Welcome to our new website!
Please note that for a brief period we will be offering complimentary access to the full site. No login is currently required.
If you're not yet a subscriber, click here to subscribe today, and receive a 10% discount.

Alaska would benefit from keeping out finfish farms

Posted
Salmon returning from the ocean attempt to jump Brooks Falls in Katmai National Park and Preserve's Brooks River on July 12, 2018. (Photo by Russ Taylor/National Park Service)

Salmon returning from the ocean attempt to jump Brooks Falls in Katmai National Park and Preserve's Brooks River on July 12, 2018. (Photo by Russ Taylor/National Park Service)

As a fourth-generation sockeye salmon fisherman, I have my own reasons for disliking farmed fish. I started fishing with my family in Bristol Bay in 1979 on my great-grandfather’s site. That was the first year independent fishermen were paid $1 per pound for their salmon. The price increased for several years and then declined drastically when the farming of Atlantic salmon grew to an industrial scale in Norway and Chile, flooding the salmon market. Small-boat salmon fishermen found themselves bargaining for pennies per pound. Forty years later, it is not uncommon for us to be paid a base price less than a dollar per pound, with no adjustment for inflation. 

Despite how harmful industrial-scale finfish aquaculture has been for fishing families like mine, we are seeing efforts to expand it, at federal and state levels. Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s bill to introduce inland finfish farming to Alaska threatens our wild seafood’s reputation. To keep finfish aquaculture at bay outside of state waters, the federal Keep Finfish Free Act of 2025, S.1529, provides a ray of hope. KFFA would block federal agencies from authorizing industrial fish farms in federally managed U.S. waters without congressional approval. This bill, first championed by the late Rep. Don Young, was just reintroduced by our own Sen. Dan Sullivan, along with Sen. Cory Booker. Note that KFFA would not deter beneficial forms of aquaculture, such as oyster and kelp farming; oysters filter water and kelp sequesters carbon.

Beyond finfish farming impacting the livelihoods of small-boat fishermen who feed the world, there are many reasons to be concerned. Ocean health is a big consideration: Large-scale finfish farms create oxygen-starved dead zones from fish waste that piles up. Net pens create conditions for disease that spread to wild fish. Antibiotics and antiparasitics, required to keep stocks from dying in crowded pens, flow freely into open water, contaminating ecosystems. They also end up in the farmed fish brought to market, ingested by consumers who think it’s as nutritious as wild fish. Dyes are added to feed to give the flesh of farmed salmon the color and appearance of wild salmon. And farmed fish consume vast amounts of feed made of wild fish, a practice that is depleting fish stocks and fueling global food insecurity.

The Keep Finfish Free Act helps preserve the proud legacy of Alaska’s wild seafood. It is an encouraging reflection of Sen. Sullivan’s appraisal and support of our state’s seafood sector. Perhaps a House companion bill will be taken up by our freshman legacy lawmaker Congressman Nick Begich, whose grandfather preceded Rep. Young in the same office. At the same time, Gov. Dunleavy’s bill to introduce finfish farming to Alaska concerns me as an Alaskan and fisherman alike. The touting of onshore recirculating aquaculture systems does not allay my fears of what could happen to our seafood industry. Lifting our 1990 finfish farm ban would open the door for fish farms to be built anywhere in our state — onshore or offshore, and harm our cherished salmon populations.

The words “wild,” “natural” and “sustainable” will hold no meaning to the Alaska seafood brand if finfish aquaculture is developed here. There is endless room for innovation with fish that are already available in our waters — and these fish grow themselves. Building local processing infrastructure, improving distribution routes, innovating products, and creating new markets could answer food security needs in our state and feed our own people. That includes full utilization of each fish — rather than wastefully discarding parts that aren’t neatly cut into fillets.

As a delegate to the World Forum of Fisher Peoples, I’ve spoken to enough small-scale and Indigenous fishermen from other parts of the world to learn that small-boat fleets are being pushed out of fishing grounds by industrial fish farms globally. And, this is not just about farmed versus wild seafood, the problem is one of scale across both aquaculture and wild capture fisheries. Around the world, large-scale commercial fishing operations catch enormous amounts of nontarget species, causing ecosystems and people to suffer. We cannot industrialize ourselves out of these problems.

The Alaska Senate and House versions of the finfish farming bills, Senate Bill 108 and House Bill 111, are alive in committees. The newly reintroduced Keep Finfish Free Act in the U.S. Senate, along with a potential companion bill sponsored by Congressman Begich, could create a positive balance and continue to protect our wild fish populations and the communities that depend on them from the harms of industrial aquaculture. Take the time to think about where you want your food to come from: a net pen of fish laden with antibiotics, pesticides, and dyes, or a small boat run by a family-owned fishing business.

SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX


Economy & Environment, Cory Booker, Dan Sullivan, House Bill 111, Keep Finfish Free Act, salmon, seafood, Senate Bill 108