An Alaska woman who claimed to be emotionally distraught due to the thinning of bear and wolves earlier this year by Alaska Fish and Game officials, in order to help the Mulchatna caribou herd’s numbers, found no love from the Alaska Superior Court.
The Alaska Legislature passed a law in 1994 that allows Fish and Game to intensively manage moose, caribou, and deer to a level that makes these wildlife available for human consumption.
More than 100 bear and wolves were killed in the intensive management exercise in the summer, an action that was even supported by the Alaska Federation of Natives.
But Michelle Bittner sued, claiming emotional devastation. Judge Andrew Guidi dismissed her case on Tuesday.
As a “mere viewer of wildlife, [Bittner] does not allege any travel experience in the area that is the subject of her complaint,” Judge Guidi wrote. She is not a hunter. She is not a guide. Neither is she a wildlife photographer or subsistence user in the area where the state did predator control to enhance the ability of humans to harvest food.
“The court is unaware of any legal authority supporting the proposition that being emotionally triggered by government action constitutes a sufficient ‘injury’ to establish standing. If that were true, then anyone with a strong emotional reaction to the predator control program would have standing to bring suit against the state regardless of where they live or any actual connection to Alaska,” the judge wrote.
Guidi also wrote that if “emotional reaction alone was sufficient to create standing,” then those upset with the state’s alleged inaction on climate change would be able to establish that they had standing as a harmed plaintiff.
Read Guidi’s opinion in the document below:
She should be responsible for the State’s court costs. She should also swing through the hardware store and get a screw driver to tighten her obviously loose screw!
She wouldn’t know which way to turn it…
Lefty Loosie Righty Tightie
Since she’s obviously a lefty, she’d turn it the wrong way anyway. Her loose screw would just get looser!
Lol! Good one!
Good one Bob!!
Is Bittner a housewife and /or stay at home mom homeschooler? Perhaps she is one of those unemployed Alaskans who are chronically in between employment. Anyone to have the time to build a case with the snail slow court she didn’t have enough work to do. I came across Alaskans like bittner, they usually unemployed, think themselves a victim how the world did them wrong, and pour their effort over building a court case instead of working for an employer.
What in the world? Have you ever had any interaction whatsoever with homeschool mothers or housewives?
If she was a stay-at-home homeschool mom she wouldn’t have a millisecond of spare time to mess with this nonsense. Housewife/mother is NOT the same thing as unemployed, good grief!
Not to mention, most homeschool parents I know don’t give this kind of whining about predator control even a millisecond of serious attention.
Thanks, MMD.
Amen! Jen has obviously never homeschooled or been a stay-at-home mom!
I thought being a stay at home mother would be easy after working 16 hour days as an attorney. I could not have been more incorrect. While incredibly rewarding, being a stay at home mom is the hardest job I’ve ever had.
Appears to be a lawyer
‘https://member.alaskabar.org/cvweb/cgi-bin/memberdll.dll/Info?WRP=Customer_Profile.htm&CUSTOMERCD=462
There is apparently an attorney named Michelle Bittner in Anchorage. The plaintiff in this suit represented herself, so I’m guessing she’s an esteemed graduate of a law
Hubbies law firm ( Birch Horton, Bittner) is the biggest in Alaska. She is an IVY league grad and very wealthy based on the downtown house with a private tennis court along the inlet in the richest part of town.
Which then gives her the right-obligation- to tell the rest of us peons how to live.
We should be grateful, I guess.
Sadly and unfairly, only people who are lawyers or are wealthy are able to bring lawsuits when the State of Alaska fails to follow its own laws and procedures, which is why I brought my lawsuit. I am not very wealthy but I was able to devote hundreds of hours to reviewing the record and the law and I know that the State of Alaska did not follow its own laws. That should upset every Alaskan. The facts in this case were on my side. The judge dismissed my lawsuit for “lack of standing.”
You are familiar with the inkblot test right? Personality projection? You read the article and saw the snowflake as a bitter housewife or mom homeschooler. You also showed your feelings toward homeschooler moms. I have known homeschool parents and the kids and they don’t teach or learn snowflake. They excel at the real subjects schools are supposed to teach.
I’m not bitter and I’m not a homeschool parent. I’m an Alaskan who has spent significant time traveling around Western Alaska and believes that the State of Alaska should have to follow its own laws which it did not when it approved and authorized a predator control operation which resulted in the brutal slaughter of 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears, and 5 wolves. Based on the numbers, this operation likely saved about 300 caribou which is not going to increase the overall abundance of the herd which has declined from 200,000 in 1998 to just 12,000 today due to overhunting, illegal hunting, poor nutrition, and brucellosis, a bacterial disease.
