Southeast Alaskans are sounding the alarm about a review of the Federal Subsistence Management Program that the U.S. departments of Agriculture and Interior are conducting in Alaska.

The review targets the decision-making bodies, processes and actions of the management program for Alaska.

Some Alaskans say the review could ultimately lead to regulatory changes that would undermine subsistence harvest rights in the state.

The public comment period was extended to March 30 from its original closure of Feb. 13.

“It’s a huge threat to rural communities,” said Calvin Casipit, of Gustavus, vice chair of the Federal Subsistence Regional Advisory Council for Southeast Alaska. Casipit has been involved with the management program since its inception in 1990.

The program provides a harvest priority on federal lands for Alaskans who reside in communities designated as rural, particularly when a fish or wildlife species’ population declines and harvests must be restricted.

The departments of Agriculture and Interior initiated their review of the subsistence program on Dec. 15 in response to President Donald Trump’s 2025 executive order “Unleashing Alaska’s Resource Potential,” as well as a petition that the Safari Club International filed with the federal government last May, which asks the government to “rein in” the subsistence program.

Casipit said that he’s most concerned that the Trump administration’s review of the program could affect the composition of the regional councils, whose members provide local knowledge and make recommendations to the Federal Subsistence Board.

He’s worried the review could lead to removal of the six Alaskans who serve on the federal board, leaving five politically appointed agency heads as the only members of the board, and could result in federal program leaders being required to give deference to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

The Safari Club, a large, Texas-based sport-hunting organization that has frequently sided with the state in lawsuits against the federal government, requested those changes in its petition last year.

“I can see a lot of damage being done,” Casipit said of the federal review. The department secretaries “wouldn’t even have to go through a proposed rule to really damage the program, they could just decide to unfund it, and they’ve already been doing that to an extent.”

He noted that, during Trump’s previous term as president, the federal secretaries did not appoint members to fill seats on the subsistence Regional Advisory Councils, and so many of the councils could not meet quorum.

Casipit said the Southeast Regional Advisory Council is currently finalizing its written comments regarding the Trump administration’s review of the program. Other groups such as the Alaska Federation of Natives and Sitka Conservation Society have raised concerns about the potential impact of the review.

Ketchikan Indian Community President Gloria Burns has expressed concern about the federal review. She rejected the idea of the federal government giving deference to the state about its management of fish and wildlife harvests on federal public lands, noting that the state does not provide a harvest priority for rural Alaskans.

William Micklin, an executive council member for the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska, spoke to the provisions of the Alaska National Interest Land Claims Act, which in 1980 established the subsistence priority for rural Alaska residents.

Micklin said the act “imposes a clear legal obligation on our federal partners, and which the state of Alaska needs to respect, observe, and comply with.”

Comments can be emailed to subsistence@ios.doi.gov.