PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 5, 2015
National Mitigation Fisheries Coordination Act
This bill directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to impose a charge for conducting mitigation fishery activities in connection with federal water resources development projects carried out by water development agencies (the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, or the Tennessee Valley Authority). The agencies must pay the charge in accordance with a fishery mitigation plan developed and approved by the USFWS Director and the agency head.
"Mitigation fishery activities" are the rearing and stocking of native and nonnative fish to replace or maintain fishery resources or harvest levels lost as a result of a project, including project planning, population assessment and evaluation, genetic monitoring, broodstock development, and fish health sampling.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
USFWS's charges must be reasonably related to expenditures necessary to: (1) operate, maintain, and rehabilitate certain USFWS-owned and -operated mitigation fishery facilities, hatcheries, and health centers; and (2) conduct mitigation fishery activities, including expenditures for personnel, transportation, utilities, contractual services, fish feed, supplies, equipment, routine maintenance, deferred maintenance, fish eggs, technical support, fish health, management and administration, planning, outreach and education, and hatchery product evaluations.
The bill lists the applicable mitigation fishery facilities in Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
People & committees
Rep. Crawford, Eric A. "Rick" [R-AR-1] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Power and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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 12, 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.2235 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.2235 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.2235 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.2235 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.