THE PROBLEM
In Alaska, trapping is allowed on most public lands (which includes many trails and beaches) and onprivate property with the owner’s permission. In Valdez, conflicts between traps and people (especially those with dogs) reached a boiling point.
VALDEZ ORDINANCE TO BAN TRAPPING IN HIGH-USE AREAS
Citing municipal authority, Valdez passed an ordinance in 2005 to ban trapping in high-use, high-conflict areas. The ordinance generally allows trapping for both recreational and subsistence purposes within the Valdez city limits, but it bars trapping in the Valdez duck flats, portions of Mineral Creek Canyon, all areas northeast of the Richardson Highway from Airport Road to the Glacier Stream Bridge, and Mineral Creek State Park, and within one-half mile of occupied subdivisions or 500 feet of any road3 and certain trails. Violators of the ordinance are subject to a minimum fine of $50 and a mandatory court appearance. The ordinance's stated purpose is to “enact land use regulations” to protect “all persons from hazardous devices and to protect domesticated animals and pets from damage and destruction which may result from uncontrolled trapping activities.”
This ordinance, while seemingly common sense, was a big deal.
Most trapping regulations are decided by the State Board of Game. Over the past two decades, individuals and municipalities across Alaska have requested that the Board of Game enact setbacks near communities and along trails. For example, in 2019 the Ketchikan Gateway Borough submitted a Resolution to the Board of Game, requesting that the board take emergency measures to ban trapping within 150 ft from named trails, and require signage when traps are active near adjacent trails and roads. Like all the proposals to restrict trapping in multi-use areas since the early 2000s, the Board unanimously rejected Ketchikan’s request. Between 2011-2022 the Board of Game received 18 proposals to regulate trapping on trails - every one of them failed.
Facing constant defeat at the Board of Game, some larger municipalities passed ordinances to limit trapping along trails and multi-use areas with overwhelming public support.
TRAPPERS SUE
The Alaska Trappers Association and the National Trappers Association filed a complaint challenging the ordinance in February 2020. The Trappers argued that the legislature had not delegated any authority to Valdez to regulate trapping and had “instead vested its authority solely with the State of Alaska Board of Game and the Commissioner of Fish and Game.” They argued further that “[e]ven if [Valdez] had some authority to regulate trapping,” it could not “adopt ordinances that override State law and regulations.” Basically, trappers argued that the State (via the Board of Game) has authority over all trapping regulations and municipalities can’t supersede Board of Game determinations. The trappers also argued that even if Valdez had the authority to regulate trapping, the ordinance should be invalidated because Valdez failed to comply with certain constitutional principles and should have brought a proposal to the Board rather than passing the ordinance itself.
Valdez answered, asserting that it had both constitutional authority and a statutory right to pass the ordinance because Valdez, as a home rule municipality, has the power to regulate land use and enact the trapping limitations on municipal land. Valdez argued that there was no evidence that the ordinance actually impeded trapping in Valdez or that the Trappers had made any attempt to provide public input when the ordinance was passed. It argued that it could not ask the Board to implement a regulation addressing its safety concerns because the Board does not have the authority to address public safety. Valdez emphasized that the Board's mandate is to “conserve and promote the use of game resources,” but the city has the authority and responsibility to protect the health and public safety of its citizens, as it had done by passing the ordinance. Finally, Valdez cited a booklet prepared by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG) summarizing state trapping regulations. It pointed out that in this booklet ADFG specifically advised trappers to be aware of local ordinances and therefore argued that the State contemplated that the ordinance could coexist with trapping.
The superior court held oral argument in December 2020, and ruled in favor of Valdez. The court concluded that the legislature's delegation of authority to the Board was limited and thus did not grant the Board exclusive control of trapping.
