If you buy wild-caught seafood — or if you catch it — the MARA Act (S.2586) is the most consequential piece of legislation you've probably never heard of.
The Marine Aquaculture Research and Advancement Act would create a federal permitting pathway for industrial finfish aquaculture in U.S. federal waters. Translation: corporations could install massive floating net pen operations in the open ocean, raising millions of fish in cages, and sell the product as "American seafood."
For the small-boat fishermen who actually work these waters, the implications are existential.
The Price Problem
Wild-caught seafood is expensive to produce. A small-boat fisherman operating out of Kodiak or Gloucester is dealing with fuel costs, gear maintenance, crew shares, quota leases, insurance, and the fundamental unpredictability of fishing. The cost per pound of wild halibut or king salmon reflects real labor, real risk, and real accountability.
Industrial offshore aquaculture operates on a completely different cost structure. Farmed fish can be produced at a fraction of the cost of wild-caught, at industrial volumes that no fishing fleet can match. When farmed product enters the same market as wild-caught, it doesn't compete on quality — it competes on price. And price competition is a race that independent fishermen cannot win.
This is exactly what happened in the salmon market when Chilean and Norwegian farmed salmon scaled up in the 1990s and 2000s. Wild Alaska salmon fishermen watched the price per pound collapse as cheap farmed product flooded grocery store cases. Many never recovered.
The Labeling Problem
Here's what makes it worse: there is no federal requirement to distinguish wild-caught from farmed on restaurant menus, and retail labeling requirements are inconsistent. A consumer buying "American seafood" at the grocery store may not realize they're buying product from an offshore fish farm rather than a fishing boat.
NAMA — the Northwest Atlantic Marine Alliance — has been particularly vocal about this. Their fishermen members have spent years building direct-to-consumer channels, farmers market relationships, and CSF programs precisely because the conventional supply chain doesn't reward quality or transparency. Offshore aquaculture would undercut those efforts by flooding the market with undifferentiated product.
The Environmental Wager
The environmental case against open-ocean net pens is well-documented:
Waste concentration. A single large net pen operation can produce waste equivalent to a small city. That waste — uneaten feed, feces, chemical treatments — disperses into the surrounding waters, affecting water quality and bottom habitat.
Disease transmission. Farmed fish in dense net pens are breeding grounds for sea lice, infectious salmon anemia, and other pathogens that can spread to wild populations. In British Columbia, the correlation between salmon farm locations and wild salmon decline has been the subject of intense scientific study and public concern.
Escapement. Farmed fish escape. It's not a question of if, but when and how many. Escaped farmed fish compete with wild fish for food and habitat, and interbreeding between farmed and wild populations can reduce the genetic fitness of wild stocks that have adapted over thousands of generations to specific river systems and ocean conditions.
Predator interactions. Net pen operations attract marine mammals and seabirds. The industry's response has historically included lethal deterrents — shooting sea lions, deploying acoustic harassment devices — putting aquaculture operators in direct conflict with marine mammal protection laws.
DCOO's Alternative Vision
The Don't Cage Our Oceans coalition isn't anti-aquaculture. They're anti-ocean-cage. The coalition actively supports land-based recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) as a way to grow domestic seafood production without the environmental risks of open-ocean operations.
RAS facilities are closed-loop systems where water is filtered, treated, and recirculated. Waste is captured and managed. There's no risk of escapement into wild populations. And the facilities can be built anywhere — including inland communities that currently have no access to fresh seafood production.
The technology exists. It works. It just doesn't offer the same profit margins as dumping net pens in public waters and letting the ocean handle the waste.
What Happens Next
The MARA Act has been introduced in Congress. It has industry support from aquaculture companies and some seafood trade associations. It faces opposition from NAMA, DCOO, commercial fishing associations, environmental organizations, and a growing number of consumers who understand what's at stake.
The Keep Finfish Free Act (S.1529), sponsored by Senators Sullivan (R-AK) and Booker (D-NJ), would prohibit finfish aquaculture in federal waters entirely. It's the legislative counterweight to the MARA Act, and it needs support.
This is not a fight that fishermen can win alone. It requires consumers who understand the difference between wild and farmed, who value the communities behind their seafood, and who are willing to make their voices heard.
[Take Action — Learn How to Get Involved →](/take-action)