By SUZANNE DOWNING
May 16, 2026 – The Alaska Legislature has rewritten who qualifies as a “resident” for hunting, trapping, and sport fishing privileges under House Bill 93, a measure that has been debated lawmakers, seasonal workers, retirees, and Alaska outdoor users.
The bill, sponsored by Rebecca Himschoot, a Democrat caucus member, would tighten residency standards by requiring Alaskans to be physically present in the state for roughly 180 days per year in order to maintain resident hunting, trapping, and sport fishing privileges, while still keeping existing domicile and intent requirements in place.
HB 93 passed the House earlier this year on a 27-12 vote and on Friday reached third reading in the Senate after advancing through the Judiciary and Resources committees. It received final Senate passage on a vote of 13-6, with one excused.
Current Alaska law relies largely on domicile, intent to remain indefinitely, and not claiming residency elsewhere when determining eligibility for resident licenses and tags. That has allowed snowbirds who spend winters outside Alaska to continue claiming resident hunting and fishing privileges by maintaining an Alaska mailing address or other ties to the state.
HB 93 would align Fish and Game residency standards more closely with Permanent Fund Dividend residency rules.
The bill would also authorize the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to use information from other state agencies to verify residency claims and establish regulations for enforcement.
Exceptions in the legislation generally mirror allowable absences under the Permanent Fund Dividend program, including military service, education, certain medical situations, and other approved reasons for extended absences.
The measure creates two classes of Alaskans, particularly affecting elderly Alaskans who spend winters Outside, oil field or maritime workers who rotate out of state for employment, traveling medical professionals, remote workers, and longtime residents who maintain homes, vote, and pay property taxes in Alaska but are absent more than half the year.
The bill could affect access to resident dipnet fisheries and other Alaska-only opportunities for people who still consider Alaska their permanent home.
Under the bill, people who fail to meet the physical presence requirement and do not qualify for an exemption would have to purchase nonresident licenses and would face nonresident bag limits and fees.
20 thoughts on “Senate advances HB 93, excluding snowbirds from resident hunting and fishing privileges”
This is long overdue. I don’t think we need elites spending 7 months outside coming up and dipnetting on the Kenai or anyplace else. They can fill their freezers with tilapia down south. On the plus side I can’t stand all this winning lately! You can’t argue that gas, groceries, and used car prices are way down recently! It was just a matter of time before we wised up and got a “businessman” in office. God bless him!
Your comment shows exactly why this was never about wildlife or residency. It’s always been about as you call them elites. What a shame to live life looking at others and not having capacity for the life you are living. Good luck. A lot of Alaskans, true Alaskans, like my self that have lived and breathed here for 42 years and have now retired and the state just dictates how long I can spend with my grandkids or anything else I want to do. Taking rights from Alaskans is not conservative and is definitely from a Democrat lacking an understanding of freedom. Rebecca Himschoot is a Democrat hack who will be defeated!!! And you conservatives who support a bill like this are on the wrong side. Selfish, jealousy and division among Alaskans like this is shameful. It’s mine all Mine. Shame.
Steve. You knew the Statutes and regulations and the legislative and Board intent behind them, and still you choose to complain? This isn’t about “How much time you spend with your grandchildren”, and I’m sure they’re adorable; no sir, this is about the law and the intent of the law. The intent was to prevent grifters from circumventing our laws and prevent the freeloading of our natural resources by those who don’t qualify. Follow the rules.
“…….. I don’t think we need elites spending 7 months outside coming up and dipnetting on the Kenai……..”
So they’ll need to stay another month. Whoop-te-do.
I support this not because actual Alaskans want to spend winters Outside (snowbirds) but because there’s a class of “residents” who are not mentioned…summer only tourists who bought property in state and then claimed this summer only vacation property as their primary domicile to qualify as Alaskan residents under current law. Most have never overwintered. They appear in the Spring and disappear in the Fall but enjoy full resident privileges and benefits all summer before they return to their actual primary residence. Many are older men whose spouses and families remain South, only taking short visits wherever their “resident” spouse has decided to vacation. These are fake residents. They are tourists who could afford to buy an Alaskan vacation place. They should be stripped of their false residency and subject to the restrictions imposed on non-residents. FYI…they also are voting in our state and local elections.
