Congress funds shark research to protect fishing communities without culling

What it does

This bill directs the Secretary of Commerce to establish a task force to study and address shark depredation—the problem of sharks damaging fishing gear and catches. The task force will include fisheries managers, state wildlife officials, and shark researchers, and will develop strategies to reduce harmful shark-human interactions, identify research priorities, and recommend management approaches. The task force will report to Congress every two years and dissolve after seven years.

Why we flagged it

The bill's core function is establishing a multi-stakeholder task force to coordinate research and develop science-based strategies for managing shark depredation in fisheries. It is a straightforward research and coordination mandate with no private carve-outs or hidden mechanisms.

What the text implies

• Task force emphasis on non-lethal deterrents and shark ecology may shift fisheries management away from lethal shark control toward coexistence strategies, affecting traditional shark-culling practices.
• Research into how angler behavior influences shark interactions could lead to regulatory changes in fishing practices or seasonal closures in high-depredation areas.
• Climate change research component signals potential future management shifts as shark populations migrate due to warming waters, affecting fishing grounds and seasons.

Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.

Who it affects

Coastal fishing communities and recreational anglers benefit from coordinated research into shark depredation and development of non-lethal deterrents and management strategies. The bill emphasizes science-based approaches and ecosystem health (healthy shark populations in food webs, climate impacts) rather than culling, which protects both livelihoods and marine conservation.

Who stands to gain

• marine research institutions
• universities with shark ecology programs
• fishing equipment manufacturers (non-lethal deterrent developers)

Named in the bill

Secretary of Commerce, National Marine Fisheries Service, Regional Fishery Management Councils, Marine Fisheries Commissions, Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Endangered Species Act of 1973, coastal states

Where it stands

4 cosponsors: 2 Democrats, 2 Republicans.

• Jan 3, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
• Jan 3, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on the Judiciary and House Committee on Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources”
• Jan 21, 2025 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection”
• Jan 21, 2025 — Floor vote scheduled · Congress.gov: “Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill”

Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.

Money around this bill

1 lobbying clients named this bill on 1 disclosure filings across 1 quarter, Jun 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $50,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 35 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.

More lobbying clients named this bill than 0% of bills with at least one filing.

Robert Wittman, the sponsor, reported $1,274,106 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.

• Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership — $50,000 on 1 filing

Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.