Juneau Empire file. (Michael Penn | Juneau Empire)

Juneau Empire file. (Michael Penn | Juneau Empire)

Analysis: Minor permits under Ballot Measure 1

Up for a vote Nov. 6, Ballot Measure 1 would put development on fish habitat into one of three tiers. Minor permits would be allowed for a things like private docks and temporary water use.

Ballot Measure 1, up for a vote during the statewide election Nov. 6, provides three tracks for development projects on salmon habitat in Alaska.

Some projects are minor, some major, and others can received what’s called a general permit for common activities done by many people.

Proponents have said that responsible development won’t face undue permitting hurdles. Opponents have said even routine projects like road widening would screech to a halt.

In a three-part series, the Empire is taking a look at how Ballot Measure 1 changes Alaska law. After talking with measure proponents, opponents and habitat managers, we’re trying to provide voters with an unbiased look at the permitting process for everything from an ATV crossing, to a personal dock or a massive mine.

An article in Sunday’s newspaper looked at general permits, which apply to things like skiff launches, stream crossing and recreational suction dredging in certain locations — everyday activities which a large number of people do with a minimal effect to habitat.

[Analysis: How Ballot Measure 1 could affect everyday activities]

An article in Thursday’s paper will look at what will be required of major Fish Habitat Permits under Ballot Measure 1.

So, what type of development could receive a minor permit?

The difference between a major and minor permit comes down to what Ballot Measure 1 calls “significant adverse effects” to fish habitat (more on that below). Minor permits could apply to things like personal docks, temporary water use permits and boat ramp maintenance.

Right now, anyone building on fish habitat has to apply for a Fish Habitat Permit. The measure doesn’t change that. Permits are approved or denied by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s Habitat Division, which has three offices around the state.

Approval or denial hinges on whether or not it can provide for the “proper protection of fish and game.” (That phrase here refers to wildlife, not the state agency.) Ballot Measure 1 doesn’t change this.

What it does change is the definition of proper protection. Current law doesn’t specify what proper protection means. Habitat biologists have so far defined proper protection using their expertise. Ballot Measure 1 outlines fish protection in legal language. That section (which would appear as AS 16.05.867 under the measure) is vague enough to allow managers some latitude.

Basically, it codifies into law how development would be allowed to permanently change anadromous fish habitat (habitat for fish, like salmon, that live in both salt and freshwater).

Things like water quality and temperature would have to stay largely intact before and after building occurs. Stream flow, fish passage, bank and bed stability and habitat diversity — anyone building would have to ensure that those could be completely restored in a reasonable timeframe under Ballot Measure 1.

This differs from current practice. Habitat managers sometimes alter or divert streams permanently if they believe the work won’t harm fish populations. A stream could be rerouted around a project, or fish habitat could be added somewhere off-site to make up for the loss of habitat.

Both major and minor permits would have to meet this bar. If they can’t, that doesn’t mean a permit will be denied, but developers would be required to take a few extra steps to help avoid harming habitat.

The difference between major and minor Fish Habitat Permits comes down to what projects pose “significant adverse effects.”

About a half page of the 8-page measure defines what’s significant. If a project impairs or degrades any habitat characteristics listed under the “proper protection” section, that’s significant. Interfering with spawning, rearing or migration of anadromous fish, or increases in fish death at any life stage — all these are considered significant adverse effects under Ballot Measure 1.

Anything at risk of significantly changing fish habitat would receive more scrutiny, both from the public and government agencies, under a major permitting track. Minor permits would also receive their own public comment period, something required of major, minor and general permits.


• Contact reporter Kevin Gullufsen at 523-2228 and kgullufsen@juneauempire.com. Follow him on Twitter at @KevinGullufsen.


More in News

(Juneau Empire file photo)
Aurora forecast through the week of Nov. 17

These forecasts are courtesy of the University of Alaska Fairbanks’ Geophysical Institute… Continue reading

(Michael Penn / Juneau Empire file photo)
Police calls for Monday, Nov. 18, 2024

This report contains public information from law enforcement and public safety agencies.

The Douglas Island Breeze In on Wednesday. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire)
New owner seeks to transfer Douglas Island Breeze In’s retail alcohol license to Foodland IGA

Transfer would allow company to take over space next to supermarket occupied by Kenny’s Liquor Market.

A butter clam. Butter clams are found from the Aleutian Islands to the California coast. They are known to retain algal toxins longer than other species of shellfish. (Photo provided by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife)
Among butter clams, which pose toxin dangers to Alaska harvesters, size matters, study indicates

Higher concentrations found in bigger specimens, UAS researchers find of clams on beaches near Juneau.

An aerial view of people standing near destroyed and damaged buildings in the aftermath of Hurricane Helene flooding on Oct. 8, 2024 in Bat Cave, North Carolina. (Mario Tama/Getty Images)
Members of U.S. Senate back disaster aid request amid increasing storm severity

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration’s request for nearly $100 billion in natural… Continue reading

Media members and other observers gather at the Alaska Division of Elections office on Wednesday evening as the results of all ballots, including ranked choice tabulations, were announced. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire)
Ranked choice voting repeal fails by 0.2%, Begich defeats Peltola 51.3%-48.7% on final day of counting

Tally released Wednesday night remains unofficial until Nov. 30 certification.

Looking through the dining room and reception area to the front door. The table will be covered with holiday treats during the afternoon open house. The Stickley slide table, when several extensions are added, provides comfortable seating for 22 dinner guests. (Laurie Craig / Juneau Empire)
The Governor’s House: Welcoming Alaskans for more than 100 years

Mansion has seen many updates to please occupants, but piano bought with first funds still playable.

The language of Ballot Measure 2 appears on Alaska’s 2024 absentee ballots. The measure would repeal the states open primary and ranked choice voting system. (Andrew Kitchenman/Alaska Beacon)
Count tightens to 45-vote margin for repealing Alaska’s ranked choice system going into final day

State Division of Elections scheduled to conduct final tally at 5 p.m. Wednesday.

The drive-through of the Mendenhall Valley branch of True North Federal Credit Union, seen on June 13, is where a man was laying down when he was fatally struck by a truck during the early morning hours of June 1. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire file photo)
Police: Driver of CBJ truck not at fault in death of man struck in drive-through lane of bank

Victim laying on pavement during early-morning incident in June couldn’t be seen in time, JPD chief says.

Most Read