robust seafood processing industry in Alaska brings value not only to the fish being processed but the communities doing the work. When looking at the Last Frontier’s seafood industry, it’s easy to get caught up in the idea that nearly all those working in it are daringly emptying crab traps or scooping thousands of pounds of salmon out of the ocean. But the reality is that a significant number of jobs created in the industry come from the seafood processing sector.

Of the about 58,700 workers directly employed by the Alaska seafood industry, about 26,000 of them work in the seafood processing sector, according to the 2019 Economic Value of Alaska’s Seafood Industry study prepared for Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute by the McDowell Group.

The broader seafood industry directly employs more workers than any other private industry in Alaska, is the third-largest overall job creator in the state—including multiplier effects—and accounts for about 8 percent of total statewide employment, according to the report.

It goes on to point out that seafood is an economic cornerstone of many Alaska communities with more than 21,500 rural Alaskan residents directly employed by the industry in 2017-2018.

The impacts on individual coastal communities vary widely depending on what processing plants are set up in the region and what fish they process, as those that focus on only a few species tend to be more seasonal.

“Kodiak is probably the least seasonal place,” state economist Neal Fried explains. “They have a pretty busy processing season all year long. And, as a result, they have the lowest non-resident processing workforce in the state because it’s a place where it happens all year long and where you can make a living.”

The flip side of the seafood processing model in Kodiak is that of Bristol Bay.

“Some of those processors are only open two or three months out of the year but are still important taxpayers. Both as a property taxpayer and the fish taxpayer,” Fried says, also noting that processing plants not only provide substantial direct employment for those processing the fish but also for maintenance people and many others in the community.

The McDowell Group reports the economic impact on the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands is higher than other communities despite the relatively short season.

With 8,700 workers—full-time work equivalent of 4,800—in seafood processing plants in the Bering Sea and the Aleutian Islands, labor income for those regions is about $235 million annually. The total economic output is about $1.4 billion.

Kodiak processors, which operate nearly year-round and handle a variety of products from salmon to sea cucumbers, generate about $50 million in labor income, just ahead of the $47 million created in Bristol Bay.

Despite similarities in labor income, the two headline fisheries in the Last Frontier stand in stark contrast in other ways. Bristol Bay employs more than double the number of people as Kodiak but provides only 100 more full-time equivalent jobs. Bristol Bay, which usually accounts for about 42 percent of the world’s sockeye salmon harvest, has an economic output of $390 million. Kodiak’s seafood processing economic output sits at about $158 million, according to the report from McDowell.

Southeast is heavily dependent on the seafood industry, with the processing side generating about 1,700 full-time equivalent jobs and an economic value of $265 million.

“Seafood is the largest private-sector industry in Southeast Alaska, in terms of workforce size and labor income. Seafood accounted for 15 percent of the regional employment in 2017/2018, including multiplier impacts,” the report states. “Seafood is an important part of most local economies in Southeast but also provides an economic foundation for Sitka, Petersburg, Wrangell, Prince of Wales Island, Hoonah, Haines, and Yakutat.”

The only other major region for seafood processing in the Last Frontier is Southcentral, which generates an economic output of $323 million with a workforce slightly smaller than Kodiak’s. Despite the relatively small economic output of $5 million from the Arctic-Yukon Region, the seafood industry continues to be an important source of cash income for remote communities.

“Seasonal income from seafood supports subsistence lifestyles in many Arctic-Yukon families. Arctic-Yukon is also home to three (of the six) Community Development Quota entities,” the report states.

Both the Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation and Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association own several processing plants and buying stations, providing extensive support to the Arctic-Yukon Region fishing industry.

The total labor income for the seafood processing industry in Alaska totaled about $435 million during the 2017-2018 period.

The only other major region for seafood processing in the Last Frontier is Southcentral, which generates an economic output of $323 million with a workforce slightly smaller than Kodiak’s. Despite the relatively small economic output of $5 million from the Arctic-Yukon Region, the seafood industry continues to be an important source of cash income for remote communities.

