What was the Result of the ANCSA Settlement?
Land Settlement
Through ANCSA, the federal government transferred 44 million acres of land to Alaska Native regional and village corporations. Of the 44 million acres, Sealaska was conveyed 365,000 acres, which equates to approximately 1.6% of the traditional homelands of the Tlingit, Haida and Tsimshian people of Southeast Alaska. Through ANCSA, Alaska Native shareholders’ land is held by regional corporations.
Monetary Settlement
Through ANCSA the federal government compensated the newly formed Alaska Native corporations with a total of $962.5 million for land lost in the settlement agreement.
Shareholders Enrolled Under ANCSA
ANCSA corporations are owned by their Alaska Native shareholders. Depending on where original shareholders lived, they may have also received shares in village or urban corporations.
Sealaska enrolled 15,782 original shareholders. As of October of 2021 Sealaska currently has 22,921 shareholders.
ANCSA requirements to enroll as a shareholder:
ANCSA Section 7(i) Revenue Sharing
ANCSA established legal title to land for regional and village corporations, which has been a significant source of revenue for some ANCs. Because the potential for natural resource development was brighter in some regions than others, ANCSA Sections 7(i) and 7(j) were included in the law. These provisions help equalize ANC revenues from activities such as oil and gas development, mineral development and timber sales.
Section 7(i) states: “70% of all revenues received by each Regional Corporation from the timber resources and subsurface estates…shall be divided annually by the Regional Corporation among all twelve Regional Corporations, according to the number of shareholders enrolled in each region.”
Section 7(j) states: “ … 50% …shall be distributed among the Village Corporations in the region and the class of stockholders who are not residents of those villages.”
Other results of ANCSA
How was Land Allocated under ANCSA?
For most regions, land was allocated by percentage of Alaska Natives in the region and by some consideration of aboriginal land use. This was not the case for Sealaska and Sealaska was the only regional corporation to be treated differently.
Why was Southeast treated differently?
There were a few contributing factors including:
How was Southeast treated different?