A Bold Move With Hidden Costs
President Donald Trump’s latest executive order, signed on April 17, 2025, promises to revitalize the U.S. fishing industry. It paints a vivid picture of thriving American fishermen, unshackled from burdensome regulations, outcompeting foreign rivals. The order slashes oversight, opens protected marine areas, and pushes an 'America First Seafood Strategy' to boost domestic production. At first glance, it feels like a lifeline for coastal communities struggling to stay afloat. But dig deeper, and the cracks in this vision emerge, revealing a policy that gambles with our oceans’ future for fleeting economic gains.
The fishing industry, no doubt, faces real challenges. Nearly 90% of the seafood Americans eat is imported, creating a trade deficit exceeding $20 billion. Coastal workers, from shrimpers in Louisiana to cod fishermen in Maine, grapple with tight quotas and complex rules. Trump’s order taps into their frustration, offering deregulation as a cure-all. Yet this approach ignores a hard truth: the ocean’s resources are finite, and reckless policies could tip fragile ecosystems into collapse, leaving those same workers worse off.
What’s at stake isn’t just fish. It’s the health of marine environments that sustain global biodiversity, regulate climate, and feed millions. The order’s push to reopen marine national monuments to commercial fishing, for instance, dismisses decades of conservation science. Meanwhile, its trade strategies, though tough-sounding, fail to address the root causes of America’s seafood import reliance. This isn’t a plan for long-term prosperity; it’s a high-stakes bet that prioritizes headlines over sustainability.
As someone who’s watched policy debates unfold, I can’t shake the sense that this order came out of nowhere, driven more by political optics than by a coherent vision. It’s time to pull back the curtain and examine what’s really at play: a policy that sounds bold but risks far more than it delivers.
The False Promise of Deregulation
The heart of Trump’s order lies in slashing regulations, which it claims choke the fishing industry. The administration argues that rules like catch limits and permitting processes stifle productivity. There’s truth to the idea that overly complex regulations can burden small-scale fishermen. Surveys of aquaculture producers estimate annual compliance costs in the tens of millions, with lost revenue and missed opportunities costing over $1.4 billion yearly. Streamlining these rules could, in theory, unlock jobs and growth.
But here’s where the logic falters. Deregulation, when poorly executed, creates chaos. Recent regulatory freezes have already delayed fishing seasons and muddled quota-setting, leading to overfishing in stocks like Atlantic bluefin tuna. Science-based regulations aren’t the enemy; they’re the guardrails that prevent collapse. Without them, we risk repeating the cod fishery disasters of the 1990s, when overexploitation decimated stocks and left entire communities jobless. The order’s call to suspend or rescind rules without clear replacements invites this kind of reckless overreach.
Then there’s the plan to open marine national monuments, like the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts, to commercial fishing. The administration frames this as an economic boon, but data tells a different story. Less than 1% of historical fishing for major species like squid or tuna occurred in these protected areas. Opening them offers negligible economic benefits while threatening delicate ecosystems. Deep-sea corals and marine mammals face heightened risks of bycatch and habitat loss, undermining biodiversity goals at a time when climate change already stresses our oceans.
Trade Tough Talk, Weak Results
The order’s 'America First Seafood Strategy' aims to tackle unfair foreign competition, from illegal fishing to forced labor in supply chains. No one disputes the harm of these practices. Illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing undercuts ethical producers, and reports of labor abuses in foreign fleets are horrifying. The administration’s push to strengthen the Seafood Import Monitoring Program and develop trade strategies sounds promising, but the reality falls short.
The monitoring program, while a step toward transparency, covers only half of U.S. seafood imports and has struggled to reduce illegal products significantly. Audits remain sparse, and mislabeling rates for covered species aren’t much lower than for others. Meanwhile, the broader trade strategy hasn’t dented the $20 billion seafood trade deficit. Alaska’s seafood industry, a cornerstone of domestic production, lost $1.8 billion between 2022 and 2023, battered by global competition and trade barriers. Tough tariffs and trade rhetoric haven’t closed the gap; they’ve merely shifted the burden onto consumers and small producers.
Advocates for fair trade have long called for robust enforcement and international cooperation, not just symbolic gestures. The Biden-Harris administration’s 2024 efforts to block forced-labor imports showed progress, but Trump’s order leans on outdated tactics like tariffs, which often backfire. Domestic fishermen deserve better than policies that sound strong but deliver little.
A Better Path Forward
There’s a way to support American fishermen without sacrificing our oceans. Targeted regulatory reforms, grounded in science, could ease burdens while protecting fish stocks. Modernizing data collection, as the order suggests, is a smart move, but it needs funding and expertise, not rushed mandates. Investing in sustainable aquaculture could create jobs and reduce import reliance, but it requires long-term commitment, not quick fixes.
On trade, the U.S. should lead with precision. Expanding the Seafood Import Monitoring Program to cover more species, increasing audits, and partnering globally to enforce labor and environmental standards would level the playing field. Legislation like the Protecting Global Fisheries Act offers a blueprint for coordinated action. These steps prioritize workers and ecosystems over political posturing.
Ultimately, the fishing industry’s future hinges on balance. Coastal communities need economic support, but not at the expense of the very resources they depend on. Policies that ignore this truth risk leaving fishermen stranded, with depleted stocks and damaged habitats. We can’t afford to trade short-term wins for long-term losses.
The Stakes Are High
Trump’s executive order sells a vision of American fishing reborn, but its flaws are glaring. It bets on deregulation and protected-area rollbacks that history warns against, offering minimal economic upside while endangering marine ecosystems. Its trade strategies, though well-intentioned, lack the precision to shift global markets. For coastal workers and the millions who rely on healthy oceans, this approach feels like a bait-and-switch.
We deserve policies that uplift fishermen without mortgaging our planet’s future. Sustainable fisheries, fair trade, and science-driven management aren’t just ideals; they’re necessities. As the administration moves forward, it’s time to demand a course correction, one that honors the ocean’s limits and the people who depend on it. Anything less is a betrayal of both.