Farming Trouble: Why Finfish Aquaculture Harms Alaska

Posted on August 28, 2025

Governor Mike Dunleavy recently voiced his support for bringing salmon farming to Alaska, posting on X (formerly Twitter):

“Alaska is a leader in fresh caught wild salmon. We could also be a leader in the farmed salmon industry. Why not do both instead of importing farmed salmon from Scotland? This would be a great opportunity for Alaska.”

His remarks came shortly after his administration introduced House Bill 111 and Senate Bill 108, legislation designed to open the door to finfish farming in Alaska. While these bills maintain Alaska’s voter-approved ban on salmon farming, they would legalize farming other species in closed containment systems.

At first glance, this may sound like innovation, but the record of finfish aquaculture worldwide tells a different story. Decades of evidence show that fish farming drives down prices for wild stocks, pollutes nearshore waters, and erodes consumer trust in seafood markets. Far from an opportunity, finfish aquaculture has consistently imposed economic, ecological, and social harm on the very communities it claims to benefit. (For a quick reference, see AMCC’s one-pager on salmon farming below.)

The governor’s comments drew immediate pushback. As the Anchorage Daily News reported, his idea “swims against a tide of skeptics.” Leaders from Alaska’s fishing communities were quick to point out the dangers. AMCC Executive Director Michelle Stratton stressed that “farmed salmon collapsed prices once already, spreads disease and pollution, and risks erasing the Wild Alaska brand that fishermen depend on. Other regions are shutting fish farms down; replacing our wild advantage with farmed salmon would be a grave mistake.”

Longtime Bristol Bay setnetter and AMCC board member Melanie Brown added that the issue goes far deeper than economics: “It’s so much more than money and it’s so much more than food.”

Governor Dunleavy himself acknowledged he expected criticism. “The article came up, and I figured I’d post it just to see what the response is,” he told the ADN. He went on to say that discussions around farmed fish become “very emotional” and make it “difficult to have a conversation where facts can be the decider [sic].”

At AMCC, we agree that facts should drive this debate. And the facts are clear: finfish aquaculture has consistently imposed economic, ecological, and social harm on the very communities it claims to benefit.

Lessons from the Past

Alaska’s fishing families have already felt the devastating consequences of farmed salmon on global markets. When aquaculture production surged in the 1990s and 2000s, ex-vessel prices for wild Alaska salmon collapsed to as low as $0.40 per pound, where they remained for years. Many boats and permits were forced to sell, processors shut down, and local economies across coastal Alaska suffered as multinational corporations undercut wild harvesters.

Coastal communities across the state saw declining local revenues, fewer jobs, and shrinking populations—all tied directly to depressed salmon prices driven by aquaculture expansion abroad. The follow-on impacts eroded local participation in salmon fisheries dramatically across the state as resident ownership fell by 50% in some places, and some villages lost more than 75% of their local permit ownership.

Environmental and Ethical Concerns

The ecological record of salmon farming worldwide is equally troubling:

• Disease & Parasites — Net pens concentrate salmon unnaturally, at densities thousands of times higher than in the wild, creating breeding grounds for sea lice, viruses, and pathogens that spread to wild populations. Entire wild salmon runs in Norway, Scotland and British Columbia have been devastated by parasite infestations linked to nearby net pens.

• Escapes & Genetic Risks — Farmed salmon routinely escape and compete with wild stocks for food and habitat, sometimes interbreeding and weakening genetic resilience. A single large escape can have long-term ecological consequences.

• Chemicals & Antibiotics — Used to manage disease outbreaks and parasite infestations, farms rely heavily on antibiotics, pesticides and chemical treatments that leach into surrounding waters. This contributes to antibiotic resistance, contaminates marine ecosystems and threatens non-target species. 

• Waste Pollution —  Uneaten feed and concentrated fish waste accumulate beneath pens, smothering benthic habitats and disrupting local ecosystems. In some regions, seabeds under salmon farms are dead zones devoid of marine life.

• Unsustainable Feed — Farmed salmon require pellets made from soy, grains and other fish caught in distant, often poorly regulated industrial trawl fisheries—exporting ecosystem damage elsewhere.

• Animal Welfare Issues — Confining a wide-ranging, migratory species in small cages is inherently unsanitary and raises ethical concerns. Forcing the salmon into constant contact leads to stress, deformities, fin erosion and high mortality rates. Mortality rates in salmon aquaculture regularly exceed 15-20% per production cycle.

  
  

These are not “bugs in the system.” They are core features of the aquaculture industry.

