Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mariculture Marketing Asmi topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let ASMI market shellfish and kelp; lawmakers seek clarity on terms and board structure
Summary
Senate Bill 131 would expand the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute’s mandate to allow marketing of aquatic farm products such as oysters and farmed kelp; senators asked whether the bill’s language could inadvertently include finfish farms and discussed ensuring mariculture expertise is represented to advise ASMI.
Senate Bill 131, introduced at the request of the governor, would amend the duties of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute (ASMI) and the legal definition of seafood to allow ASMI to market aquatic farm products, including shellfish and farmed kelp.
Anna Latham, deputy commissioner at the Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, said Alaska has geographic and historical strengths for mariculture and that the bill aligns with the administration’s food-security initiatives. "Expanding ASMI's scope to include the marketing of shellfish could incentivize growth in this emergent sector," Latham told the committee.
Jeremy Woodrow, ASMI’s executive director, described the change as narrow and focused on existing mariculture products, not finfish farming. "SB 131 as written does not have any direct ties to SB 108, which is the finfish farming bill," Woodrow said, stressing ASMI’s intent to support oysters and farmed kelp and to pursue grant funding for marketing. Woodrow also noted ASMI’s board unanimously supported the change at its February 21 meeting.
Senators sought greater precision in statutory language and clarity on board composition. Senator Dunbar and others asked whether the bill’s phrase “aquatic farm” (an existing statutory term defined in Alaska Statute 16.41.099) should be replaced with or clarified by the term “mariculture,” which is more commonly used in industry discussions. Staff cautioned that “aquatic farm” is the term already defined in statute and changing it could require downstream edits elsewhere in law.
Senator Kawasaki raised caution that if the legislature’s intent is to keep any potential finfish farming outside ASMI’s remit, the committee should watch statutory definitions carefully as other bills move through the legislature. Woodrow said ASMI would use advisory committees and include mariculture experts to align marketing efforts with industry needs. The committee left public testimony open and set no immediate amendment deadline for SB 131.
