119-HR-2293 Investigative Journalist Impact Analysis

Document 119‑HR‑2293: Impact Analysis (Whipline Style)

The bill passed the House on December 9, 2025 under suspension, after earlier committee action; it directs reissuance of the 21.47 aquaculture depredation order, broadens eligible states and adds private lake/pond managers, removes the 2014 sunset, requires 5‑year renewals, and preserves MBTA/NEPA obligations. Current baseline policy since 2020 uses a state/tribal special permit under MBTA with population‑based take limits. [6]Congress.gov — Congressional Record Daily Digest — December 9, 2025 (House)[7]Congress.gov — Congressional Record — Pages H5076–H5077 (Dec. 9, 2025)[1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…[8]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS finalizes new special permit for cormorant…

Sources for metrics: USFWS Federal Register FEIS/rule; USFWS 2017 EA/FONSI; Virginia Tech/USDA‑funded field studies. [5]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / Federal Register — Federal Register (Dec. 29, 20…[9]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS 2017 FONSI: Issuing Depredation Permits fo…[3]Virginia Cooperative Extension (Virginia Tech) — Cormorant Predation of Commerc…

Summary

• Economic: Likely to reduce aquaculture depredation and some permitting burden where fish farms are concentrated (e.g., MS‑AL‑AR), with gains dependent on how the reissued order’s reporting/controls are implemented. [3]Virginia Cooperative Extension (Virginia Tech) — Cormorant Predation of Commerc…[2]USDA APHIS — Depredation Orders for Double-crested Cormorants (50 CFR 21.47/21.…
• Social: Benefits cluster in aquaculture communities; bird‑conservation and angling interests face countervailing effects depending on displacement to wild waters and colony management. [4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish[10]Web search · turn 0 #6
• Environmental: Population‑level risk is manageable under current FEIS‑based take frameworks, but localized ecological effects (sportfish cohorts, colony habitats) are documented; outcomes depend on NEPA safeguards in the reissuance. [5]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / Federal Register — Federal Register (Dec. 29, 20…[11]USGS — Cormorant predation and population dynamics of walleye/yellow perch in O…

Economic Effects

Evidence on aquaculture, permitting, and fisheries‑adjacent markets.

• Depredation costs at catfish farms: Multi‑year Delta studies estimate average annual lost sales revenue of $47.2M (range $25.8M–$65.4M) plus hazing costs, with combined on‑farm effects averaging $64.7M/year. Reinstating order‑based lethal take at/near facilities could reduce these losses relative to non‑lethal‑only periods. [3]Virginia Cooperative Extension (Virginia Tech) — Cormorant Predation of Commerc…
• Catfish consumption by cormorants: Winters 2016–17 and 2017–18 saw 10.3M and 12.0M farmed catfish consumed in the Mississippi Delta; DCCOs average ~1 lb fish/day and about one‑third of diet was commercial catfish in the Delta. These figures bound potential benefits from quicker control authority. [4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish
• Compliance/transaction costs: The original 21.47 order was created to allow take without individual MBTA permits at aquaculture facilities (with non‑lethal first, daylight shooting, reporting), lowering per‑incident permitting costs relative to case‑by‑case permits. Reissuing a modernized order could replicate those savings if reporting remains robust. [2]USDA APHIS — Depredation Orders for Double-crested Cormorants (50 CFR 21.47/21.…[12]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS (1998): Depredation Order announced for aq…
• Geographic distribution of benefits: 2023 aquaculture sales are concentrated—Mississippi led with ~$277M; top five states (MS, WA, LA, FL, AL) account for ~55% of sales. Several newly added states in H.R. 2293 have comparatively smaller aquaculture sectors, implying uneven direct gains. [13]USDA NASS — USDA NASS: 2023 Census of Aquaculture Results (Dec. 16, 2024)
• Recreational fisheries and hatcheries: If more DCCOs are displaced from farms to public waters (observed under prior order), wild/stocked fisheries may face higher predation pressure, risking negative impacts on angling‑related spending where sportfish cohorts are sensitive. [4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish

Social Effects

Who is affected and how.

• Aquaculture communities: Catfish is the largest U.S. aquaculture segment; the MS‑AL‑AR region supports thousands of jobs and significant local tax revenues, so reduced depredation can stabilize employment and supplier networks. [14]Web search · turn 10 #0
• State/tribal agencies vs. private managers: Since 2020, a state/tribal special permit framework has governed DCCO take; H.R. 2293 would newly empower licensed lake/pond managers. This may speed responses on private waters but shifts some discretion from public agencies to private actors. [8]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS finalizes new special permit for cormorant…[1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…
• Birding/public perception: Federal rulemaking recognized non‑market values (birders, aesthetic/ecological). Expanded lethal take near private lakes/ponds may heighten visibility and controversy even if biologically sustainable. [15]Federal Register / govinfo — Federal Register (Jan. 22, 2020) proposed rule: co…

Environmental Effects

Population‑level safeguards vs. localized ecological responses.