Alaska’s Wild Brand at Risk

Alaska’s seafood reputation rests on one word: wild. Consumers worldwide pay a premium for Alaska’s salmon precisely because it is natural, healthy, and sustainably managed. Allowing finfish farming—even with restrictions—threatens to blur the line between wild and farmed, undermining one of Alaska fishermen’s most valuable assets: the Wild Alaska brand.

Alaska’s congressional delegation has played an important role in defending that brand. Senator Lisa Murkowski has long championed clear labeling of genetically modified salmon, ensuring that consumers know exactly what they are buying and eating. More recently, Senator Dan Sullivan introduced the Keep Finfish Free Act, opposing finfish farms in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone, signaling strong federal support for protecting wild fisheries and the communities that depend on them. Their efforts reinforce the message that Alaska’s future lies with wild salmon, not farmed substitutes.

Mislabeled farmed fish are already common in U.S. markets, with farmed and even genetically modified varieties often sold without clear identification. If Alaska permits finfish farming, consumer trust in the authenticity of “Wild Alaska” seafood will be harder to protect.

A Step Backward, Not Forward

Around the world, governments are already moving away from finfish farming due to its economic and environmental costs. Washington state banned commercial net pens after 250,000 non-native Atlantic salmon escaped into Puget Sound in 2017, causing lasting damage. Canada has committed to phasing out open-net pen salmon farms in British Columbia by 2029, citing the need to protect wild salmon runs and coastal ecosystems.

These actions reflect a global recognition that the risks of finfish farming outweigh its benefits. Why would Alaska rush toward an industry that others are working to leave behind? Rather than importing problems, Alaska should double down on the resource that sets us apart: sustainably managed, truly wild fisheries. 

Keeping Alaska Wild

Alaska’s constitution mandates management of fisheries for sustainability and the benefit of its people. Finfish aquaculture undermines both. The real opportunity lies not in importing a flawed industry but in strengthening what Alaska already does best: protecting wild fisheries, supporting working waterfronts and ensuring that the next generation of Alaskans can continue to make a living from the sea.

Wild salmon built this state. Wild salmon still feed our families. Wild salmon define our communities and our way of life. Let’s not trade them for a handful of fish farms.

---

Want the fast facts on salmon farming? See AMCC’s one-pager below, designed to reference, use, and share.

---

Threats to Alaska’s Fishing Industry from Finfish Farming

Despite Alaska’s long-standing ban on salmon farming, new legislation to allow finfish aquaculture poses serious risks for fishermen, processors, and coastal communities. Other parts of the world are phasing this industry out; Alaska should not invite it in.

Market & Price Impacts

• Farmed fish flood markets with lower-priced, lower-quality products, undercutting wild harvests.

• Depressed ex-vessel prices could spread beyond salmon to halibut, sablefish, and cod.

• Processors may invest in aquaculture infrastructure instead of supporting wild fleets.

Erosion of the “Wild Alaska” Brand

• Consumers pay a premium for wild. Even limited finfish farming blurs that distinction.

• Mislabeling and supply chain mixing could damage trust in Alaska seafood worldwide.

• Loss of brand integrity would undermine state investments in Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) marketing and weaken Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certifications.

Policy Slippery Slope

• Allowing non-salmon finfish farming chips away at the voter-backed ban.

• It sets a precedent for future rollbacks—including farmed salmon as suggested by Governor Dunleavy.

• State focus could shift from protecting wild fisheries to subsidizing aquaculture, as has happened in many ways on the federal level.

Community & Equity Concerns

• Industrial fish farms are typically corporate-owned, siphoning wealth out of Alaska.

• Working waterfronts could be privatized or restricted for farm operations.

• Rural and Indigenous fishing communities risk losing cultural and economic ground.

Ecological & Biosecurity Risks

• Disease, parasites, and escapes threaten wild stocks—even from “closed” systems.

• Waste, chemicals, and antibiotics can pollute nearshore habitats.

• Genetic mixing and ecological stress undermine long-term stock resilience.

Global Competitiveness

• Alaska’s edge is that our seafood is wild, natural, and sustainable. Diluting this brand harms our established global markets.

• Entering farmed fish markets means competing with Norway, Chile, and Canada—who already dominate at scale.

• Alaska cannot risk trading its strongest global differentiator for a weaker, risk-laden industry.

Bottom Line

Finfish farming undermines Alaska’s markets, ecosystems, and communities while threatening the hard-won “Wild Alaska” brand. The fishing industry’s future lies in strengthening wild fisheries, not introducing farmed substitutes.