PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Aug 2, 2013
Healthy Fisheries through Better Science Act - Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to require the Secretary of Commerce to develop and publish at least triennially in the Federal Register (on the same schedule as the fisheries research strategic plan) a plan to conduct stock assessments for all stocks of fish for which a fishery management plan is in effect.
Defines "stock assessment" as an evaluation of the past, present, and future status of a stock of fish, including: (1) a range of life history characteristics, including the stock's geographical boundaries, age, growth, natural mortality, sexual maturity and reproduction, feeding habits, and habitat preferences; and (2) fishing for the stock.
Requires the plan to: (1) establish schedules for conducting initial stock assessments and updating previously conducted assessments; and (2) identify data and analysis, especially concerning recreational fishing, that would reduce uncertainty in and improve the accuracy of future stock assessments, including whether such data and analysis could be provided by nongovernmental sources, such as fishermen, fishing communities, universities, and research institutions. Provides for waivers of stock assessment requirements when the Secretary determines that the assessment is not necessary and justifies such determination in the Federal Register notice.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to develop and publish in the Federal Register guidelines to incorporate data, analysis, and stock assessments from nongovernmental sources into fisheries management decisions and to establish a registry of information providers. Requires the Secretary and Regional Fishery Management Councils to use such information as the best scientific information available in fisheries management decisions, unless otherwise determined by the science and statistical committee of such Councils.
Directs the Secretary to report to Congress regarding each fishery governed by a fishery management plan to: (1) identify the goals and methods of the applicable programs governing monitoring and enforcement of fishing subject to such plan; (2) certify which methods are most cost-effective; and (3) explain why such most-cost-effective methods are not required, if applicable.
Prohibits the Secretary from collecting certain fishing permit fees and North Pacific Council fisheries research plan implementation fees before identifying the costs that will be recovered by such fee.
People & committees
Rep. Wittman, Robert J. [R-VA-1] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 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.3063 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.3063 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.3063 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.3063 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.