also considers how climate change affects subsistence and Alaska Natives’ control over their subsistence activities. The second part of the article considers how the legal and political framework unique to Alaska limits the ability of Alaska tribes to control land and resources needed for subsistence. Finally, the article considers whether any non-tribal entity will be able to protect Alaska Natives’ subsistence interests in the face of escalating climate change. There are a number of caveats regarding this article’s analysis of climate change. First, it is based on the premise that the earth has embarked on a period of overall warming, exacerbated by anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. There are still a large number of Americans who disagree with this premise. Second, many of the observations included in the article are based on weather changes, and the distinction between weather change and climate change is not always clear. Publicity surrounding climate change may influence interpretation of weather observations, whether or not this is appropriate. Third, the impacts of climate change cannot be understood in isolation from other changes, particularly those associated with economic development and rapid social and cultural change. Finally, there are 229 federally recognized tribes in Alaska. Alaska tribes have different cultures and economic situations and may have different views on the impacts of climate change.