A new lawsuit in Washington mirrors a similar legal challenge in British Columbia, exposing political interference, disregarded science, and economic fallout in North America’s aquaculture industry.
By Fabian Dawson
SeaWestNews
A new legal battle over Washington’s waters is brewing after the Northwest Aquaculture Alliance (NWAA) filed a lawsuit against the State, challenging its outright ban on commercial net pen fish farms.
The lawsuit claims the Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR), led by its former Commissioner Hilary Franz, overstepped its authority, bypassed state law, and disregarded scientific evidence in its “predetermined and inadequate” rulemaking process.
The politically driven decision defies a landmark 9-0 ruling by the Washington State Supreme Court, which unequivocally debunked the fabricated claims of anti-fish farm activists about the disease from marine aquaculture sites and sea lice harming wild stocks, the NWAA said.
“This ban was not based on the best-available science but rather on political maneuvering,” said NWAA President Jim Parsons.
“DNR ignored hundreds of pages of scientific documentation that demonstrated that responsibly managed net pen aquaculture can coexist with Washington’s marine ecosystems,” he said.
At the heart of the challenge is DNR’s decision earlier this year to prohibit commercial finfish net pen aquaculture in state-owned waters, a move that NWAA argues contradicts Washington law, which allows the ocean farming of native species such as steelhead and sablefish using conventional methods.
NWAA is seeking a judicial review of the DNR’s ruling and an invalidation of the ban, arguing that the process was flawed from the start.
According to NWAA, commercial net pens have long been a part of Washington’s working waterfronts, generating millions in economic activity while supplying consumers with high-quality, affordable seafood.
With the U.S. already importing more than 80% of its seafood, critics of the ban argue it will only further outsource fish production to foreign markets, instead of supporting local, regulated, and environmentally sound aquaculture.
Parsons said NWAA members had hoped the Board of Natural Resources would take more time to review nearly 500 pages of scientific data from NWAA, agencies, and scientists before the January 7 vote—a concern echoed by some board members.
Instead, he noted, DNR relied solely on its “own science” dismissing findings from NOAA and the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife.
“This ban was rushed through,” Parsons said.
“We hope a thorough Judicial Review will overturn it so we can return to what we’ve done for over 40 years—growing nutritious, high-quality fish that consumers can afford.”
According to a recent news report by King 5, one of the board members who abstained from the January 7 vote, was Wendy Powers, who represents the Washington State University College of Agriculture, Human and Natural Resources.
“I didn’t feel comfortable casting a vote one way or the other at the January meeting and that was the reason for abstaining, I felt like we could’ve had a little more conversation, particularly agency involvement in the conversation, hearing from them,” said Powers.
Powers said that, as a scientist herself, she wanted to take the time to read through all of the research that’s been done on net pens and their impact on the environment.
Many scientists wrote in during the public comment period prior to the ban and said net pens can be beneficial if properly maintained, reported King 5 news.
Among them was Ken Cain an aquaculture research manager with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
“I can speak to the science of net pen aquaculture and the science is very clear,” he said. “It’s clear that it’s the most sustainable way to produce animal protein…The science supports net pens as a very sustainable way to produce fish or seafood for the consumer,” said Cain.
He added that the alternative to net pens is importing seafood from other countries, which creates a new set of concerns.
“If you look at the carbon footprint of shipping something from Norway or China to the U.S., that’s substantial compared to what that footprint would be if we produce it locally or domestically,” said Cain, adding “so we really need to be producing it in the U.S. to supply seafood for Americans.”
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Kenneth Warheit has also criticized DNR’s approach, stating that without consulting all relevant state agencies, DNR’s findings amount to opinion rather than ‘best available science.’
The Washington lawsuit parallels a similar legal challenge in British Columbia by salmon farmer Cermaq Canada.
Cermaq’s lawsuit alleges that former Fisheries Minister of Canada Joyce Murray secretly consulted anti-fish farming activists, deliberately seeking biased input to override her own department’s science and justify a predetermined decision to shut down salmon farms in B.C.’s Discovery Islands.
The legal filing details a damning timeline, accusing Murray of delaying decisions, excluding industry voices, and soliciting last-minute input from anti-aquaculture activists—all in an effort to discredit peer-reviewed risk assessments that found open-net farms posed no threat to wild salmon stocks.
Stemming from the Discovery Islands’ decision, Canada is now advancing a Transition Plan for the sector, which carries a staggering $9 billion price tag for taxpayers, along with extensive economic, social, and environmental consequences.
The Transition Plan has a date to ban all ocean salmon farming in B.C. by 2029.
(Main image from Facebook shows former Washington state’s Public Lands Commissioner Hilary Franz)