That’s got to be a future class action lawsuit against the State of Alaska
The excluded crowd they do have rights to hunt, fish, and trap
Alaska has idiot leaders
Nobody is saying anything about the right to fish. The bill says if you don’t live in Alaska then you pay nonresident rates, just like everyone else who doesn’t live in Alaska. If you do live in Alaska then you pay resident rates. This is how it works in every other state that I’m aware of.
Now, let’s talk about PERS COLA… those same people are coming north to have lunch every 90 days and taking extra out of our retirement fund to live in a much cheaper state.
I have been in favor of this from the beginning. I even called my local senator who I don’t vote for to express my support. This bill is basic common sense, if you Do Not qualify for a PFD then you Do Not qualify for a resident hunting/ fishing license. This has been a giant loophole for too long.
I have 0 problem with people living here 180 days to be a resident. But our neighbors who spend 120 days outside were denied from their homeowner tax break because they followed the law and didn’t apply for the permanent fun dividend. That reeks.
Let me get this straight. Because I want to spend my winters, and shoulder seasons outside Ak in the lower 48 or else where now that I can I lose all my privleges that I have earned over the last 45 years? WTF!
Alaska is my home. I have raised my family here. Built my business of 31 years from scratch here. Now that I can enjoy some time exploring the rest of this great USofA I no longer can enjoy my life long privlidges that I have earned, do to some cheating SOB’s??
I have received every single PFD sense the beginning. To date. (I must admit I am a procrastinator and missed the deadline this year.)
I own no home in the lower 48, my residence is AK. I pay my property tax on my residence that I built and have owned for over 30 years in AK. Now I am considered a “Non-Resident”..
Somebody please set me straight???
people in their 80 that have spent 50 years in alaska arriving in the 70s or people born in alaska and having spent the majority of their life are automatically un alaskaned and less alaskaned than someone who arrived 3 years ago and lives in anchorage and has never done any subsistence anything but gets the permanent fund and there fore are a real alaskan. I bet no one commenting here has a small place down south in warmer weather or is retired . How can you compare a lifetime in alaska with a 2 year permanent fund qualified stint in alaska and call the old timer that has a place in new mexico or texas not an alaska. I know folks that were alaskan fisherman and raised families in alaska that are in their 80s that out alaskan most alaskans in years here. Sure some rich folks buy houses here and only spend a couple of weeks or months here and every one of them has cars and houses down south with southern registration for cars and every other disqualifying item. Take away the Hunting and fishing privileges of those that have done them for 40 plus years and they will just sell their places to rich foreigners that dont know a salmon berry from a dinkleberry. If alaska enacts this they will lose revenue from retirees that have spent their lives in Alaska. LONGEVITY should matter and should be counted towards the decision for who gets their hunting and fishing privileges. I have been working and living in alaska since 1983 . I now spend the winters down south in Texas with my son and wife while some new permanent fund baby claims residency because they have been here for 2 years. I spend money and work in alaska each summer and contribute the the alaskan economy . the hipocricy of us vs them needs to be balance with the hypocricy of im an alaskan cause i been here 2 years vs someone that has spent decades here and now spends the winters down south.
if being an alaska means getting the permanent fund because you have never left the state because you either dont want to or cant afford to doesnt make you more alaskan. It means you cant afford to leave or you dont want to but anyone that has spent 30 alaskan winters should be allowed to have a place down south that they can stay at in the winter without being penalized because they can afford to do it. Lots wish they could go south but just dont have the money for it so if someone that has spent a lifetime in alaska finds a way to winter down south the 2 year alaskans want to disavow those snowbirds alaskanness because they can afford to go south every winter because they worked hard and saved and planned now your jealous that you cant do the same and want to take away from them something that they have earned more than any 2 year permanent fund welfare recipient.
You hit on a lot of excellent points Steve. Too dang bad that many of us will simply be drowned out.
Many snowbirds have lived their entire lives in Alaska and contributed to the economy. They have cabins, pay property taxes and enjoy a trip outside during the worst months of winter. Why should they travel back and forth and be a part of this great state if they are shunned?