• Population status and allowable take: FEIS/rulemaking estimated continental DCCO abundance at ~0.87–1.03M birds and set population‑specific allowable take under a common framework. If reissuing 21.47, NEPA‑backed limits and monitoring will be pivotal to maintain sustainability. [5]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / Federal Register — Federal Register (Dec. 29, 20…
• Localized fishery impacts (documented): Studies link DCCO predation to reduced subadult survival and declines of walleye/yellow perch in NY’s Oneida Lake; management reduced predation and improved recruitment. Similar work in the Lake Ontario/St. Lawrence system documents heavy local consumption of smallmouth bass, yellow perch, and other species. [11]USGS — Cormorant predation and population dynamics of walleye/yellow perch in O…[16]Waterbirds (BioOne) — Mitigation of DCCO Impacts on Lake Ontario (Waterbirds 20…[17]USGS — USGS: Relationship between smallmouth bass abundance and DCCOs (Lake Ont…
• Displacement effect from farms: During the 2015 order year, 40% more DCCOs used natural waterbodies vs. 2016 when the order was vacated; when only non‑lethal tools were available, a larger share foraged on aquaculture. Reissuing the order could again redistribute predation pressure toward public waters. [4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish
• Colony/habitat interactions: Cormorant colonies can damage vegetation and affect co‑nesting waterbirds; management actions have aimed to balance fishery protection with maintaining other colonial species’ habitats. Local outcomes depend on site‑specific methods (e.g., egg oiling, limited culls). [18]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS: 2003 Final EIS press release (colony impa…[19]USGS — USGS: DCCO studies at Little Galloo Island (diet, consumption, managemen…

Temporal Analysis

• Immediate (0–12 months): Despite the directive to reissue, Section 2(d) preserves NEPA/MBTA compliance; rulemaking, environmental review, and reporting scheme updates will likely delay on‑the‑ground changes relative to the existing 2020 state/tribal permit framework. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…[8]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS finalizes new special permit for cormorant…
• Medium term (1–3 years): If a revised 21.47 takes effect with modernized recordkeeping, aquaculture facilities should see quicker responses and reduced depredation at ponds/roosts; displacement to public waters may surface in fishery monitoring data. [2]USDA APHIS — Depredation Orders for Double-crested Cormorants (50 CFR 21.47/21.…[4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish
• Long term (3+ years): The bill’s 5‑year renewal cycle and removal of the 2014 sunset make the order durable; cumulative ecological and fishery effects will hinge on adaptive management and transparent reporting. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…

Unintended Consequences / Risks

• Predation redistribution: Order‑enabled lethal take at farms has been associated with more DCCOs using natural waters, potentially increasing pressure on wild/stocked fisheries unless paired with targeted public‑resource management. [4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish
• Non‑target/colony disturbance: Control at colonies or shared roosts can disturb co‑nesting species and vegetation if poorly executed; mitigation requires method limits and monitoring specified in NEPA documents. [18]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS: 2003 Final EIS press release (colony impa…
• Data/oversight gaps: The bill calls for “modernized” recordkeeping and simplified compliance with other federal law; if reporting weakens or becomes inconsistent across many new actors (e.g., private lake managers), population accounting could degrade. [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…

Assessment (Analytical Stance)

Neutral. The bill can deliver tangible economic relief where aquaculture losses are concentrated, but the magnitude and distribution of benefits will be uneven across states. Ecological trade‑offs are real yet manageable if the reissued order embeds FEIS‑grade population limits, transparent reporting, and coordination with public‑resource management to avoid shifting impacts onto wild fisheries. The decisive variable is implementation quality under MBTA/NEPA. [3]Virginia Cooperative Extension (Virginia Tech) — Cormorant Predation of Commerc…[5]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / Federal Register — Federal Register (Dec. 29, 20…[8]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS finalizes new special permit for cormorant…

Sourcing (Selected)

Key authorities and datasets used above.

1. Bill text, scope, and House action (Dec 9, 2025; pp. H5076–H5077). [1]Congress.gov — Text - H.R.2293 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): Cormorant Relief A…[6]Congress.gov — Congressional Record Daily Digest — December 9, 2025 (House)[7]Congress.gov — Congressional Record — Pages H5076–H5077 (Dec. 9, 2025)
2. Regulatory baseline and FEIS/rule: 2020 USFWS state/tribal special permit; FEIS population estimates and take framework. [8]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS finalizes new special permit for cormorant…[5]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service / Federal Register — Federal Register (Dec. 29, 20…
3. Prior depredation orders and geographic scope (50 CFR 21.47/21.48) and purpose. [2]USDA APHIS — Depredation Orders for Double-crested Cormorants (50 CFR 21.47/21.…
4. 2016 vacatur and subsequent permitting EA/FONSI. [20]U.S. Department of the Interior — DOI Legislative Affairs: Cormorant Mismanagem…[9]U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service — USFWS 2017 FONSI: Issuing Depredation Permits fo…
5. Documented aquaculture losses and diet/consumption in the Delta; displacement under AQDO. [3]Virginia Cooperative Extension (Virginia Tech) — Cormorant Predation of Commerc…[4]USDA APHIS (NWRC) — NWRC Spotlight: Cormorant Impacts to Catfish
6. Localized fishery effects in NY/Great Lakes systems. [11]USGS — Cormorant predation and population dynamics of walleye/yellow perch in O…[17]USGS — USGS: Relationship between smallmouth bass abundance and DCCOs (Lake Ont…[19]USGS — USGS: DCCO studies at Little Galloo Island (diet, consumption, managemen…
7. Aquaculture scale by state (2023 NASS Census; ERS). [13]USDA NASS — USDA NASS: 2023 Census of Aquaculture Results (Dec. 16, 2024)