US Law Keeps Fishermen on Decades-Old Ships

But the vessel itself tells a more troubling story: it was built in 1978. Nearly half a century later, it was still hauling crab in one of the most dangerous fishing grounds on Earth.

That’s not unusual. Cases like these are reported often. America’s seafood supply depends on a fleet of fishing vessels operating in some of the harshest waters on earth. These boats deliver pollock, cod and crab to American tables and help sustain coastal communities from Alaska to Washington. Yet much of this fleet is aging, undermining safety, efficiency, and long-term competitiveness.

And the reason is not a lack of ingenuity or ambition among American fishermen — it is U.S. law.

Federal law requires that fishing vessels be constructed in U.S. shipyards. In practice, this bars American operators from purchasing modern vessels constructed abroad, even when those vessels would be safer, cleaner and more efficient. International shipyards can often deliver comparable vessels at far lower cost. The result is a fleet that grows older by the year, imposing real economic costs while eroding safety and environmental performance.

Consider American Seafoods, one of the country’s largest fishing companies. Although it proudly claims to operate the “world’s most advanced fleet,” its youngest fishing vessels entered service in 1990. That’s not an outlier. A 2018 study found that vessels in the North Pacific fleet average about 40 years old, and some U.S. fishing vessels date back to World War II.

In most other industrialized countries, fishing vessels are replaced every 15 to 25 years. In the U.S., they are often pushed to 50 or even 60 years, with multiple life-extension refits along the way. This isn’t because American fishermen prefer antiquated ships but because new ones are prohibitively expensive.

U.S.-built fishing vessels can cost roughly twice as much — or more — than equivalent vessels built overseas. A longliner boat that might cost $15–20 million to build abroad can cost $30–40 million in a U.S. yard. One of the U.S. fleet’s rare new additions, the America’s Finest (built in 2019) cost over $35 million more — after inflation — than a slightly larger catcher-processor built in Turkey in 2023.

Such cost differentials significantly affect the decision to purchase a new vessel.

Financial analysts at the Seattle-based Zachary Scott investment bank offer a thought experiment: Imagine two nearly identical crab harvesters — one American, one Norwegian — each earning $2 million in annual profit from the same global seafood markets. The Norwegian vessel might cost $10 million to build, allowing a five-year payback period. The American vessel might cost $24 million, leading to a more than decade-long payback period.

The upshot: the Norwegian owner can justify a new ship every 10 years, steadily improving safety, fuel efficiency and product quality. The American, meanwhile, pours capital into keeping a 40-year-old vessel operational.

Multiply that logic across an entire fleet, and the result is predictable: International vessels are, on average, decades younger than their U.S. counterparts. American fishing companies are competing in the global market with one hand tied behind their backs.

And the costs of current policy go beyond mere dollars. Also consider safety. Older vessels typically don’t have features such as double-bottom fuel tanks, modern fire-suppression systems, improved watertight subdivision, higher-fatigue-life steel, redundant propulsion and power systems, and advanced stability and monitoring technology. Those working in one of the country’s most dangerous professions deserve better than ancient vessels designed before many modern safety standards even existed.

There are also environmental benefits to a modernized fleet. New hull designs and propulsion systems can cut fuel consumption by 20 to 30 percent or more. More advanced onboard processing reduces waste and allows fuller use of each fish, lowering the effective environmental footprint of harvesting.

What is the build requirement accomplishing? Although intended to support domestic shipyards, costs have risen so high that demand for new fishing vessels has nearly evaporated. When completed in 2016, America’s Finest was the first new trawler purpose-built for the Northwest since 1989. Meanwhile, fishing companies find themselves in a cycle of deferred replacement, rising maintenance costs and technological stagnation.

As one banking executive who works with the fishing industry bluntly put it, this maritime protectionism “isn’t protecting us anymore. It’s pricing us out of the future.”

The U.S. faces a choice. It can continue to mandate U.S. construction at any cost, accepting an aging fleet that is less safe, less efficient and less competitive each year. Or it can modernize its approach by eliminating the build requirement so that American fishermen can invest in 21st-century vessels. If Americans can use cars and airplanes built overseas, why not boats?

For policymakers concerned about seafood competitiveness and the challenges presented by aging vessels, the answer should be clear. America’s fishermen do not need to be protected from modern vessels. They need permission to use them.