Violation
Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (1971): extinguishment of aboriginal title by statute
Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.
Alaska's 1867 cession treaty did not recognize Native title; Congress extinguished aboriginal claims in 1971 in exchange for land and money.
- Treaty
- Treaty of Cession of Russian Possessions (1867), Art. III; no U.S.-Native treaties in Alaska
- Nations
- Alaska Native peoples (Iñupiat, Yup'ik, Aleut/Unangan, Athabascan, Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian, and others)
- When
- 1971
- Acreage
- 40-44 million acres conveyed; $962.5 million
What happened
Alaska passed from Russia to the United States by the 1867 Treaty of Cession. The Congressional Research Service says Article III admitted "inhabitants of the ceded territory" as citizens and maintained their "free enjoyment of their liberty, property, and religion," but that the treaty did not otherwise discuss aboriginal property holdings. In Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States, decided February 7, 1955, the Supreme Court held that "the taking by the United States of unrecognized Indian title is not compensable under the Fifth Amendment."
In 1971 Congress passed the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA). Congress said the settlement should be "in conformity with the real economic and social needs of Natives" and happen "without litigation." The law extinguished "all aboriginal titles, if any, and claims of aboriginal title in Alaska based on use and occupancy," including "any aboriginal hunting or fishing rights that may exist." It was a statute passed by Congress, not a treaty.
The CRS report says ANCSA "extinguished claims by Alaska Natives to over 360 million acres of land." In return, regional and village corporations shared "a settlement payment of approximately $962.5 million" and "approximately 45 million acres." The Court's 1955 holding means no court treated the earlier taking of Native title as compensable, and the 1971 law is Congress's own settlement of those claims.
Good to know. ANCSA was a law passed by Congress, not a treaty, and gave land to Native corporations rather than tribes. Alaska Native views of the deal vary.
Summarized with AI assistance from 4 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error
What the sources say, and how this was checked
Well supported by the sources below.
the taking by the United States of unrecognized Indian title is not compensable under the Fifth Amendment
Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States, 348 U.S. 272 (1955) (Cornell LII)including any aboriginal hunting or fishing rights that may exist, are hereby extinguished
43 U.S.C. 1603 (ANCSA section 4) (Cornell LII)extinguished claims by Alaska Natives to over 360 million acres of land
Alaska Native Lands and ANCSA, CRS R46997in conformity with the real economic and social needs of Natives
43 U.S.C. 1601 (ANCSA findings), Cornell LII
Research notes. Corrections: CRS says about 45 million acres conveyed; the input used 40 million (38+2) and Wikipedia's 44 million. The input's 'Treaty Art. III' quote was not opened here. The funding split ($462.5M Treasury + $500M mineral revenue) was not confirmed in the pages I read, only the $962.5M total. The 2025-26 NANA transfers and ANILCA were not verified. Labeled 'unilateral' because Congress enacted it; the statute followed negotiation with Alaska Native leaders, which sources describe, and tribal views of the deal vary.
Who is doing the work
This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:
Working with these nations
- United Tribes of Bristol Bay (UTBB) Nation government Long-term guardianship of lands, air and waters, Tribal self-determination Give on their site Website
- NANA Regional Corporation Nation government Nearly 28,000 acres transferred under ANCSA (HCN)
- Native Conservancy (Cordova, Alaska) Native-led LandBack, OceanBack and PeopleBack programs: Native-led conservation trusts, regenerative mariculture, return of… Give on their site Website
- Native Movement (Alaska) Native-led Indigenous rights, environmental justice, food sovereignty and grassroots organizing (not a land buyer) Give on their site Website
- Spruce Root (Seacoast Trust / Sustainable Southeast Partnership) Native-led Indigenous-led conservation funding: Indigenous Guardians, community forest partnerships, food sovereignty in… Give on their site Website
Land return and Native-led work nearby
- Potlatch Fund Native-led Native philanthropy and grantmaking to Native individuals and Native-led organizations Give on their site Website
Native legal and land defense, nationally
- Native American Rights Fund (NARF) Native-led Litigation and legal advocacy for tribal sovereignty, treaty rights, land and resources Give on their site Website
- NDN Collective (LANDBACK Campaign) Native-led LANDBACK campaign (launched 2020; Mount Rushmore closure and return of Black Hills public lands), Indigenous… Give on their site Website
- Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) Native-led Land recovery and control by tribes and individual Indian landowners Website
- Decolonizing Wealth Project (Indigenous Earth Fund; California Tribal Land Return) Native-led Reparative philanthropy Give on their site Website
Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.
Connections
These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.
Nations named 3
Taken to court in 2
Carried out through 1
Located in 1
Policy era 1
Land returns that respond to this 1
Concerns the instrument 1
Sources
- hcn.org/issues/58-2/landback-advances-across-the-west/news
- govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-15/pdf/STATUTE-15-Pg539.pdfprimary record
- supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/348/272/legal text copy
- en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Native_Claims_Settlement_Actpointer
- govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-85/pdf/STATUTE-85-Pg688.pdfprimary record
The record’s fields
- What happened
- Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (1971): extinguishment of aboriginal title by statute -- Article III of the 1867 cession treaty stated that 'the uncivilized tribes will be subject to such laws and regulations as the United States may, from time to time, adopt' and did not recognize their title. In Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States (Feb. 7, 1955) the Court held that taking unrecognized Indian title is not compensable under the Fifth Amendment. ANCSA (Pub. L. 92-203, Dec. 18, 1971) was a negotiated settlement: Sec. 4(b) extinguished all aboriginal titles and claims based on use and occupancy in Alaska, including submerged lands and 'any aboriginal hunting or fishing rights'; Sec. 4(c) extinguished claims against the United States, the State and others. In return: $462.5 million from the Treasury plus $500 million from mineral revenue sharing ($962.5 million), and about 40 million acres (38 million in Secs. 12(b)-(c) plus 2 million in Sec. 14(h); Wikipedia says up to 44 million), delivered to 12 regional corporations plus a 13th and over 200 village corporations. Congress declared the settlement should be 'without establishing any permanent racially defined institutions, rights, privileges, or obligations' and without a reservation system.
- Land affected
- Aboriginal-title and use-and-occupancy claims across the rest of Alaska (statewide land area is about 365 million acres) and aboriginal hunting and fishing rights as such.not yet checked against a source
- Legal aftermath
- ANCSA lands continue to be transferred (e.g., nearly 28,000 acres to NANA Regional Corporation in 2025-26); a new law removed a requirement that some land be held in state trust for a future village corporation (HCN 2026). Subsistence protection later came through ANILCA (1980).not yet checked against a source
- Kind
- Violation
- Confidence
- High
- Nation review
- Not yet reviewed by this nation
- Notes
- Some details are disputed