She might work for ADFG. There’s plenty of state agency employees who hate management of predators. Watchable Wildlife adherents figure looking at wildlife is of higher end-value and more virtuous than harvesting. That’s like looking at the menu but never ordering any food and contributes little to nothing towards the cost of management.
For your information, Jen, I am a lawyer and was a stay at home mom but not a homeschooler. I do not consider myself a victim. I brought this lawsuit because, when the State approved and authorized the predator control operation that killed 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears, and 5 wolves, it did not follow its own laws and procedures. The State ignored the most recent scientific studies which showed that illegal hunting, poor nutrition, and brucellosis, a bacterial disease, were the primary factors preventing the rebound of the Mulchatna Caribou Herd and the State failed to provide prior public notice. The reason I could file this lawsuit is because I am a lawyer. Very few people in Alaska would be able to afford a lawyer to bring a lawsuit like the one I filed. Next time you write such derogatory and bitter words about someone, you should know more about them. I spend most of my time providing free legal counsel to people who need it or volunteering at Title I schools. What do you do to give back to your community?
I’m guessing she wears a mask all the time and has purple hair.
I’m guessing that you are correct.
I don’t wear a mask and my hair is light brown.
Wow some judge actually made the correct decision.
Alaska’s fish and game have mismanaged the same for as long as I can remember, Kenai Peninsula Moose population at lowest numbers ever, Dall sheep the same with many other fish and wildlife in trouble also caribou, trappers that only catch dogs, trying to open up mining on salmon spawning grounds and on and on.
I have heard stories of illegal hunting by foreigners. I think some of those low numbers might be because of the illegal hunting that goes on in this state!
You are absolutely correct, Ginny. One of the primary factors affecting the overall abunance of the Mulchatna Caribou Herd, which was the subject of my lawsuit, is illegal hunting which prevents the herd from rebounding.
“Alaska’s fish and game have mismanaged the same for as long as I can remember, Kenai Peninsula Moose population at lowest numbers ever”
Alot of that is because the USFWS, who is in charge of the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, won’t allow baiting for brown bears, who kill a ton of moose calves every spring. Along with the fact that the Tustemena Bench is difficult to access, and has become a refuge for Brownies, who move out of there to predate on moose. Not to mention that before the Caribou Hills and Funny River fires, there had been no large scale fires to take out spruce and open the canopy for successional trees the moose feed on. No food + predators = no moose. Not a ADFG caused fault. Blame that on the feds and NIMBY’s who didn’t want to risk prescribed burns near their homes.
“Dall sheep the same with many other fish and wildlife in trouble also caribou”
Human harvest of Dall’s Sheep under current full-curl regulations is not an additive mortality. A ram is sexually mature by around 5, so that 8- or 9-year-old full curl ram has already done his breeding and is on his way out. The largest factors of sheep mortality are winter-kill (freeze-thaw in the winter covering food with ice) and loss of habitat as the tree line increases in altitude. Predation by wolves and bears occurs, and intensive management occurs, but another large predator for sheep is Golden Eagles, and we can’t cull those.
“trappers that only catch dogs,”
Dogs are legally required to be on leash unless actively being used (say for hunting). Many of the trails dog walkers use were originally trapline trails. A trapper is in his right to set a trap there, and it is your responsibility to maintain control of your animal.
Well said.
There is no State regulation or statute requiring people to keep dogs on leash except within some municipal boundaries. We still enjoy some level of liberty here and you pay your money and take your chances. Dogs being caught in traps is generally because there’s always a minutia of trappers who set near heavily used public areas (trailheads and parking areas) or even within residential neighborhoods. That’s a self regulating issue and the vast majority of trappers are conscientious about avoiding those areas. It’s usually neophyte and/or young trappers who do so. Otherwise pretty spot on analysis.
Animals do not exist simply for people to eat them. In fact, eating meat is one of the top five risk factors for all digestive cancers and also may be a cause of Parkinson’s Disease. Alaskans who love to view wildlife deserve the same consideration that Alaskans who love to kill wildlife. If people need food, then they should go get a job. The State of Alaska has been mismanaging fish and wildlife for years. The Chinook Salmon are gone from every river, most other salmon are declining sharply, almost every caribou herd out of 32 caribou herds in Alaska are declining, sheep are declining, wolves have all but disappeared. Soon Alaska will be just a vast wild land with no animals. The oil will be gone. And the tourists who come to see the wildlife will go somewhere else.