The Trappers moved for reconsideration, asserting that the superior court failed to address their argument that the ordinance was invalid because Valdez did not apply the Constitution’s sustained yield principle. At the court's invitation, Valdez responded that the municipality was merely enacting a public safety and land use ordinance, not managing the taking of game, so it was not required to consider sustained yield. The superior court denied the motion to reconsider.
AWA STEPS IN
Photo by Nicole Schmitt with the dog team. In Alaska, mushing has a long history of backcountry travel. AWA has long encouraged trappers to set away from mushing trails and to clearly mark their traps so there is no incidental catch of dog teams.
AWA has been seeking reasonable trapping restrictions on multi-use areas across Alaska for decades. Every year, AWA receives calls and emails from Alaskans who have encountered a trap while recreating, many of whom reach out because their dogs were caught or killed in a trailside trap.
Map The Trap: In 2019, we started collecting information from these contacts and published an annual “Map the Trap” report summarizing trap-trail conflicts and proposed solutions. We received feedback from Map The Trap readers that real-time data on trap sightings would help keep recreationalists safe, so we adjusted the platform to be a real-time map of trap sightings. You can view this map and submit reports for free at https://www.akwildlife.org/safetrails.
Working with Alaska Trappers Association to find a solution: In 2023 and 2024, AWA was a co-host of AK Trappers Association workshops on releasing traps in Cooper Landing and Fairbanks. AWA also spoke in ATA’s “Shared Trails” video, encouraging dog owners to learn how to release dogs from traps and requesting that trappers respect multi-use areas by setting traps away from trails, marking traps, and checking traps regularly.
Seeking setback regulations: After a series of dog deaths in Southcentral Alaska, AWA submitted a proposal to the Board of Game in 2022 requesting 50-yard setbacks from multi-use trails in the Mat Su. Our proposal was unanimously denied.
AWA also supported the Anchorage municipal ordinance to regulate trapping and was watching the Valdez case closely. Shortly after the ruling, Alaska Trappers Association and the National Trappers Association appealed the case to the Alaska Supreme Court. The State filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the Trappers’ position, and we at the Alaska Wildlife Alliance filed an amicus curiae brief in support of Valdez.
In our Amicus brief, drafted by Kneeland Taylor, we write “The AWA does not take the position that local government may directly manage game. Nor did the Superior Court. The AWA’s position is that local governments may enact ordinances impacting the state’s trapping regulations in the exercise of their authority as landowners, and as legitimate public safety measures.”
Further, we conclude, “Valdez and other municipalities throughout Alaska have the authority to enact
police power ordinances which restrict the placement of traps within their borders on both municipally owned lands, and other lands, both public and private. The AWA asks the Court to affirm the decision of the Superior Court finding the Valdez ordinance valid.
The affidavit of AWA Executive Director, Nicole Schmitt outlines AWA’s interest in this issue.
“In my work as the Executive Director of the AWA, I have met with or communicated with numerous Alaskans who are concerned about and oppose unrestricted trailside trapping. These Alaskans reside throughout Alaska... The AWA has an interest in the issues presented in [this case] because of the threats that trail side traps pose to hunters, skiers, hikers and their pets, and because the Board of Game has for many years failed to adopt regulations addressing these threats, despite the public’s requests to do so.”
THE RULING: WE WON!
In May, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Valdez, concluding that municipalities do, in fact, have the authority to regulate trapping on local trails in the interest of public safety. The Board of Game has repeatedly rejected public and municipal requests for trap setbacks along trails, and this ruling provides clarity for municipalities wishing to enact safe-trail buffers locally.
AWA will continue to work towards reasonable trap setbacks in multi-use areas. Thanks to member support, we will maintain the Map the Trap platform. AWA also submitted a proposal to the Board of Game in spring 2024 requesting 50-yard setbacks from specific trails in the MatSu Borough. If you are interested in supporting that proposal this fall, make sure to join our newsletter. If you have a trap encounter story you would like to share, please email us at info@akwildlife.org.
The best way to support this work is by becoming a member. Join today for as little as $35!
