S.1255 - Cormorant Relief Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
The Cormorant Relief Act of 2025 (S.1255) aims to require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue regulations concerning the taking of double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities. It specifically targets the reissuance of the 'original depredation order' as it existed on January 1, 2016. The bill expands the application of this order to additional states and includes lake and pond managers among those authorized to take cormorants.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill, if enacted, would be to broaden the scope of permissible cormorant taking to protect aquaculture facilities. This could lead to a reduction in cormorant populations in the affected areas. It would also shift some regulatory burden related to wildlife management to the federal government.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially reduces economic losses for aquaculture facilities due to cormorant predation.
- Provides additional tools for lake and pond managers to manage local ecosystems.
- Could lead to increased fish production at aquaculture facilities, benefiting consumers.
- May reduce conflicts between aquaculture operations and wildlife.
- Addresses concerns raised by stakeholders in the aquaculture industry.
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential negative impact on cormorant populations and local ecosystems.
- May face opposition from environmental and conservation groups.
- Could set a precedent for similar legislation targeting other wildlife species.
- Possible unintended consequences for non-target species.
- The expansion of the depredation order may not be based on the most current scientific data.
Most Disadvantaged Areas:
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutional alignment is primarily rooted in Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce (Article I, Section 8), as aquaculture products are often sold across state lines. The necessary and proper clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18) could also be invoked to justify federal regulation of wildlife management where it impacts economic activities. However, the Tenth Amendment, reserving powers not delegated to the federal government to the states, could be raised as a challenge if the states believe their authority over wildlife management is being unduly infringed.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).