“Seasonal income from seafood supports subsistence lifestyles in many Arctic-Yukon families. Arctic-Yukon is also home to three (of the six) Community Development Quota entities,” the report states.

Both the Norton Sound Economic Development Corporation and Yukon Delta Fisheries Development Association own several processing plants and buying stations, providing extensive support to the Arctic-Yukon Region fishing industry.

The total labor income for the seafood processing industry in Alaska totaled about $435 million during the 2017-2018 period.

The seafood processing sector varies widely not only between regions but also by type of processing plant, with the general trend in the state moving toward consolidation of independent processors into larger established powerhouses, such as Trident.

In Alaska, Trident has processing plants in Akutan, Chignik, Cordova, False Pass, Ketchikan, Kodiak, North Naknek, Petersburg, Sand Point, St. Paul, and Wrangell.

Additionally, the company has secondary value-adding facilities in Anacortes, Bellingham, and Everett, Washington; Carrollton, Georgia; and Motley, Minnesota.

Employment numbers, types of fish processed, and processing capacity at Trident’s facilities range from being able to process more than 3 million pounds of raw fish per day at Akutan to Chignik’s beach crew of about thirty-five people during the summer with processing operations conducted on an offshore vessel.

Small, independent seafood processing plants maintain a friendly, cordial relationship with large local processors, explains Kodiak Island Wildsource CEO Chris Sannito, who is also a seafood technology specialist with Alaska Sea Grant.

“We recognize that they are the main economic engines of our coastal communities. Large processors have made very significant investments in our communities in terms of seafood processing infrastructure and most of us benefit from this in some way,” Sannito says, noting that Wildsource sometimes handles small-batch orders for larger processors.

Owned by the Sun’aq Tribe of Kodiak, Wildsource’s business model is somewhat different than traditional Alaska seafood processors.

“Products generally leave our facility in a higher state of ‘value added’ than most processors that are dealing with larger volumes. Smaller volume processing allows for us to serve niche markets that focus on quality,” Sannito says.

Though each fishery is different, Sannito points out that with red salmon fillets, his company will, in general, triple the value per pound at the wholesale level. This is done through filleting, packaging, and freezing the product.

“Value-added processing takes more time and specialty machinery to produce the products. Much of this type of work has been occurring outside of Alaska in the past by secondary processors.”

Wildsource processes mixed loads of fish, including halibut, black cod, salmon, rockfish, and Pacific cod. However, the company also has expanded its services to meet new demands in the industry.

“We strive to keep our plant busy and provide work to employees—we recently processed seaweed and sea cucumbers,” Sannito says, noting that the company is run by six full-time employees. “We will consider processing any seafood resources—as long as there is a market and we have the equipment to do so. Our main products are portion cut, vacuum-packed fresh frozen fillet products.”

There is always a little uncertainty for any resource-collection industry, and the seafood industry is no exception.

“Concerns in the coming year are pretty much the same as every year: Will the fish come back and will there be good markets for it,” Copper River Seafoods Chief Development Officer Martin Weiser says.

Smaller returning salmon sizes in recent years have also impacted how some processors do business.

“Small fish negatively affect processing in two ways. They are difficult to run through automatic machines and they are harder to sell,” Weiser says. “Again, this is why you have to create such items as smoked products, canned [products], et cetera.”

Small fish are less valuable than big ones at the docks and once they’ve been processed.

“It is all about having markets,” Weiser says. “We know specific companies that want the smaller fish and that is who we call when we have a load of small fish. Does it bring a lower sales price? Sure, but it still brings a good price.”

Another solution that helps processors squeeze the most economic value out of each fish is to develop value-added products that utilize smaller fish to increase their value, Weiser says, pointing at jerky, pre-marinated products, and chowder as examples.

