Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250 (2026)
Standards for initial issue of entry permits
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 16.43.250. Standards for initial issue of entry permits.
(a) Following the establishment of the maximum number of units of gear for a particular fishery under AS 16.43.240, the commission shall adopt regulations establishing qualifications for ranking applicants for entry permits according to the degree of hardship that they would suffer by exclusion from the fishery. The regulations shall define priority classifications of similarly situated applicants based upon a reasonable balance of the following hardship standards:
(1) degree of economic dependence upon the fishery, including, when reasonable for the fishery, the percentage of income derived from the fishery, reliance on alternative occupations, availability of alternative occupations, investment in vessels and gear;
(2) extent of past participation in the fishery, including, when reasonable for the fishery, the number of years of participation in the fishery, and the consistency of participation during each year.
(b) The commission shall designate in the regulations those priority classifications of applicants who would suffer significant economic hardship by exclusion from the fishery.
(c) The commission shall designate in the regulations those priority classifications of applicants who would suffer only minor economic hardship by exclusion from the fishery.
(d) If an individual eligible to apply under AS 16.43.260(a) has applied during application periods established under AS 16.43.260(b) for two or more entry permits under AS 16.43.260(d) or (e) for the same specific fishery resource and the same specific type of gear in different administrative areas, but has failed to qualify for an entry permit for that type of fishery resource and gear, the individual's cumulative qualifications may be credited to the fishery for which the individual is most qualified. The commission shall issue an entry permit to the individual for the fishery if the individual's cumulative qualifications result in placing the individual in a category designated in (b) of this section. The qualifications credited to a fishery under this subsection may not be considered for the purpose of ranking the applicant under (a)-(c) of this section for any other fishery. The commission may not revoke any permit previously issued notwithstanding the issuance of permits in excess of the maximum number established under AS 16.43.230 — 16.43.240 as a result of this subsection. In this subsection, “fishery” includes all salmon fisheries of the state for which a maximum number of entry permits has been established by the commission under AS 16.43.240(b).
(e) If the cumulative qualifications of an individual under (d) of this section include points granted by the commission under (a) of this section for more than one fishery and the number of points required to place an applicant in the priority classification under (b) of this section is not the same for each of the fisheries, the commission shall obtain a quotient for the individual by dividing the number of points the individual has been granted for each fishery by the number of points needed to place an applicant in a priority classification under (b) of this section for that fishery. If the sum of the quotients obtained under this subsection equals or exceeds 1.00, the individual is entitled to a permit under (d) of this section.
(a) Following the establishment of the maximum number of units of gear for a particular fishery under AS 16.43.240, the commission shall adopt regulations establishing qualifications for ranking applicants for entry permits according to the degree of hardship that they would suffer by exclusion from the fishery. The regulations shall define priority classifications of similarly situated applicants based upon a reasonable balance of the following hardship standards:
(1) degree of economic dependence upon the fishery, including, when reasonable for the fishery, the percentage of income derived from the fishery, reliance on alternative occupations, availability of alternative occupations, investment in vessels and gear;
(2) extent of past participation in the fishery, including, when reasonable for the fishery, the number of years of participation in the fishery, and the consistency of participation during each year.
(b) The commission shall designate in the regulations those priority classifications of applicants who would suffer significant economic hardship by exclusion from the fishery.
(c) The commission shall designate in the regulations those priority classifications of applicants who would suffer only minor economic hardship by exclusion from the fishery.
