Alaska judge rules state can resume shooting black and brown bears to protect caribou herd despite ongoing lawsuit

In the sprawling wilderness of southwestern Alaska, where caribou once roamed in numbers that sustained generations of Native hunters, a Superior Court judge has cleared the way for state wildlife agents to shoot black and brown bears. The ruling, issued earlier this month by Judge Adolf Zeman, lets the Department of Fish and Game resume its predator control program even while a lawsuit plays out. It centers on the Mulchatna caribou herd, which has plunged from roughly 190,000 animals in the 1990s to about 16,000 today. You find yourself weighing the trade-offs here: protecting one struggling species while managing another that also belongs to the wild landscape.

The Mulchatna Caribou Herd’s Steep Drop

Caribou numbers in this region collapsed over decades, leaving local communities without a reliable subsistence resource they once counted on. State biologists point to high predation on newborn calves during the spring calving season as a major barrier to recovery. Without intervention, the herd stays stuck at levels far below what the habitat could support. You see the pressure this puts on people who have hunted these animals for food for centuries, turning a cultural lifeline into a memory.

The decline has drawn intense scrutiny from both scientists and residents. Data collected over more than a decade shows bears targeting calves right when the herd needs every survivor to rebound. Officials argue the losses compound other stresses like habitat changes and weather. In response, they crafted a targeted plan to reduce bear numbers in the critical window before calving peaks.

Inside the State’s Bear Control Approach

Agents plan to use helicopters and small planes across roughly 40,000 square miles of southwest Alaska this spring and summer. The program allows them to take black and brown bears of any age, with no set limit on how many. Timing matters: officials aim to act ahead of the May calving period, when young caribou are most vulnerable. You recognize the scale involved, covering terrain so vast that ground-based methods alone would fall short.

Past efforts under earlier versions of the program removed hundreds of bears between 2023 and 2025. State managers say their research backs the idea that lowering bear density in key areas gives caribou calves a better shot at survival. The goal remains straightforward—give the herd room to grow back toward sustainable levels that support both wildlife and human needs.

Why Conservation Groups Took the State to Court

Two organizations, the Alaska Wildlife Alliance and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed suit last November. They argue the plan lacks solid proof that killing bears will actually rebuild the caribou herd long term. Instead, they say it risks unnecessary harm to bear populations that have their own ecological role. You can sense the frustration in their position: wildlife management should rest on clear evidence, not assumptions.

The groups also claim the approach violates Alaska’s constitutional requirement to manage all species under a sustained-yield principle. A prior court had already flagged problems with an earlier version of the program. Now they want the full case heard on the merits, warning that irreversible damage could occur while litigation drags on.

What the Judge Decided and Why

Judge Zeman denied the request for a preliminary injunction after a hearing last week. He concluded the conservation groups had not shown the state lacked any reasonable basis for its plan. The order lets operations move forward during the calving season, which officials describe as a make-or-break time for herd recovery. You notice the court stopped short of ruling on the bigger constitutional questions, leaving those for later arguments.

The decision reflects a balance the judge described in his 22-page order. He acknowledged harms on both sides but found that delaying the program would hurt consumptive uses—hunting and subsistence—that cannot easily be undone. The lawsuit itself continues, with no final resolution yet on whether the program meets constitutional standards.

Bear Populations Face Real Risks Ahead

Opponents highlight the absence of comprehensive bear population surveys across the massive control area. Without better data, they warn, unlimited removals could quietly erode local bear numbers over time. Past seasons already took more than 180 bears, including cubs, raising questions about long-term effects on family groups and breeding. You weigh the uncertainty: bears recover slowly, and the landscape here supports many other predators and prey.

Conservation advocates emphasize that bears are not the only factor affecting caribou. Broader habitat issues and climate shifts play roles too. Removing one piece of the puzzle without addressing the rest, they say, offers no guarantee of success and could disrupt the balance that has evolved over generations.

What Comes Next for the Caribou and the Lawsuit

State officials plan to monitor results closely as the program unfolds, hoping to see more calves reach adulthood this year. At the same time, attorneys on both sides will keep pressing their cases in Anchorage Superior Court. You realize the outcome matters far beyond one season: it will shape how Alaska handles predator control for other herds facing similar pressures.

Local hunters and wildlife managers watch closely, eager for any sign the caribou numbers might stabilize or climb. The debate stays live, blending science, law, and the practical realities of life in a place where people and animals have shared the land for thousands of years.