PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 07 · Reported to House · Sep 15, 2025
Cormorant Relief Act of 2025
This bill requires the Department of the Interior to reissue the depredation order for double-crested cormorants at aquaculture facilities in certain states. (The previous order was vacated in 2016 by court order.)
Depredation orders allow for the taking (i.e., capturing, killing, dispersing, or transport of the carcass) of a specified species without a permit, generally to reduce damage caused by the species or to protect interests like health or property. Reissuing this order authorizes landowners, operators, tenants, and employees of entities engaged in aquaculture to take double-crested cormorants that are causing or threatening harm at aquaculture facilities and state and federal fish hatcheries.
Interior must reissue the depredation order with updates, including an expansion of (1) the number of states covered by the order, and (2) the entities to whom the order applies (i.e., private lake and pond managers who are licensed by the state).
Under the bill, Interior must renew the depredation order every five years.
People & committees
Rep. Ezell, Mike [R-MS-4] · R–MS
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5076-5077)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H5076-5077)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 2293.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5076-5077)
Mr. Hurd (CO) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 241.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-285.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-285.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries Discharged
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries.
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.
Source last updated: Nov 4, 2026. 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.2293 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.2293 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.2293 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.2293 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.