Alaska’s growing season is short, our winters are long and punishing, and much of our land is more rock than topsoil. Traditional farming has always been a challenge here, and it shows. Roughly 95 percent of our food is shipped in from Outside, the cost of which punishes both rural communities and working families. That is not sustainable. Fortunately, HB 111 gives us a path forward. With aquaponics, we have the tools to grow our own food; fresh, local, and year-round, right here in Alaska.

Aquaponics is a hydroponic model of sustainable farming that adds fish into the equation. Picture a closed-loop system where fish like Arctic char or trout swim in tanks. Their waste provides fertilizer for crops like lettuce or spinach. The plants, in turn, clean the water, which cycles back to the fish. This is not about competition with our fabulous wild-caught salmon, it is about a clean and efficient system that produces both protein and vegetables under one roof, without relying on supply chains that stretch down the West Coast.

Consider that, despite all of Alaska’s fisheries expertise, Alaskans cannot walk into a store and buy Alaska-grown finfish. That is not because we lack the know-how or the interest. It is because the law flat-out prohibits it. Since 1990, under AS 16.40.210, Alaska has banned finfish farming in marine waters. The intention was to protect wild fish stocks from disease, escapement, and genetic contamination, a sound idea that went further than necessary. The ban not only shut the door on ocean net pens, it also discouraged innovation in closed-loop inland systems that pose no threat to wild fisheries.

Today, there is no clear legal pathway for inland finfish farming in Alaska. Our laws allow shellfish and aquatic plant farming, but if someone wanted to raise Arctic char in a tank and sell it in Anchorage, they would find no permit, no regulatory framework, and no support. Fish and Game cannot issue permits because there is no statute that gives them that authority. Entrepreneurs face a legal dead end. Worse yet, the use of non-native species such as tilapia, which thrives in aquaponic systems, has long been blocked out of fear, even in escape-proof indoor facilities. Even sterile, triploid fish are hard to source because the hatchery infrastructure simply does not exist.

HB 111 begins to fix that problem. Formally titled “An Act relating to finfish farms and finfish farm products,” it moves the needle by legalizing and regulating inland finfish farms under AS 16.40.220. These farms would raise sterile, triploid fish to protect wild stocks, all under strict conditions that include escape-proof systems as required by AS 16.40.230. And while HB 111 is focused on fish, the infrastructure it establishes opens the door to integrated aquaponic systems such as fish and greens growing side by side, managed with local oversight.

This bill amends AS 16.05.050 to authorize the Department of Fish and Game to permit and regulate inland finfish farming. It updates AS 09.45.235 to bring these operations into our agricultural framework. Section 9 of the bill creates a new section, AS 16.40.220, that lays out how permits will be issued every three years. These permits come with rules on siting, operation, and disease control, all of which are relevant to aquaponic operations that use fish as a core input. While the bill does not directly address plant systems, it creates the legal foundation. A farmer who secures a permit to raise finfish inland could add a plant-growing component and feed Alaskans without relying on a single truckload from Seattle.

Overly strict rules on non-native fish species like tilapia, paired with permitting bottlenecks at Fish and Game, have left aquaponics in a regulatory gray area. HB 111 is not a perfect solution; triploid fish may cost more to raise, and future legislation may be needed to specifically include plants in aquaponic systems, but it is a start. At a time when 95 percent of our groceries depend on barges and jets, HB 111 gives us a better option; food grown in Alaska, for Alaskans.

The economic potential is just as important as the food security benefits. Inland finfish farms, especially when paired with aquaponic systems, create jobs and opportunities across the state. Building and maintaining these systems takes work. Raising fish, growing crops, and selling produce and protein at local markets all contribute to the economy. Imagine farmers’ markets in Kenai or Fairbanks selling fresh Alaskan-grown perch and parsley instead of limp imports. HB 111 relies on our huge body of fisheries knowledge and our conservation ethic, with closed systems, no impact to wild stocks, and local control under AS 16.40.220(e).

Of course, energy costs are a challenge, and these systems are not cheap to build. That is why HB 111 should be paired with pilot projects. Start with one in Wasilla, another in a regional hub like Bethel or Nome. Refine the model, prove it works, and scale it where it makes sense. That is how we move from concept to reality.

Aquaponics, supported by the regulatory structure in HB 111, offer a real solution to Alaska’s food challenges. This bill gives us the permits, oversight, and standards to build a new future for agriculture in Alaska. It leverages the knowledge and understanding of thousands of years of fishermen and fishing. It is time to grow our own food, protect our wild fish, and build economic strength from the ground up. HB 111 is how we start. The Legislature should move it forward. Let us build systems that feed our people, strengthen our communities, and reflect the resilience of Alaska. Local fish, local greens, Alaska Grown Fish, that is how we can thrive.

~ Kevin

Originally published on Substack: https://kevinjmccabe.substack.com/p/to-fish-farm-or-not-to-fish-farm