By ALEX GIMARC
I received a heads up last week from Craig Medred, announcing a World Bank publication that spoke in glowing terms about the role aquaculture is going to play in feeding a growing worldwide population. It predicts as many as 22 million new jobs by 2050, 25 years from today, and investment opportunities of $1.5 trillion over the same period. Growth is projected somewhere between 60 – 97 million tonnes annual production over those 25 years. Today, aquaculture provides almost 60% of global seafood production.
As with any opportunity, there are competitors. The press release linked above lists shrimp from Ecuador, salmon from Chile, Pangasius (shark catfish) from Vietnam. China and Bangladesh are supplying their own domestic markets with carp and black tiger shrimp.
The immediate question arises: How will Alaska play in this new, apparently highly lucrative global marketplace? What do we bring to the competitive table? What, if anything do we do well? What do we sell?
The first and most important thing to note is that Alaska does not and for the foreseeable future will not participate in any effort to commercially farm finfish for commercial sale, having made it illegal in 1990. This was done as a protectionist effort to protect Alaska commfish from competition. What it actually did was ensure Alaska commfish completely incapable of participating in the growing global marketplace in any meaningful way. Even a Dunleavy attempt to introduce onshore, fish farming for trout (mostly based on the current freshwater stocking program) this legislative session was summarily ignored until it died.
The closest we here in Alaska get to fish farming is hatchery release of a billion or two pink fry into Prince William Soung yearly (ocean ranching), fish which are out competing all other salmon species for food, quickly driving them into oblivion. Environmental concerns about the ongoing destruction wrought by excess pink population in the North Pacific is swatted aside by ADF&G commfish friendly biologists with the same tender loving care that the tobacco companies swatted away lung cancer concerns up until 30 years ago when the Clinton administration turned tobacco into a cash cow for trial lawyers who elected him.
All is not doom and gloom, though there is a little aquaculture going on in Alaska, intentionally limited to seaweed and shellfish. The industry is quite new, starting in 1988 with the goal of $100 million in sales by 2040. The most recent NOAA sales figure from 2019 was $1.4 million. Let’s see, an increase in sales from zero to $1.4 million in a mere 31 years, somehow I think we’re going to miss the $100 million goal by a lot ($98 million). This is hardly serious growth.
Contrast that with the World Bank Report of 20 million new jobs, $1.5 trillion new investment opportunity and 67 – 90 million tonnes of product over the next 25 years worldwide and ask yourself how are we going to play in that new world?
Note that the total value of Alaska commercial salmon harvest in 2024 was $304 million, down 24% from 2023, with around 450 million pounds of fish harvested, around 67 cents / pound. Is this the best value we can get for the resource? Or is there another way?
One other way would be to embrace the growing worldwide marketplace for farmed fish. Railing against fish farming and frankenfish, while fun, won’t do anything to make us more competitive.
Sadly, any approach will require action by both the governor and the legislature. Starting with a repeal of the 1990 ban on fish farming in Alaska. The Alaska Legislature can and should be leading this, but their approach to Dunleavy’s proposal for onshore fish farming for trout did not inspire much confidence. It is all too easy to sit back and figure out new ways to raid the Permanent Fund and spend the PFD rather than try to grow the economy.
Still, some things may be changing. The perennial commfish friendly speed bump to progress in Kodiak, Gary Stevens is retiring. An open seat in that part of the state should listen to calls to take advantage of the new opportunities, at least until Election Day 2026.
It is imperative that this state quickly and vigorously embrace fish farming both onshore (recirculating aquaculture systems – RAS) and offshore. There is opportunity out there. Embrace it and we all win.
Continue down our current path, squabbling over ever decreasing returns of valuable salmon species (kings, anyone?), and we will be left with little more than failing businesses and endangered salmon in the streams or in the oceans.
If what we are doing isn’t working, isn’t it time to do something else? Choose wisely.
Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He was a small business owner and Information Technology professional.
“One other way would be to embrace the growing worldwide marketplace for farmed fish. Railing against fish farming and frankenfish, while fun, won’t do anything to make us more competitive.”
Farmed fish in Alaska would be tragic for business for Alaska! Everytime I go to the store I check the salmon display and there is no doubt which one is farmed salmon!! Wild caught salmon is a brilliant red color where as the farmed salmon is a faint orangish color which makes it look SICK!! Besides the Red Salmon texture is more solid and the flavor is amazing!! No farm salmon in Alaska!!!
“……. Alaska does not and for the foreseeable future will not participate in any effort to commercially farm finfish for commercial sale, having made it illegal in 1990. This was done as a protectionist effort to protect Alaska commfish from competition. What it actually did was ensure Alaska commfish completely incapable of participating in the growing global marketplace in any meaningful way……….”
Let them die of their own hand.
I always wondered why we never put a fish hatchery on the Yukon or Kuskokwim to help support the dwindling numbers? This seems like a simple win, seeing the success of the pink salmon in PWS. An entire industry has been created and thrived for decades. Seems like the Yukon and its communities would benefit and provide sustenance.
How about banning bottom trawling in Alaskan waters and focusing on efforts to restore King Salmon, Crab, and Halibut populations. I agree with you guys on most issues but fish farming has no place in Alaska.
Amen. I am all for the elimination of bottom trawling. This needs to be outlawed. The focus to restore King Salmon, Crab and Halibut populations needs to be a priority. Not only for the preservation of these fish species but for sport fishing / subsistence as well.
Alaska has advantages, were it to engage in fish to table aquaculture. One is the perception that cold water raised fish have improved flavor. I first heard about the concept via a Russian fish farming entity. Others have expanded on the concept: ‘https://marvinositaliansteakhouse.com/the-difference-between-cold-water-and-warm-water-fish/
Alaska has existing infrastructure, though much of it needs substantial reinvestment and modernization.
The opposition will likely continue from Seattle based fishing interests. Seattle has neither the infrastructure nor the potential for a significant aquaculture industry, so it will likely cling to memories of past harvests.
The battle of 1990 started with an individual (Andy) who wanted to raise a few thousand salmon fingerlings in his garage in Interior Alaska. He was no threat to anyone, but the uproar was huge. Com Fish lobbyists had a heyday.
“World Bank”? Sounds to me like another useless, USA funded organization staffed by overpaid bureaucrats that sit around all day throwing darts to come up with their predictions. Show me a single decades-out prediction made by them that came any closer to reality than the Alaska aquaculture plan.
Alex, really – “squabbling” over the impact of the world’s greatest natural salmon runs so people out of Seattle and California can “aquaculture” salmon.
Let me guess, you support the commercial long net fishing that has decimated our King runs on the peninsula.
Shame.
I ask that someone kindly explain how a so-called “fish-farmer” poses a threat to commercial fishermen harvesting our wild stock with their exclusive permits.
Do they usually feed them Purina fish food?
Do we even want to enter this market?
Possibly we will win by simply staying with genuine wild product, and leave everyone else to sell the factory stuff.
Makes sense, with Pollock drying up NMFS needs a new way to fund their retirement plans.
At 24% loss of value from year before. This is simply unsustainable. Yet, the horse shoe smiths union can continue to rally against the automobile revolution. To the Commfish’s death knell then, I shed no tears. They have blamed and obstructed sports fishing at every turn. Screw them
This is the attitude that has always worried me, commfish destroying all trust and mutual interest from people who ought to agree with them. Whey they are crushed by the economic train barrelling down on them, and their decades long open warfare on every other user group (sport, personal use and subsistence users) nobody will care. Some might even enjoy the show. Of course, its going to take the streams a decade or so to rebuild the wild runs back to catchable numbers afterwards. Cheers –