On the Menu 3.14.2025

HB 111/SB 108 – Finfish Farms and Products

These bills were introduced by the governor on Friday, February 21, and February 24. HB 111 was referred to House Fisheries and Resources committees. SB 108 was referred to Senate Resources and then Finance. Significant opposition has been voiced from across the legislature, as well as from Alaskans around the state. Meanwhile, others have expressed interest in further exploring fish farming opportunities to support Alaska’s food security and independence. Alaska has a rich seafood industry and a growing mariculture industry. We have a long history of protecting wild fish harvest, with a strong international brand. 

You can read our policy brief here. We have also received a copy of the 1990 Alaska Finfish Farming Task Force Report which you can find here. 

SB 108 was heard for the first time with invited and public testimony on Monday, March 10 in Senate Resources at 3:30 PM. Alaska Department of Fish & Game Commissioner Doug Vincent Lang provided the bill overview. He was joined by the ADF&G Legislative Liaison. You can see the presentation slides here. He gave some background on off-shore salmon farming and the 1990 ban and noted that history is why salmon are not included in SB108. He talked about current on-shore fish farming technology and its use in Norway. He provided an overview of the provisions of the bill, namely the authorization of onshore farming of non-salmon finfish in approved, land-based facilities. Example species include trout, char, grayling, and black cod. He shared the safeguards included in the bill, including the requirement for triploid (sterile) fish, continued prohibition of offshore fish farming, and oversight under all existing ADF&G and ADEC policies, regulations, and permitting. He reviewed the Department’s belief of benefits and considerations in support of this proposal. 

Senator Dunbar reviewed a bill passed last year, allowing for hatcheries to sell certain fish products, as an example of consideration of word usage – “salmon” vs. “salmonids” which is a larger group of fish that include charr. Joe Felkl referenced the proposed statute definition that clarifies the specific species of salmon prohibited under this bill. Sen. Dunbar followed up to ask if charr is actually a type of Atlantic salmon and if they would be allowed under this bill. Commissioner Vincent-Lang said allowing charr would be up to the discretion of the ADF&G commissioner. 

Sen. Wielechowski asked to clarify that this would allow not only indoor/tank-based farming but also open ponds or other outdoor farms. Commissioner Vincent-Lang said yes. Sen. Wielechowski then also spoke to triploid fish not always being 100% sterile, and his understanding is there are some types of fish (i.e. catfish or tilapia) that tend to be more prone to that. The Commissioner confirmed that has happened and that the Department would be very careful about permitting those fish in outdoor facilities. Sen. Wielechowski asked if this bill would prevent the use of antibiotics in farmed fish. The Commissioner said that any fish sold would have to be cleared for sale by the Department of Environmental Conservation. He shared a story of an aquaponics grower in an enclosed hydroponics facility who had tilapia but couldn’t sell it. 

Sen. Meyers asked for information on the quantity and dollar value of farmed fish being sold in Alaska. Commissioner Vincent-Lang said he didn’t know, but he saw the Governor’s video (I assume he was referring to either this one or this one). He then asked about the value of shellfish grown in the state, and the percentage of the shellfish sold in the state that are grown here. The Commissioner said he would get back to them with that information.

Sen. Dunbar then followed up by saying that “in a world where this bill passes, which I’m not sure is a world we currently exist in” the Department should consider a broader definition restricting salmonids. Commissioner Vincent-Lang then said that the state has the most experience with salmonids. He said we don’t know if this is economically feasible, and we can’t know the economic feasibility with a ban in place. 

Sen. Kawasaki also spoke to the definitions of finfish, and that there are nearly 29,000 species of bony finfish. He asked how the Department would be assessing these many different species. Commissioner Vincent-Lang said probably similar to how they look at private pond stocking now – can it escape? If so, is it triploid? Is it healthy? He noted that fish like tilapia are not going to grow in an outside pond in Alaska. Sen. Kawasaki asked to clarify that all of the fish would be triploid and the Commissioner said yes. Sen. Kawasaki then asked about how they would confirm a closed system in a pond in a river flood zone, for example. Commissioner Vincent-Lang said probably similar to a sewage treatment pond. He assured the committee that they do not want to threaten Alaska’s wild stocks and that they would look to other industries for containment. 

Sen. Kawasaki asked if the administration would be amenable to further sideboards on controlled systems, and the Commissioner said yes – this bill is to open the conversation. Sen. Kawasaki asked about steelhead and the protection of natural steelhead populations. Vincent-Lang talked at some length and noted that to be successful in growing them to size they would need warmed water in controlled facilities. 

Sen. Claman asked if any private businesses had come to the Department asking for this, or if the Department came up with this on their own. Vincent-Lang noted the hydroponics grower in the Valley with tilapia they couldn’t sell. He said that he doesn’t know about any business wanting to get started specifically on this, but that with food insecurity it’s a possibility. He reiterated the statement that farmed fishing is a big industry worldwide, and that the administration believes we should get on board with that. Sen. Claman asked if anyone has stocked lakes under the new law passed by the legislature allowing it. Vincent-Lang said that no supply of fish is established. Sen. Meyers asked if we can farm fish to sell for pets. Vicent-Lang noted that they can’t be sold period. 

Sen. Hughes gave her appreciation for thinking outside the box on food security. She shared an anecdote of catfish farming in the southern states. She asked how you make a fish sterile, and how you ensure it happens. Vincent-Lang said that, to his memory, the eggs were temperature-shocked and then they are checked after. ADF&G utilizes that technology now in their stocking programs. 

Johnny Fishmonger, Executive Director of Wild Salmon Nation, King Salmon, started off public testimony. He shared concerns around offshore fish farming, and then talked about the economic challenges right now. He cautioned against introducing an alternative protein that competes with our wild fish industry. He opposes the bill. Jill Weitz, Central Council of Tlingit & Haida Tribes, Juneau, testified in opposition to the bill. She highlighted concerns, including distracting our already limited resource management agencies. Melanie Brown, a commercial fisherman from Bristol Bay, testified in opposition. She shared concerns about how farmed fish will undercut our wild fisheries, including the brand of Alaska’s fish. She noted that the state does not have processing capacity for all of our fish, and if that capacity existed it should go towards wild fish instead of farmed fish. Adam Cuthriell testified from Girdwood in opposition to the bill. He is a fly-fishing guide and said that we are widely known for our wild fish and fish farming would be damaging to that. Susan Stevens, testified from Wrangell, in strong opposition to the bill. She referenced an article from the Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics (linked here) and her concerns about the environmental impacts. Matthew Jones, Save Our Salmon organizer in Anchorage, testified in opposition to the bill. He asked what jobs could be jeopardized if this bill were to pass, highlighting the strong tourism industry reliant upon healthy wild salmon. He shared concerns about the potential health impacts on wild salmon stocks if farmed fish were to escape. Norman Pillen, Seafood Producers Cooperative in Sitka with 360 members spoke in opposition to the bill. He noted that we don’t need more worldwide farmed fish products. He provided statistics on farmed fish imports to the U.S. and the impacts of that competition. He also said that steelhead and trout are direct competition and that this will just open the door to salmon farming eventually. Judy Phillips, Kodiak, spoke as an individual in opposition to the bill. She acknowledged a compelling argument from the Department but that even if farmed fishing isn’t going away, it is detrimental and dangerous to our wild stocks. She also expressed concern about the potential to open the door to future salmon farming. 

The committee ran out of time for additional testimony. You can email written testimony to senate.resources@akleg.gov. The bill was set aside with public testimony open, so stay tuned for another hearing if you want to verbally testify.  Watch the hearing here.