(d) If an individual eligible to apply under AS 16.43.260(a) has applied during application periods established under AS 16.43.260(b) for two or more entry permits under AS 16.43.260(d) or (e) for the same specific fishery resource and the same specific type of gear in different administrative areas, but has failed to qualify for an entry permit for that type of fishery resource and gear, the individual's cumulative qualifications may be credited to the fishery for which the individual is most qualified. The commission shall issue an entry permit to the individual for the fishery if the individual's cumulative qualifications result in placing the individual in a category designated in (b) of this section. The qualifications credited to a fishery under this subsection may not be considered for the purpose of ranking the applicant under (a)-(c) of this section for any other fishery. The commission may not revoke any permit previously issued notwithstanding the issuance of permits in excess of the maximum number established under AS 16.43.230 — 16.43.240 as a result of this subsection. In this subsection, “fishery” includes all salmon fisheries of the state for which a maximum number of entry permits has been established by the commission under AS 16.43.240(b).
(e) If the cumulative qualifications of an individual under (d) of this section include points granted by the commission under (a) of this section for more than one fishery and the number of points required to place an applicant in the priority classification under (b) of this section is not the same for each of the fisheries, the commission shall obtain a quotient for the individual by dividing the number of points the individual has been granted for each fishery by the number of points needed to place an applicant in a priority classification under (b) of this section for that fishery. If the sum of the quotients obtained under this subsection equals or exceeds 1.00, the individual is entitled to a permit under (d) of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 41
cases, 1976–2011 · leading case: Wilber v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 187 P.3d 460 (Alaska 2008).
Wilber v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 187 P.3d 460 (Alaska 2008). “The Commission explained that the agency had considered using seasons as suggested by Wilber in his appeal, but had rejected that alternative in a desire to satisfy the legislature's preference for measuring eligibility by calendar years as expressed in the dive fishery…”
Isakson v. Rickey, 550 P.2d 359 (Alaska 1976). “Fishermen who have previously been issued a gear license but have since retired, and hence who do not represent an existing unit of gear, will presumably be excluded under the second-stage "hardship" screening of AS 16.”
Haynes v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 746 P.2d 892 (Alaska 1987). “664 violated AS 16.43.250) and injunctive relief (a remand of his application to the CFEC).”
Rose v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 647 P.2d 154 (Alaska 1982). “AS 16.43.250. Those suffering "significant economic hardship," as defined by the CFEC, are to be awarded permits even if so doing results in exceeding the maximum number of permits set for that fishery.”
Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n v. Apokedak, 680 P.2d 486 (Alaska 1984). “Once an application was accepted the Commission ranked the applicant under regulations adopted pursuant to AS 16.43.250 "according to the degree of hardship which they would suffer by exclusion from the fishery.”
Grunert v. State, 109 P.3d 924 (Alaska 2005). “[49] AS 16.43.250(1)-(2). [50] Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.”
Johns v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 758 P.2d 1256 (Alaska 1988). “” AS 16.43.250. The CFEC has adopted point systems for each of the limited fisheries for this purpose.”
Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n v. Apokedak, 606 P.2d 1255 (Alaska 1980). “[47] The legislature specified in AS 16.43.250(a): Standards for initial issue of entry permits.”
State v. Ostrosky, 667 P.2d 1184 (Alaska 1983). “AS 16.43.250. As the system now operates, wealth is the sole determinative factor.”
Deubelbeiss v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 689 P.2d 487 (Alaska 1984). “630, is explicitly stated in the section of the Limited Entry Act which authorized its promulgation, AS 16.43.250. [4] To avoid unjust discrimination [5] , the Act instructed the commission to rank applicants for the limited number of permits according to the degree of hardship…”
Simpson v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 101 P.3d 605 (Alaska 2004). “Under AS 16.43.250, "CFEC is required to define priority classifications based upon the hardship of similarly situated applicants for permits.”
Younker v. Alaska Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.2d 917 (Alaska 1979). “Even if the “including but not limited to” language of AS 16.43.250(a) allows the Commission to expand upon the concept of participation, it does not require it to do so.”
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(1) — 1 case
Grunert v. State, 109 P.3d 924 (Alaska 2005). “[49] AS 16.43.250(1)-(2). [50] Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.”
