Alaska Wolf

Defenders of Wildlife v. Alaska Board of Game


Species Background:

Since 2003, the state of Alaska has authorized the aerial gunning of wolves under predator control plans adopted by the Alaska Board of Game. Under these plans, private individuals may obtain permits to chase and shoot wolves by aircraft across forty million acres of Alaska’s interior. Despite repeated challenges by ballot initiatives and federal lawmaking, the predator control program continues to expand under the push of the Alaska Board of Game which claims that “control” of wolf populations is necessary to protect Alaska’s sport-hunted game populations. Though the Federal Airborne Hunting Act was passed in 1971 specifically to prevent this sort of aerial killing, the Bush administration is unwilling to enforce the law.

Case Background:

Defenders legally challenged the Alaska Board of Game’s decision authorizing the aerial killing of wolves in several areas of Alaska. The citizens of Alaska have passed two ballot measures banning public same-day airborne wolf hunting. However, the state legislature has repeatedly overturned the will of the public and passed legislation reinstating airborne hunting of wolves by the public in wolf control areas. Under this authority, the Alaska Board of Game plans aim to reduce wolf populations by 60-100% in several game management units as part of an effort to artificially boost moose and caribou populations.  From fall 2003 to spring 2008, 795 wolves were killed under this program. In addition, in the spring of 2007 Alaska Governor Sarah Palin authorized a $150 bounty for any wolf killed in specific management zones. The bounty was to serve as an incentive to kill more wolves in control areas where the state’s predator kill goals are not currently being met.

On August 24, 2006 Defenders filed suit against the Alaska Board of Game to invalidate these predator control regulations and challenging the legal authority of the state to issue bounties for wolf kills. In November of 2006 Defenders requested that the court halt the predator control programs while litigation was pending. The Court denied the request to stop the programs, but halted the bounty program. In the mean time, on February 15, 2007 Defenders' suit was consolidated with a similar suit brought forth by Friends of Animals. In late March of 2007, the Superior Court judge issued a temporary restraining order blocking the state from paying the $150 bounty for each wolf killed in the program. In the following May, the Governor’s Office requests legislation taking all the standards for predator control out of the State’s law, and adding brown bears to the list of species that can be killed using private hunters and airplanes.

The State of Alaska Superior Court issued their decision on March 14, 2008. Their decision included the following:

  1. Alaska constitution's requirement that fish and wildlife be managed under sustained yield principles applies to predators, including the wolf, despite the state's insistence that predators were not meant to be covered under the constitutional sustained yield provision.
  2. Though the Alaska Board of Game’s predator control program was not found to violate the constitutional requirement, the Board’s authorization of aerial gunning of wolves was found invalid for some of the predator control areas.
  3. The bounty program established by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game was deemed illegal because the Department does not have the authority to establish bounties, though Alaska Board of Game does maintain this authority. The current bounty program was halted, though the Board of Game has the power to reinstate.

Related documents:


Complaint (3/25/2007)
Temporary Restraining Order Request (3/27/2007)
Temporary Restraining Order (3/30/2007)
Order Consolidating Cases (2/17/2007)
Opposition to State’s Cross Motion and Reply Brief (8/14/2007)
Exhibits for Opposition to State’s Cross Motion and Reply Brief (8/14/2007)
Order Granting Denied in Part on Cross Motions (3/14/2008)
Press Release on Court’s Decision- Trustees of Alaska (3/14/2008)
Motion for Reconsideration (3/24/2008)
Order Granting Reconsideration (3/27/2008)

Status:


Active/Alaska Superior Court

Co-filers:


Alaska Wildlife Alliance, Sierra Club Alaska

Updates:

06/17/2008
Alaska Superior Court denied Defenders' Motion for Reconsideration of the portion of the Superior Court's summary judgment order from March 13, 2008, concerning our claim that the Alaska Board of Game failed to consider sustained yield for predators when it adopted its predator control implementation plans.

03/27/2008
The Alaska Superior Court granted Defenders’ Motion for Reconsideration on the application of sustained yield to the predator control programs that Defenders filed for three days prior. The court also granted the State’s Motion for Reconsideration on the two programs the Board of Game changed on March 21.

03/21/2008
The Board of Game conducted an emergency meeting to discuss the two control programs halted due to the court’s decision. They made a finding of emergency, then repealed the existing implementation plans for the two areas, approved the new findings, and re-adopted the implementation plans with a few minor changes. These changes are likely to go into effect soon.