The fact that this woman could even file such a claim without apparently feeling the least bit of embarrassment is proof enough of the depths of the insanity of the radical left snowflake.
You have no idea what you are talking about. This lawsuit was about the State failing to follow its own laws which resulted in the brutal slaughter of 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears, and 5 wolves. Don’t you think that the State should be required to follow its own laws and procedures? Or do you trust the State to do what is right without following its own laws and procedures?
There is apparently an attorney named Michelle Bittner in Anchorage. The plaintiff in this suit represented herself, so I’m guessing she’s an esteemed graduate of a law school.
She needs to move to a sanctuary city where all they hunt is Mandingo. No predator control in these city’s and she could feel safe.
Thank you Judge Guidi, now make her pay for this frivolous case! Her emotion’s are properly set aside in the trash can!
This case wasn’t about emotions. My lawsuit was about the State of Alaska failing to follow its own laws when it approved and authorized a predator control operation which resulted in the brutal slaughter of 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears, and 5 wolves. Next time the State doesn’t follow its own laws and procedures, it could result in the infringement of your or your friend’s or a family member’s right. How will you feel about it then? My case was not frivolous.
I think this was a trial balloon by the lawyers to see if they could set a precedence. Judge Guidi was absolutely correct. If this had gone to trial “my hurt feelings” would grant standing to any bleeding heart and open the door to litigate (and make lots of money) for any and all causes they deem to “stress out” their clients. Litigation needs to be based on facts.
I would not have made one cent on this lawsuit. The only thing I would have done was ensure that the State follow its own laws when approving and authorizing predator control operations. Let’s see if you feel differently in 10 years when there are so few bears, wolves, sheep, caribou, and moose that we never see them anymore. Perhaps you don’t care about animals, but there are many Alaskans who do, and many visitors to Alaska come for the sole purpose of viewing wildlife. My lawsuit was based on the facts. The State of Alaska did not follow its own laws when approving and authorizing this predator control operation which resulted in the brutal slaughter of 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears, and 5 wolves. The State ignored the most recent science and failed to provide prior public notice and an opportunity for public comment. My case would not have opened the door to litigate and make lots of money because there is no money in this case and because its time consuming and expensive to file a lawsuit and very few people can afford to do so unless they happen to be an attorney, which I am.
I was triggered by this. Who should I sue?
Hey Everybody, this is the rich, crazy, housewife who filed the lawsuit against the State of Alaska for illegally, invalidly, and brutally killing 94 brown bears including 20 cubs (11 cubs of the year), 5 black bears and 5 wolves. The State did this to increase the overall abundance of members of the Mulchatna Caribou Herd which has been declining precipitously from a high in 1998 of 200,000 to likely less than 12,000. In approving and authorizing this predator control operation, the state ignored the studies of two wildlife biologists who concluded that predator control of wolves was not helping to boost the number of the herd, that the primary factors affecting the abundance of the herd are illegal hunting, poor nutrition, and brucellosis, a bacterial disease that is affecting about 45% of the herd. When the state passed the amendment to include brown bears and black bears in the animals targeted for predator control, they did not provide the public with prior sufficient notice. So the State of Alaska did not follow its own laws by ignoring science when authorizing predator control and by not providing the public with prior sufficient notice. There are many people who are upset about this because the science does not support the operation, the public was not given notice, and killing these bears saved a maximum of about 300 cubs which may not even survive because of all the factors impacting the herd. Unfortunately, most people who know that the State of Alaska has broken the law are not able to do anything because they can’t afford a lawyer or they are not a lawyer. Fortunately for me, I am a lawyer and I filed a lawsuit against the State. My case was dismissed on standing grounds, even though I have lived in Alaska since I was a child, have fished in and explored many areas in Western Alaska near where this operation occurred, and I care about animals, particularly knowing that virtually every caribou herd in Alaska is declining, mostly due to overhunting. Instead of bashing me, you should be happy that there is someone who is willing to spend the hundreds of hours of work and research it took me to try to ensure that the State of Alaska follows its own laws. I have no financial incentive to file this case — I was not requesting any damages. You may be bashing me, but next time the State may fail to follow its own laws and infringe on your rights, and then you won’t be so quick to judge someone who cares about animals, especially when they are needlessly and brutally killed, and also cares about the State following its own laws.
Comments are closed.