HR 2293: Cormorant Relief Act of 2025

HR 2293 in plain English: This bill requires the Department of the Interior to reissue a depredation order for double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities, which was previously vacated by a court in 2016. The order would allow landowners, operators, and certain managers at aquaculture facilities and fish hatcheries to capture or kill cormorants causing harm without needing an individual permit. The reissued order must expand the number of states covered and must be renewed every five years.

Stated purpose

This bill requires the Department of the Interior to reissue a depredation order that allows the killing or dispersal of double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities and fish hatcheries without a permit, in order to protect fish stocks from bird-caused damage.

Key points

• Reinstates a depredation order for double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities and fish hatcheries, vacated since 2016.
• Allows killing or capturing cormorants without a permit if they are causing or threatening harm at covered facilities.
• Expands the order to cover more states and adds licensed private lake and pond managers as authorized users.
• Requires the Department of the Interior to renew the depredation order every five years.

Arguments supporters make

• Cormorants can consume large quantities of fish, causing serious financial harm to fish farmers and hatcheries, and restoring this order gives those businesses a practical tool to protect their livelihoods.
• The original depredation order was vacated by a court in 2016, leaving aquaculture operations without protection for years; Congress stepping in restores a commonsense safeguard that existed before.
• The bill still requires compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, so cormorant populations retain legal protections and the order is not a blank check to eliminate the species.

Arguments opponents make

• Double-crested cormorants are a protected migratory bird whose populations were once severely depleted; allowing broad lethal control across more states could harm their recovery and disrupt ecosystems that depend on them.
• Bypassing the normal regulatory process by having Congress mandate reissuance of a specific order removes the scientific review and public comment that agencies normally use to set wildlife management rules.
• Expanding the order to private lake and pond managers goes well beyond protecting commercial aquaculture, potentially authorizing killing of cormorants for the benefit of private recreational fishing interests.

Tradeoffs

Protecting the economic interests of fish farmers and hatchery operators comes at the cost of reduced federal discretion and potentially greater pressure on a migratory bird species; broader coverage across more states and more types of managers increases relief for affected businesses but also increases the scale of authorized bird removal.

Current status in Congress: Passed House.

NewsClear — neutral news & congressional tracking · Bill of the Week