Free tier, this brief uses 1 of 2 remaining for the month.Resets May 1
¶NOAA Fisheries is preparing a programmatic EIS to identify Aquaculture Opportunity Areas (AOAs) in Alaska state waters, focusing on shellfish and seaweed mariculture. Commenters include tribal governments, commercial fishing associations (dive, troll, longline), conservation organizations, coastal municipalities, academics, and individual residents. The dominant position is opposition or conditional support, with the largest bloc of specific technical objections centered on overlap with existing commercial dive harvest areas in Southeast Alaska. The loudest concerns are conflicts with pre-existing commercial and subsistence fishing users, inadequate tribal and Indigenous consultation, flaws in the cultural resources suitability model, and broader environmental risks from pre-zoning ocean space for industrial aquaculture.
Notice of Intent To Prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Identification of Aquaculture Opportunity Areas in Alaska State Waters and Conduct Public Scoping Meetings
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) has issued a Notice of Intent to prepare a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to identify Aquaculture Opportunity Areas (AOAs) for shellfish and seaweed aquaculture in Alaska state waters of the Gulf of Alaska. The action is driven by Executive Order 13921 and does not authorize any specific aquaculture projects. Two alternatives will be analyzed: No Action and identification of one or more AOAs drawn from 77 candidate locations covering 13,031 acres across Southeast, Southcentral, and Southwest Alaska. The 45-day public scoping period closes May 28, 2026, with a draft PEIS targeted for winter 2027 and a final PEIS for spring 2028.
Draft Aquaculture Opportunity Area Options-Alaska State Waters
NMFS and NCCOS published a Notice of Availability requesting public comment on 97 draft Aquaculture Opportunity Area (AOA) Options in Alaska State waters of southeast, southcentral, and southwest Alaska. The marine spatial planning study, developed under Executive Order 13921, used scoring and ranking to identify sites up to 4,000 acres per study area for subtidal shellfish and seaweed aquaculture and up to 100 acres per study area for intertidal shellfish aquaculture, all within 3 nautical miles of shore and up to 61 meters depth. NMFS may or may not formally identify AOAs after further public participation and NEPA review. Comments are due May 23, 2025.
Commercial dive fishermen (sea cucumber, geoduck, urchin) argue that proposed AOA sites directly overlap their established limited-entry harvest grounds and that farms deeper than 80 feet would resolve most conflicts.
"We are consistently coming up with farms being located in areas where we harvest geoduck, sea cucumber, or sea urchin within the limited entry permit fisheries...we are effectively blocked from access to this public resource."
Representative quote, cluster 01
Residents of Craig and Southeast Alaska identify specific named bays as subsistence fishing, hunting, and gathering areas and as weather refuges, arguing AOA siting there is incompatible with those uses.
"CRA-S1 (PORT SAN ANTOINE), CRA-S2 (PORT CALDERA)...are all especially vital for subsistence fishing, hunting, gathering and safe anchorages from the weather."
Representative quote, cluster 02
A cultural resources specialist argues that the AOA suitability model fails to exclude known archaeological and traditional use sites within the required 500-meter buffer, rendering the model invalid and requiring recalculation before NEPA proceeds.
"Currently, there are AOAs with AHRS-identified cultural heritage within the 500 m buffer; this means there is something wrong with the existing model, and it needs to be recalculated."
Representative quote, cluster 03
Tribal governments, Indigenous advocates, and individual commenters argue that AOA finalization must require free, prior, and informed consent from Alaska Native Tribes, incorporation of Traditional Ecological Knowledge, and protection of subsistence rights.
"NOAA must require free, prior, and informed consent from Alaska Native Tribes before any AOA is finalized, recognizing Tribal sovereignty and the essential role of Traditional Ecological Knowledge."
Representative quote, cluster 04
Individual commenters and conservation organizations oppose aquaculture generally, citing disease, pollution, harm to wild fish, invasive species, and opposition to pre-zoning ocean space without case-by-case review.
"I worry they could still encourage large-scale aquaculture development in marine ecosystems that are complex and constantly changing...pre-zoning ocean areas for aquaculture...weakens how precaution is applied in practice."
Representative quote, cluster 05
A retired professor warns that subsidizing shellfish and seaweed aquaculture will incentivize overstocking and disease outbreaks, citing Gordon (1954) and examples from Norwegian and Scottish salmon farming.
"If you subsidize these folks, they will take risks that they ought not to take, and when disease wipes them out they will come begging for you for even more subsidies...they will have devastated your coastal environment."
Representative quote, cluster 06
The City and Borough of Wrangell and the Alaska Mariculture Alliance support Alternative 2, citing existing infrastructure, protected waters, and the need for economic diversification in coastal communities.
"Southeast Alaska already has the conditions needed to support a growing mariculture economy...It creates opportunity tied to the water, supports local jobs, and helps diversify economies that have historically relied on a limited number of industries."
Representative quote, cluster 07
Troll fishermen and commercial fishing associations argue that proposed AOA locations fall within established fishing drags and grounds, and that NOAA failed to consult fishing organizations before site selection.
"Most of our troll fishing drags are right along the beach and with these sites popping up in the middle of our fishing grounds would not be a good idea."
Representative quote, cluster 08
Multiple commenters call for mandatory baseline monitoring, water quality and benthic health tracking, public reporting, and exclusion of sites lacking biotoxin testing logistics.
"Site selection should require demonstrated logistical capacity for timely biotoxin and water quality sampling, with exclusion of areas lacking reliable transport to labs."
Representative quote, cluster 09
Several commenters, while not necessarily opposing shellfish or seaweed mariculture, call for an explicit prohibition on finfish net-pen aquaculture in Alaska state waters based on ecological and nutritional concerns.
"I ask that you consider including a prohibition of finfish aquaculture in your assessment...farm raised fish does not provide the nutrition that a wild caught fish provides."
Representative quote, cluster 10
Key tensions
pre-existing commercial and subsistence fishing rights
↕ vs.
new aquaculture opportunity area siting
tribal sovereignty and FPIC requirements
↕ vs.
federal AOA designation process
case-by-case environmental review
↕ vs.
advance pre-zoning of ocean space
economic diversification for coastal communities
↕ vs.
displacement of established fishing livelihoods
archaeological and cultural resource protection
↕ vs.
suitability model accuracy
Pro section
Unlock the full comment analysis
10 themed clusters, 66 comments, position distribution, key tensions, and source-linked exemplar quotes.