PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 248.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Apr 27, 2006
Multi-State and International Fisheries Conservation and Management Act of 2006 - Reauthorizes through FY2012: (1) the Interjurisdictional Fisheries Act of 1986, including authorization of appropriations to the Department of Commerce for management of interjurisdictional fishery resources and the development of interstate fishery management plans for interjurisdictional fishery resources; (2) the Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, including authorization of appropriations for preservation of fishery resources; (3) the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975, including authorization of appropriations for the International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas and including use for the payment of the U.S. share of the joint expenses of the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas; and (4) the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995, including authorization of appropriations for the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention and including use for the payment of the U.S. contribution to the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization.
Reauthorizes through FY2016 the Dungeness Crab Fishery Management Act of 1996, allowing the states of Washington, Oregon, and California to enforce state laws governing fishing and processing of Dungeness crab fisheries where there is no fishery management plan in effect. Requires the Pacific State Marine Fisheries Commission to report biennially to Congress on the status and management of the Dungeness Crab fishery located off the coasts of such states, including stock status and trends throughout its range, a description of research and scientific review processes used to determine such stock status and trends, and measures implemented or planned to prevent or end overfishing in the fishery.
Expresses the sense of Congress that the U.S. Commissioners to the Atlantic Tunas Convention should seek to include ecosystem and conservation of fish habitat considerations in fisheries management.
People & committees
Rep. Gilchrest, Wayne T. [R-MD-1] · R–MD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 248.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-444.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 109-444.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from Commerce.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans.
Referred to the House Committee on 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: Apr 7, 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.4686 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.4686 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.4686 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.4686 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.