Wildsource, under Sannito’s watch, is also eyeing the lucrative pet treat market to cash in on fish processing by-products.

“I think that more companies will look to seafood by-products for the pet food/treat market,” Sannito says. “At Wildsource we are beginning to take note of the value of by-products and alternate markets for them.”

According to its website, the Trident Cordova North processing plant also creates fish products that perhaps don’t first come to mind when people think of Alaska wild-caught fish. The plant, which focuses on the production of can-packed and skinless-boneless canned salmon, also produces large volumes of wild salmon oil for human health supplements and hydrolysates for animal feed and organic fertilizers.

Another solution that helps processors squeeze the most economic value out of each fish is to develop value-added products that utilize smaller fish to increase their value, Weiser says, pointing at jerky, pre-marinated products, and chowder as examples.

Wildsource, under Sannito’s watch, is also eyeing the lucrative pet treat market to cash in on fish processing by-products.

“I think that more companies will look to seafood by-products for the pet food/treat market,” Sannito says. “At Wildsource we are beginning to take note of the value of by-products and alternate markets for them.”

According to its website, the Trident Cordova North processing plant also creates fish products that perhaps don’t first come to mind when people think of Alaska wild-caught fish. The plant, which focuses on the production of can-packed and skinless-boneless canned salmon, also produces large volumes of wild salmon oil for human health supplements and hydrolysates for animal feed and organic fertilizers.

“The Alaska seafood industry strives to use 100 percent of the harvest to support sustainable production and fully utilize this important resource,” says Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute Communications Director Ashley Heimbigner. “Approximately 10 percent of the fish oil produced in Alaska is used to power generators in shoreside processors and processing vessels to reduce fossil fuel use and increase the value of their harvest.”

Along with fish oil, Heimbigner points out the importance of using by-products in diverse ways.

“Alaska’s seafood processors are investing in new and innovative ways to further utilize the materials remaining after primary seafood processing. Biomedical applications, nutritional supplements, fishmeal, pet food, and a variety of applications for the chitosan from crab shells are a few of the many ways processors are minimizing waste and extending the value of Alaska’s catch.”

Even as processors navigate the sector’s high fixed costs and develop new offerings to maximize profits, their core products remain in demand.

“Research shows us that consumer purchasing trends are in favor of Alaska’s seafood industry. Seafood consumption in the United States is up 13 percent over the last five years and is expected to continue to grow an additional 15 percent over the next five years,” Heimbigner says.

“Alaska Seafood remains the top ranked protein brand on menus nationwide, and a recent consumer study of seafood buying trends tells us shoppers are willing to spend more for a protein they know is healthy, fresh-tasting, and sustainably harvested. Alaska’s seafood processors are an important component to meeting the growing consumer demand for convenient, delicious, and healthy protein.”

Despite positive movement within the industry, there are factors that continue to put pressure on the sector, both legislative and environmental.

Climate change has already started to impact fisheries, change the scientific community is in the midst trying to understand. And what impacts fishermen ultimately impacts the seafood processing sector.

However, the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute report notes: “Alaska’s robust portfolio of seafood balances natural fluctuations in wild-capture fisheries. High volume species such as salmon, Alaska pollock, flatfish, and rockfish dominate landings volume while species such as crab, halibut, and sablefish account for high-value contributions to the industry.”

On the legislative side, it can be hard to establish exactly how policies—such as the US trade war with China—have impacted the seafood processing sector. Nonetheless, Weiser points out that certain legislative choices are clearly having a negative impact on coastal communities reliant on the industry.

“There are issues, such as the reduction/elimination of ferry service, that hurt us,” Weiser says. “We move a lot of fish and employees utilizing the Alaska Marine Highway System. Also, the elimination of revenue sharing on the State Raw Fish Tax with the communities that the fish is landed in has led to these communities establishing their own raw taxes. So we are now paying additional taxes on the fish we land.”