PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 29, 2007
Endangered Salmon Predation Prevention Act - Amends the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 to authorize the Secretary of Commerce to issue one-year permits for the lethal taking of California sea lions if the Secretary determines that alternative measures to reduce sea lion predation on threatened or endangered salmonid stocks in the Columbia River do not adequately protect the salmonid stocks from such predation. Limits the cumulative annual taking of California sea lions to one percent of the annual potential biological removal level of such sea lions. Requires the Secretary to determine whether alternative measures to reduce sea lion predation on salmonid stocks will adequately protect such stocks.
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) nonlethal means of preventing sea lion predation of salmonid stocks in the Columbia River is preferable to lethal means; (2) permit holders exercising lethal removal authority should be trained in wildlife management; and (3) the federal government should continue to fund, research, and support effective nonlethal alternative measures for preventing such predation.
People & committees
Rep. Baird, Brian [D-WA-3] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1769 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1769 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1769 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1769 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.