West v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
248 P.3d 689 (2010)
- Written by Deanna Curl, JD
Facts
Alaska has historically managed bear and wolf populations through predator-control programs to ensure sufficient populations of big-game prey, such as moose and caribou, were available for human use. In 1994, the Alaska legislature passed an intensive-management statute to implement the Alaska Constitution’s sustained-yield clause. The intensive-management statute required the Alaska Board of Game (the board) to adopt regulations designed to ensure that an abundance of big-game prey was available for human use. The board’s regulatory framework required predator-control programs to apply sustained-yield principles until 2006, when the requirement was eliminated from the predator-control plan (the 2006 plan). Despite removing the express sustained-yield requirement, the 2006 plan contained several bear and wolf population-maintenance strategies. The Defenders of Wildlife and the Alaska Wildlife Alliance (the defenders) (plaintiff) sued the state and the board (defendant), alleging that the 2006 plan failed to apply the sustained-yield principle required by the Alaska Constitution and the intensive-management statute. The trial court found that the state was mandated to apply the sustained-yield principle to predator populations under the Alaska Constitution but not under the intensive-management statute.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Christen, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 812,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