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(a) — 17 cases
Wilber v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 187 P.3d 460 (Alaska 2008). “The Commission explained that the agency had considered using seasons as suggested by Wilber in his appeal, but had rejected that alternative in a desire to satisfy the legislature's preference for measuring eligibility by calendar years as expressed in the dive fishery…”
Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n v. Apokedak, 606 P.2d 1255 (Alaska 1980). “[47] The legislature specified in AS 16.43.250(a): Standards for initial issue of entry permits.”
Isakson v. Rickey, 550 P.2d 359 (Alaska 1976). “Fishermen who have previously been issued a gear license but have since retired, and hence who do not represent an existing unit of gear, will presumably be excluded under the second-stage "hardship" screening of AS 16.”
Grunert v. State, 109 P.3d 924 (Alaska 2005). “[49] AS 16.43.250(1)-(2). [50] Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.”
Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n v. Apokedak, 680 P.2d 486 (Alaska 1984). “Once an application was accepted the Commission ranked the applicant under regulations adopted pursuant to AS 16.43.250 "according to the degree of hardship which they would suffer by exclusion from the fishery.”
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(a)(1) — 12 cases
Haynes v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 746 P.2d 892 (Alaska 1987). “664 violated AS 16.43.250) and injunctive relief (a remand of his application to the CFEC).”
State v. Ostrosky, 667 P.2d 1184 (Alaska 1983). “AS 16.43.250. As the system now operates, wealth is the sole determinative factor.”
Johns v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 758 P.2d 1256 (Alaska 1988). “” AS 16.43.250. The CFEC has adopted point systems for each of the limited fisheries for this purpose.”
Grunert v. State, 109 P.3d 924 (Alaska 2005). “[49] AS 16.43.250(1)-(2). [50] Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.”
Rutter v. State, 668 P.2d 1343 (Alaska 1983).
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(a)(2) — 3 cases
Wilber v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 187 P.3d 460 (Alaska 2008). “The Commission explained that the agency had considered using seasons as suggested by Wilber in his appeal, but had rejected that alternative in a desire to satisfy the legislature's preference for measuring eligibility by calendar years as expressed in the dive fishery…”
Isakson v. Rickey, 550 P.2d 359 (Alaska 1976). “Fishermen who have previously been issued a gear license but have since retired, and hence who do not represent an existing unit of gear, will presumably be excluded under the second-stage "hardship" screening of AS 16.”
Younker v. Alaska Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.2d 917 (Alaska 1979). “Even if the “including but not limited to” language of AS 16.43.250(a) allows the Commission to expand upon the concept of participation, it does not require it to do so.”
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(b) — 6 cases
Wilber v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 187 P.3d 460 (Alaska 2008). “The Commission explained that the agency had considered using seasons as suggested by Wilber in his appeal, but had rejected that alternative in a desire to satisfy the legislature's preference for measuring eligibility by calendar years as expressed in the dive fishery…”
Simpson v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 101 P.3d 605 (Alaska 2004). “Under AS 16.43.250, "CFEC is required to define priority classifications based upon the hardship of similarly situated applicants for permits.”
Johns v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 758 P.2d 1256 (Alaska 1988). “” AS 16.43.250. The CFEC has adopted point systems for each of the limited fisheries for this purpose.”
Wickersham v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 680 P.2d 1135 (Alaska 1984).
Matson v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 785 P.2d 1200 (Alaska 1990).
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(c) — 1 case
Vanek v. State, Bd. of Fisheries, 193 P.3d 283 (Alaska 2008).
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(d) — 3 cases
Dominish v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 907 P.2d 487 (Alaska 1995).
Nash v. State, Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 679 P.2d 477 (Alaska 1984).
Jones v. Com. Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 649 P.2d 247 (Alaska 1982).
— Alaska Stat. § 16.43.250(l) — 1 case
Grunert v. State, 109 P.3d 924 (Alaska 2005). “[49] AS 16.43.250(1)-(2). [50] Younker v. Alaska Commercial Fisheries Entry Comm'n, 598 P.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.