Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR S8931)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 19, 2002
Fisheries Research Improvement Act - Amends the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act to require the National Academy of Sciences to review and recommend measures for improving National Marine Fisheries Service procedures for ensuring data quality in the data collection phase of the stock assessment program.Requires the Secretary of Commerce to establish a national cooperative research and management program to be administered by the National Marine Fisheries Service, based upon recommendations by the Regional Fishery Management Councils.Requires the Secretary to create guidelines so that participants in this program are not penalized for loss of catch history or unexpended days-at-sea as part of a limited entry system.Authorizes specified funds for cooperative comparative trawl research between the National Marine Fisheries Service and fishing industry participants for the Northeast multispecies groundfish fishery.Authorizes a Council or the Secretary to extend beyond ten years the time period for the rebuilding of an overfished fishery to accommodate a new rebuilding target if the target is changed during the rebuilding period. Repeals the current exception to the ten year rebuilding deadline in cases where the biology of the stock of fish, other environmental conditions, or management measures under an international agreement in which the United States participates dictate a longer rebuilding period.
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 S.2972 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 S.2972 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 S.2972 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 S.2972 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.