For those lifelong snowbirds, who were: born here … grew-up here … graduated from here … grew their businesses and wealth here … but now enjoy warmer climes elsewhere during the nasty months of the year, will always return home to AK907 to enjoy a slice of heaven, enjoying the cabin at the river or lake, and some world class hunting and fishing opportunities.
however, given the trajectory of this issue, and the overall sentiment, based completely on envy – jealousy, many snowbirds will pause think strategically, divesting some physical assets and certainly moving other high-value instruments elsewhere as a defensive measure so as to protect these instruments of wealth from greedy politicians. Any potential for further investment within the state may be greatly diminished.
I’m sure the xtra $$$ raised in additional licensing fees will be minimal but, this should satisfy the politicos and other like minded, licking their chops in fiend victory as the great State of AK continues it’s trajectory towards parkland status with an ever increasing demand for $$$.
Next will be a state income tax. That’s when the snowbirds will cut ties and continue their efforts in protecting their wealth. Many other states offer tax shelters for this effort and snowbirds will be ‘wisely’ advised by the Lawyers and Tax Accountants.
… I wonder if this HB-93 will be applied to natives too?
… Or, will it only be applied to Whities and Heterosexuals?
This bill should have had an exception for long time Alaskans who worked and raised families in Alaska. It takes a cold-hearted person to place the Californian who just moved to Alaska two years ago above the old-timers who have lived here their whole life.
Alaska is my primary residence. As a consequence, I can’t legally get a resident hunting license in another state. Thanks to HB93, I wont be able to get a resident hunting license in any state without playing silly games with the number of days I am absent from Alaska.
I am Alaskan born and raised and have never been a resident of any other place. Getting to the point where I could leave for the winter has been a lifelong dream. For people who have lived in Alaska the longest, this dream is nearly universal. This bill crushes that dream and demonstrates how the younger generation is short sighted, jealous and hateful.
I could get behind tightening the rules to go after people claiming residency on summer homes who never really lived in Alaska year round, but this bill goes way beyond that and attacks people who have never called another state home (unlike Himshoot).
All I can do now is pray for forgiveness and wisdom to overcome the anger for this blatant act of betrayal from a place I have always called home.
Thank God I still have the privilege of voting as an Alaskan. I suppose Himshoot will come after that next.
This is long overdue. Working on a similar issue in the legislature years ago, I learned that it is very clear in law when you become an Alaskan resident for fishing & hunting purposes but unclear how you lose your residency for fishing and hunting purposes. This clears it up and is appropriate. Way too many people live the majority of the year outside the state yet claim residency to gain hunting and fishing advantages. Many of these people also hold permanent hunting and fishing licenses.
This issue came home to me when lunching with a wealthy couple from San Diego in Wrangell who casually mentioned getting halibut on a skate. “Why that’s a subsistence fishery, I protested.” The woman who owned her own law firm and clearly had thoroughly researched this replied, “We are subsistence users!” They had bought a piece of property in Wrangell with a storage shed, kept a yacht in the harbor and spent most of one year in the area to get residency, register their vehicles, register to vote in our elections and get a permanent hunting and fishing license. They also had a house in Mexico and Nevada which kept them out of California long enough to not have to pay California taxes. Another former coworker retired 15 years ago to Hawaii but keeps a cabin here and comes back for a monthor two every summer just to dipnet. It is all disgusting. I welcome this law.
If you qualify for the permanent fund dividend – i.e – spend 180 days in the state with exceptions for military, education and some medical – then you will still be a resident sport fisher and hunter. However, if you choose to spend the majority of the year outside the state, you no longer should be considered a resident. You can still fish and hunt it will just cost you more and some fisheries like dipnetting are Alaska only. If spending 180 days in Alaska is too much for you, then how can you still consider yourself an Alaskan? It isn’t about history. It is about who is a legal resident now and those spending a short summer here will not and should not qualify. Lines have to be drawn somewhere. You made your choice.
The lines were drawn and I had been planning my course based on those lines. Now they have been changed to favor a bunch of whiney, second-rate fishermen in rural Alaska from the boogy man. I have never agreed with letting folks from small towns rape the resources with personal use halibut longlines, but I never tried to get it outlawed. I think it’s about time to lobby for some changes to reign in the subsistence abuses.
Follow the PFD guidelines – case closed!