On January 17, 1969, the United States issued Public Land Order (“PLO”) 4582, which withdrew all unreserved public lands in Alaska and reserved them under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior for determination. PLO 4582 was modified on December 8, 1970 to extend the withdrawal period for lands subject to PLO 4582 through September 30, 1971. Shortly after the end of the withdrawal period, on December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (“ANCSA”), 43 U.S.C. § 1601, et seq.[1] ANCSA was enacted to provide a fair and just settlement of all aboriginal land claims in Alaska. Pursuant to 43 U.S.C. § 1611(a), Ahtna, one of the Regional Corporations created pursuant to ANCSA for the benefit of Alaska Natives, received title to the Lot from the United States on October 23, 1981 by Interim Conveyance No. 443 (“I.C. 443”). On July 26, 1983, Johnson and Williams submitted an application to Ahtna seeking reconveyance of the Lot pursuant to ANCSA § 14(c)(1) (43 U.S.C. § 1613(c)(1)), which Ahtna denied on March 1, 1990 on the ground that BLM had rejected their headquarters site application which rendered them trespassers subject to the judicial interpretation of § 14(c)(1) precluding failed land entrants and trespassers from claiming a right to ANCSA lands.[2]
<p>The parties do not appear to dispute the relevant facts. Johnson and her former husband, Henry Williams, first occupied Lot 1 U.S.S. 5590 (the “Lot”), a five-acre parcel of land located near Cantwell, AK, in 1965 as a headquarters site. Johnson and Williams filed Headquarters Site Location Notice F-34755 in August 1965, constructed a cabin, developed access to the property, and applied to acquire title to the Lot. However, Johnson and Williams failed to complete their application within the Bureau of Land Management’s (“BLM”) five-year requirement. On August 19, 1970, the statutory life of the William’s entry expired. Johnson and Williams sought to have their application reinstated, but the BLM denied their request on January 26, 1971. Nevertheless, Johnson and Williams remained on the Lot.</p><p>On January 17, 1969, the United States issued Public Land Order (“PLO”) 4582, which withdrew all unreserved public lands in Alaska and reserved them under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior for determination. PLO 4582 was modified on December 8, 1970 to extend the withdrawal period for lands subject to PLO 4582 through September 30, 1971. Shortly after the end of the withdrawal period, on December 18, 1971, Congress enacted the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (“ANCSA”), 43 U.S.C. § 1601, et seq.[1] ANCSA was enacted to provide a fair and just settlement of all aboriginal land claims in Alaska. Pursuant to 43 U.S.C. § 1611(a), Ahtna, one of the Regional Corporations created pursuant to ANCSA for the benefit of Alaska Natives, received title to the Lot from the United States on October 23, 1981 by Interim Conveyance No. 443 (“I.C. 443”). On July 26, 1983, Johnson and Williams submitted an application to Ahtna seeking reconveyance of the Lot pursuant to ANCSA § 14(c)(1) (43 U.S.C. § 1613(c)(1)), which Ahtna denied on March 1, 1990 on the ground that BLM had rejected their headquarters site application which rendered them trespassers subject to the judicial interpretation of § 14(c)(1) precluding failed land entrants and trespassers from claiming a right to ANCSA lands.[2]</p><p>In 1980, prior to Ahtna’s denial of the application, Congress enacted the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (“ANILCA”), 43 U.S.C. § 1636.[3] ANILCA established the Alaska Land Bank Program, a land conservation measure which provided private land owners the option of placing their undeveloped and unleased lands into a cooperative management program with the Secretary of the Interior, or with the State of Alaska, and provided holders of ANCSA lands certain immunities from claims of adverse possession and real property taxes. In 1988, ANILCA was amended to set forth definitions of “developed” and “leased.”[4] In 1998, ANILCA was again amended by the ANCSA Land Bank Protection Act to specifically exclude from the definition of “developed” “[a]ny lands previously developed by third-party trespassers.”[5] The relevant effect of the amendment was to prevent any adverse possession claims by third-party trespassers who had developed ANCSA lands.</p>
Defines where disputes must be litigated (state vs. federal), which affects cost, leverage, and practical enforceability for shareholders.