The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 5514·119th Congress·Introduced Sep 24, 2026

Responsible Cormorant Management and Control Act of 2026

IntroducedAnimalsMajor
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX]
Committees
Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action
Sep 24, 2026

Bottom line

The bill creates a new, science-based regulatory system for managing double-crested cormorant populations, aiming to mitigate their negative impacts while ensuring their conservation.

What it actually does

This bill mandates the Secretary of the Interior, through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to establish regional management frameworks for the 'take' of double-crested cormorants within one year. These frameworks must balance the conservation of cormorant populations with the need to address documented conflicts related to fisheries, sensitive vegetation, and other migratory birds, allowing for management actions by states, tribes, and private lake/pond managers.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that the bill provides essential tools to manage rapidly expanding double-crested cormorant populations that are causing significant harm to commercial and recreational fisheries, sensitive ecosystems, and other migratory bird species. They contend it offers a balanced, science-driven approach to address these conflicts while safeguarding the cormorant species.

Opponents contend

Opponents might argue that the bill could lead to excessive culling of cormorants, potentially disrupting ecological balance or that existing migratory bird protections are sufficient. They may also express concerns about the potential for non-target take and the scientific justification for widespread population control measures.

The bill is concise and clearly written, making it accessible for a thorough understanding within a reasonable timeframe.

Section 1

Short Title

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section formally names the Act as the 'Responsible Cormorant Management and Control Act of 2026.' This title provides a concise and official reference for the legislation, facilitating its discussion and identification within legislative and public discourse.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupGeneral public and policymakersImpactProvides a clear and consistent name for referencing the legislation.MechanismScale

Supporters argue

A clear and concise short title is essential for easy identification and discussion of the legislation, making it more accessible to the public and legislative bodies.

Critics contend

No specific opposition is typically raised against this provision, as it is a standard legislative practice for naming bills.

Tradeoffs

None.

Section 2(a)

Definitions of Key Terms

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This subsection defines critical terms used throughout the Act, such as 'double-crested cormorant,' 'Indian Tribe,' 'lake manager,' 'pond manager,' 'Regional Flyway Council,' 'Secretary' (referring to the Secretary of the Interior through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service), and 'take' (as defined in existing federal regulations). These definitions are fundamental for ensuring consistent interpretation and application of the bill's provisions.

Section 2(b)

Mandate for Regional Management Frameworks

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section requires the Secretary of the Interior, in coordination with the Regional Flyway Councils, to promulgate regulations within one year of the Act's enactment. These regulations will establish regional management frameworks for double-crested cormorants, based on the best available scientific information and consistent with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. This provision sets the core directive for a new, coordinated approach to cormorant population management.

Section 2(c)

Specific Requirements for Regional Management Frameworks

prominently featuredhighly complex

This subsection details the mandatory components of each regional management framework. It requires ensuring conservation of cormorant breeding populations at biologically sustainable levels, specifying allowable take methods and time periods, mandating public reporting of all take (including non-target birds), and implementing measures to avoid non-target take. The frameworks must also identify documented conflicts that authorized take can resolve, include non-lethal measures, and consider the effects of cormorants on fisheries, vegetation, other migratory birds, human health, water quality, and endangered species. It also identifies authorized entities for take, including State and Tribal agencies, and licensed lake and pond managers.

Section 2(d)

Management within National Wildlife Refuge System

mentioned in summarymoderately complex

This section directs the Secretary, in collaboration with State and Tribal game and fish agencies and the Regional Flyway Councils, to develop recommendations for cormorant management actions within units of the National Wildlife Refuge System. These actions must comply with the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act and align with the management objectives of all involved parties, while also fulfilling the primary conservation purposes of the refuges.

Sections 2(e) and 2(f)

Regular Population Surveys and Framework Updates

mentioned in summarystraightforward

The bill mandates that the Secretary, in coordination with Regional Flyway Councils, conduct a survey of double-crested cormorant populations every five years, beginning five years after the Act's enactment. Concurrently, the regional management frameworks developed under the Act must be reviewed and updated every five years, incorporating the results of these most recent population surveys. This ensures that management strategies remain adaptive and based on current scientific data.

Section 2(g)

Report on Hunting Licenses Feasibility

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This section requires the Secretary to submit a report to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the House Committee on Natural Resources within 90 days of enactment. The report must assess the feasibility of issuing licenses to hunt double-crested cormorants as a method to meet the requirements of the regional management frameworks. This explores an additional potential tool for population control.

Section 2(h)

Sunset Clause

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision stipulates that the entire Act shall cease to have force or effect on January 1, 2034. This means that all mandates, regulations, surveys, and management frameworks established under this Act will expire on that date unless Congress takes further action to reauthorize or extend the legislation. It sets an expiration date for the entire program.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
Ask Ledger AI about this