In State v. Eluska, 724 P.2d 514 (Alaska 1986), the defendant killed a deer out of season and was charged with possessing or transporting game taken in violation of state hunting laws. In his defense, he claimed that the Board's regulations failed to differentiate between subsistence hunting and other hunting as required by statute. The Alaska Supreme Court ruled that Eluska had no right to hunt for subsistence in the absence of a regulation authorizing such hunting. The supreme court rejected the view that "an agency's failure to act in accordance with a statutory requirement means that those who are regulated by the agency may act as though they were not regulated."