Bycatch has emerged as a defining fisheries issue in Alaska’s U.S. Senate race, but the legislative records of former Rep. Mary Peltola and Sen. Dan Sullivan show different approaches to reducing incidental harvests and addressing trawling's impacts.

Peltola, who is challenging Sullivan for his Senate seat, introduced the Bycatch Reduction and Mitigation Act in 0224 while serving in the U.S. House. Sullivan introduced his Bycatch Reduction Act this year, which advanced through the Senate Commerce Committee on Sept. 16.

According to the Alaska Beacon, the two proposals share some common ground, particularly federal support for technology to reduce bycatch. But there are notable differences in how that support would be distributed and how each proposal approaches fisheries management.

Peltola’s 2024 legislation prioritized smaller operators by making vessels under 65 feet eligible for funding aimed at developing and deploying bycatch-reduction technology. Sullivan’s legislation does not include the same small-vessel priority.

Peltola’s broader fisheries efforts have also focused on changes to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act. During her time in Congress, she joined efforts to reauthorize the federal fisheries law with provisions that would strengthen protections for subsistence users and add tribal representation to the North Pacific and Pacific fishery management councils.

Those proposals also sought to change federal bycatch language. Legislation Peltola cosponsored would have removed the phrase “to the extent practicable” from Magnuson-Stevens provisions directing managers to minimize bycatch.

Sullivan’s current legislation takes a different approach. His Bycatch Reduction Act directs federal fisheries managers toward additional bycatch-reduction measures while emphasizing research, technology, and gear innovation. Sullivan has described the legislation as an effort to reduce bycatch and limit the impacts of trawl gear on the seafloor.

The political and industry responses to proposals have also differed. Peltola’s 2024 legislation drew significant opposition from fishing industry organizations, with groups calling for the legislation to be withdrawn. Sullivan’s proposal has also faced concerns from industry groups, including pollock organizations, but the Alaska Beacon reported that opposition has focused on specific provisions rather than calls to withdraw the legislation entirely.

The competing approaches come as trawl bycatch has taken an unusually prominent role in Alaska’s 2026 elections. Brett Watson, an economist and natural resource expert with the University of Alaska Anchorage’s Institute of Social and Economic Research, told the Beacon he could not recall fisheries issues playing such a central role in a statewide or federal campaign during roughly the past decade.

Both candidates have made reducing bycatch a central part of their fisheries platforms, but their legislative records show differences in how they would use federal policy, funding, and fisheries management to address the issue.