## Facts

- Alaska law granted certain pre-statehood tideland occupants a class I preference right to obtain title to occupied tidelands for a nominal fee.
- Snug Harbor Packing Company applied for, and later received, a state patent for a tideland tract (ATS 360) adjacent to its cannery operations.
- The patent reserved mineral rights to the State and included an express prohibition on taking herring spawn at the site, but did not expressly address general public fishing rights.
- Dean B. Bunker, a commercial fisherman, fished with salmon set nets in the waters above the ATS 360 tidelands for many years.
- Before the patent issued, the Department of Natural Resources told Bunker he could continue fishing there under a reservation of fishing rights that would be included in the patent; no such reservation was included.
- CWC Fisheries purchased Snug Harbor’s cannery operations and succeeded to title in ATS 360, then attempted to exclude Bunker from fishing above the tidelands.
- CWC and an affiliated individual sued Bunker for trespass and sought damages and injunctive relief.
- The superior court granted summary judgment to Bunker, holding the tideland title was subject to the public trust and did not permit exclusion of public fishing in the overlying waters.

## Issues

1. Whether tidelands patented under Alaska’s class I tideland preference right statute are conveyed free of public trust burdens or subject to the public’s right to fish in the navigable waters above them.
2. Whether a private tideland patent holder can maintain a trespass claim against a fisherman who fishes in the waters above the patented tidelands.

## Decision

- The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Bunker.
- The court held that tidelands conveyed under the class I preference right statute are conveyed subject to the public trust, including public fishing rights in the navigable waters above the tidelands.
- Because CWC could not exclude the public from fishing in the overlying waters, Bunker’s fishing did not constitute trespass.

## Legal Principles

- State conveyances of tidelands are presumed to remain encumbered by the public trust doctrine, including public rights of navigation and fishing in navigable waters.
- Legislative authorization to extinguish or materially impair public trust rights must be clear and express; a statutory grant of “title” alone is insufficient.
- Patent language granting fee ownership “forever,” without explicit language addressing public trust rights, does not terminate public fishing rights in navigable waters above the tidelands.
- Targeted patent conditions (e.g., a prohibition on taking herring spawn) do not imply a broader elimination of public fishing rights.
- Absent explicit legislative direction, private tideland ownership does not include an exclusive possessory right to control public fishing in the water column above the tidelands.

## Conclusion

Alaska held that a tideland patent issued under the class I preference right statute does not extinguish public trust fishing rights in the navigable waters above the tidelands, so the private patent holder could not exclude a commercial fisherman or recover for trespass based on fishing there.


CWC Fisheries, Inc. v. Bunker, 755 P.2d 1115 (Alaska 1988)