Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute requests $10M to shore up U.S. marketing as ex‑vessel prices fall

Juneau — The Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute told a House Finance subcommittee on Feb. 11 that it is seeking a $10 million, multiyear unrestricted general fund supplemental to sustain marketing work aimed at U.S. consumers after state industry revenues and carryforward reserves fell and ex‑vessel prices dropped across species.

“For the record, my name is Jeremy Woodrow. I'm the executive director for the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute,” Woodrow said at the start of his presentation. He told the committee ASMI is a state corporation created in statute “to maximize economic value of the Alaska seafood resource.”

Woodrow described simultaneous price declines across multiple species since COVID‑era market changes, an unusually large Bristol Bay sockeye harvest in 2022–23 that created excess inventories, and what he called aggressive pricing from competing exporters. “The cost to execute our fisheries here in Alaska is no longer price competitive with our global competition,” Woodrow said, adding that many processors have operated at a loss and ASMI has been drawing down reserves to maintain marketing programs.

ASMI presented a budget breakdown showing three primary revenue sources: industry seafood marketing assessments collected as statutory designated program receipts (SDPR) set at 0.5 percent of ex‑vessel value; federal trade and grant funds, chiefly USDA Market Access Program grants and the Regional Agricultural Promotion Program (RAPP); and state unrestricted general funds. Woodrow said ASMI receives other federal awards, including small NOAA Saltonstall‑Kennedy (S‑K) grants, and that USDA foreign agricultural service funds must be spent on overseas marketing.

Woodrow said ASMI’s carryforward reserves have fallen from highs of roughly $13–$14 million to approximately $6–$7 million and that industry assessment revenue is expected to fall further. He estimated a possible $8–$10 million reduction in industry revenues over the coming years and said the $10 million supplemental would allow ASMI to maintain consistent marketing activity while stabilizing its carryforward.

Woodrow emphasized a policy opportunity he called “Freedom Fish,” citing Executive Order No. 14068, which he said bans most Russian seafood imports to the U.S. He described that ban as vacating roughly $452 million worth of Russian pollock, cod and salmon products in the U.S. market and said ASMI plans to prioritize U.S. marketing through FY25–FY27 to capture some of that displaced demand.

He also described ASMI’s Responsible Fisheries Management (RFM) certification program as a lower‑cost third‑party option compared with the Marine Stewardship Council label and noted the RFM logo does not certify Russian‑caught fish.

Committee members pressed for clarifications on carryforward size, federal award terms, and the distributional impact of ASMI’s work on Alaska communities. Woodrow said ASMI would provide more precise carryforward figures and an economic value report produced by its contractor, McKinley Research Group, to the committee on request.

The presentation included examples of ASMI marketing tactics to U.S. consumers and trade — digital partnerships, retail and distributor promotions such as work with Costco and Ibotta, food‑service campaigns (including fast‑food partners), and distributor outreach where ASMI reported a high return on investment. Woodrow noted ASMI’s international program remains large because 65–70 percent of Alaska seafood value is exported and because federal market access funds are restricted to foreign promotion.

No committee action or vote was recorded during the presentation; members asked follow‑up questions and requested additional data. Woodrow said ASMI and the subcommittee would continue some discussions offline.

The subcommittee moved on to a second scheduled presentation following Woodrow’s appearance.