June 5, 2025 Seward Folly Staff

For the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the past few months have brought a wave of uncertainty. The agency, which oversees the National Weather Service (NWS), the NOAA Fisheries Regional Office and Alaska Fisheries Science Center, is now staring down the possibility of a $1.7 billion budget cut — a 27% reduction proposed by the Trump administration for 2026.

Senator Lisa Murkowski has emphasized that the proposal isn’t final. Still, the potential loss looms large in Alaska, where NOAA’s presence is essential. The agency provides everything from lifesaving weather forecasts to the fisheries data that powers one of the state’s biggest industries. And this proposal comes after years of shrinking budgets and a major exodus of NOAA employees earlier this spring.

“Decades of experience have left — which was a gut punch to Alaska,” said Rick Thoman, a longtime NWS meteorologist who now works as a climate specialist at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.

The National Weather Service stands to lose $209 million dedicated to satellites and infrastructure if the cuts go through, threatening the backbone of Alaska’s weather monitoring system. Yet for all its impact, the NWS costs Americans just $4 a year — roughly the price of a cup of coffee, as JoAnn Becker, president of the National Weather Service Employees Organization, likes to point out. According to a 2024 study, the agency delivers a staggering 8,000% return on investment.

Alaska’s challenge is unique: only three forecast offices — Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Juneau — cover a region that would have 25 to 30 offices in the Lower 48.

“We have very few scientists for a massive area,” Thoman explained. He also warned that popular weather apps are only as good as the data they draw from NOAA, meaning forecasts everywhere would become less reliable.

The stakes are even higher for Alaska’s mariners and pilots, who rely on NOAA’s data and on-the-ground staff to keep their routes safe. Maintaining vital equipment — like tidal and stream gauges, weather balloons, and ocean buoys — requires both funding and people. With fewer staff, the risk to those who travel Alaska’s skies and waters grows. The Bering Air plane crash this past winter, Thoman noted, was a grim reminder of what’s at stake when weather information gaps widen.

But the cuts don’t end there. Several Alaska research centers — including the Cooperative Institute for Climate, Ocean, and Ecosystem Studies (CICOES) and the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Policy (ACCAP) — could be forced to shut down if NOAA’s budget is slashed. These institutions play a key role in tracking climate change and its impact on Alaska’s environment.

NOAA’s fisheries data is equally vital. The Alaska Board of Fisheries and the North Pacific Fisheries Council both rely on the agency’s research to set sustainable quotas. Without reliable information on fish stocks, managers might have to err on the side of caution, potentially reducing quotas — or worse, miss shifts in fish populations altogether.

“Fishermen navigate unpredictable waters without reliable projections to guide their harvests,” the Alaska Fisheries Conservation Council warned. “Climate-driven shifts in fish habitats may go unmonitored, leading to unexpected declines or overfishing for some species, or missed opportunity in others. These data gaps would fundamentally disrupt an industry that depends on precise science to keep harvests strong and fisheries healthy.”

Federal funding for agencies like NOAA rarely makes headlines in small-town Alaska. But the ripple effects are impossible to ignore. For many communities, reliable forecasts and healthy fisheries aren’t just nice to have — they’re a matter of survival.