Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of 1995
Became Public Law No: 104-143.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 12, 1995
Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Reauthorization Act of 1995 - Amends the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Management Act of 1984 (as named by this Act) to revise and extend the management program for restoration of fish and wildlife in the Trinity River Basin. (Sec. 2) Provides that Trinity Basin fisheries restoration is to be measured not only by returning adult anadromous fish spawners, but by the ability of dependent tribal, commercial, and sport fisheries to participate fully, through enhanced in-river and ocean harvest opportunities, in the benefits of restoration. Declares that the Secretary of the Interior requires additional authority to implement a management program, in conjunction with other agencies, to achieve the long-term goals of restoring fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity River Basin, and to the extent these restored populations will contribute to ocean populations of adult salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish, such management program will aid in the resumption of commercial, including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities. (Sec. 3) Revises such management program to require the Secretary to consult with the Secretary of Commerce on certain matters, where appropriate. Declares that such program is intended, to the extent these restored populations will contribute to ocean populations of adult salmon, steelhead, and other anadromous fish, to aid in the resumption of commercial, including ocean harvest, and recreational fishing activities. Revises the management program to include ocean fish levels and fish habitats in the Klamath River. Provides that modernization of the Trinity River Fish Hatchery is to mitigate fish habitat loss above Lewiston Dam while not impairing efforts to restore and maintain naturally reproducing fish stocks within the basin. (Sec. 4) Revises provisions for the Trinity River Basin Fish and Wildlife Task Force. Adds five members (to the current 14) and provides that such new members represent: (1) the Yurok Tribe; (2) the Karuk Tribe; (3) commercial fishing interests; (4) sport fishing interests; and (5) the timber industry. Directs the Secretary to appoint a designated representative to ensure coordination of actions and management and the exchange of information between such Trinity River Task Force and the Klamath River Basin Fisheries Task Force and the Klamath Fishery Management Council. Allows reimbursement of members of the Task Force who are not full-time officers or employees of the United States, the State of California (or a political subdivision thereof), or an Indian tribe. (Sec. 5) Extends for three years the period of availability of the authorization of appropriations for the management program for restoration of fish and wildlife in the Trinity River Basin. Authorizes the Secretary to accept in-kind services as payment for specified obligations incurred under the Act. Limits to 20 percent the portion of management program funds which may be used for overhead and indirect costs. Requires the Secretary to: (1) submit annual financial reports to specified congressional committees; and (2) conduct periodic programmatic audits of the in-river fishery monitoring and enforcement programs under the Act. Authorizes the Secretary, beginning in the fiscal year immediately following completion of the restoration effort, to seek appropriations to monitor, evaluate, and maintain program investments and fish and wildlife populations in the Trinity River Basin for the purpose of achieving long-term fish and wildlife restoration goals. (Sec. 6) Provides that nothing in the Act shall be construed as establishing or affecting any past, present, or future rights of any Indian or Indian tribe or any other individual or entity.
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays (2/3 required): 412 - 0 (Roll No. 845).
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 5, rule I, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H14277-14279)
Mr. Young (AK) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 201.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-395.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 104-395.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
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: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.2243 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.2243 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.2243 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.2243 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.