[Pages H240-H242]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

{time} 1430
SUPPORTING THE HEALTH OF AQUATIC SYSTEMS THROUGH RESEARCH KNOWLEDGE AND
ENHANCED DIALOGUE ACT OF 2025

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass
the bill (H.R. 207) to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a
task force regarding shark depredation, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:

H.R. 207

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Supporting the Health of
Aquatic systems through Research Knowledge and Enhanced
Dialogue Act of 2025'' or the ``SHARKED Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. SHARK DEPREDATION TASK FORCE AND RESEARCH PROJECTS.

(a) Shark Depredation Task Force.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Commerce shall establish
a task force (referred to in this subsection as the ``task
force'') to identify and address critical needs with respect
to shark depredation.
(2) Membership.--The Secretary of Commerce shall appoint
individuals to the task force, including--
(A) 1 representative from--
(i) each Regional Fishery Management Council established
under section 302(a)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(a)(1));
(ii) each Marine Fisheries Commission, as such term is
defined in section 3 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1802);
(iii) the fish and wildlife agency of a coastal State from
each Regional Fishery Management Council established under
section 302(a)(1) of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1852(a)(1)); and
(iv) the National Marine Fisheries Service;

[[Page H241]]

(B) an individual with expertise in the management of
highly migratory species;
(C) a researcher with expertise in shark management and
behavior; and
(D) a researcher with expertise in shark ecology.
(3) Responsibilities.--The task force shall--
(A) develop ways to improve coordination and communication
across the fisheries management community and shark research
community to address shark depredation;
(B) identify research priorities and funding opportunities
for such priorities, including--
(i) identifying shark species involved in interactions;
(ii) shark stock assessments;
(iii) how sharks become habituated to humans and thus lead
to more interactions between sharks and humans;
(iv) how angler behavior and fishery regulatory frameworks
may influence shark interactions;
(v) techniques and strategies to reduce harmful
interactions between sharks and humans, including the
development and use of non-lethal deterrents;
(vi) the role of healthy shark populations in the ocean
food web; and
(vii) climate change impacts on shifting shark populations,
prey, and shark behavior;
(C) develop recommended management strategies to address
shark depredation; and
(D) coordinate the development and distribution of
educational materials to help the fishing community minimize
shark interactions including through changed angler behavior
and expectations.
(4) Report.--Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this section, and every 2 years thereafter until
the termination of the task force in accordance with
paragraph (5), the task force shall submit to Congress a
report regarding the findings of the task force.
(5) Sunset.--The task force shall terminate not later than
7 years after the date on which the Secretary of Commerce
establishes the task force.
(6) Coastal state defined.--In this subsection, the term
``coastal State''--
(A) means a State of the United States in, or bordering on,
the Atlantic Ocean, Pacific Ocean, Arctic Ocean, Gulf of
Mexico, or Long Island Sound; and
(B) includes Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the United
States, Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana
Islands, and American Samoa.
(b) Shark Depredation Research Projects.--Section 318(c) of
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(16 U.S.C. 1867(c)) is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(6) Projects to better understand shark depredation,
including identifying what causes increases in shark
depredation and determining how to best address shark
depredation.''.
(c) Effect.--Nothing in this section shall be construed to
affect the authority and responsibility of the Secretary of
Commerce in carrying out the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1351 et seq.) or the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.).

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Huffman) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas.

General Leave

Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks
and to include extraneous material on H.R. 207, the bill now under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 207, sponsored by the
Committee on Natural Resources vice chairman, Congressman Rob Wittman
of Virginia.
Concerns over shark depredation are increasingly common in the
Florida Keys, the Gulf of Mexico, and North Carolina's Outer Banks.
Shark interactions can be frustrating for anglers, resulting in loss of
catch, damaged gear, and degraded fishing experiences. They also
potentially impact the post-release survival of both target fish and
bycatch.
As the number of reports of shark depredation has increased, the
underlying cause remains uncertain. It could be due to an increase in
the number of sharks as stocks rebuild, a learned behavior by sharks as
they recognize motors, fishing techniques, or shark feeding locations
as a source of food. We simply don't have enough information to answer
all the questions.
To emphasize the scale of this issue, during the consideration of
this legislation, we heard from Captain Jack Graham, who fishes out of
the renowned Oregon Inlet in North Carolina. Captain Graham has been
keeping records of tuna depredation impacting his small marina of about
25 boats. By his estimates, a staggering 250,000 pounds of tuna are
depredated each month during tuna season just within his marina.
To make matters worse, shark depredation involves many Federal and
State jurisdictions, but because no single entity is responsible for
addressing it, very little is being done.
H.R. 207 would require the Secretary of Commerce to establish a task
force to address shark depredation. The task force membership would
include representatives from NOAA, the Regional Fishery Management
Councils, marine fisheries commissions, State fish and wildlife
agencies from the States within the Regional Fishery Management
Councils, and non-Federal experts.
In the 118th Congress, this legislation was passed unanimously
through the Committee on Natural Resources, and it passed the House by
voice vote. I am grateful that we are again considering this
legislation that will help the Federal Government respond to the
challenge.
Madam Speaker, I applaud Representative Wittman for his work, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, this bill would establish a new task force led by the
National Marine Fisheries Service to identify shark conservation needs
and depredation research. That is fine.
Before getting into that, I want to point out that the suspensions
today are supposed to reflect some of the bipartisan work of the
Committee on Natural Resources to find common ground and move bills
that had process last Congress. This legislation should certainly be
one of those, but committee Republicans blocked an accompanying bill,
Representative Keating's Sea Turtle Rescue and Rehabilitation Act. We
should be voting on that bill today, and we are not.
Last year's hurricanes and floods damaged key sea turtle rescue and
rehabilitation facilities, forcing them to lose money and space that
would otherwise go toward recovering stranded turtles. Representative
Keating's legislation would help support these facilities as they care
for Endangered Species Act-listed sea turtles.
The Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Commerce Committee
secured a deal in December to move that bill, along with this SHARKED
Act and two other bills. Unfortunately, unelected billionaire Musk's
last-minute power play on the CR scuttled that modest package, and here
we are.
It is disappointing that our colleagues on the other side of the
aisle have decided to forgo those bipartisan commitments and move this
legislation as a standalone. If House Republicans won't even follow
through on these easy bipartisan agreements, it is hard to see how
Democrats can trust them to keep their word in the midst of the tougher
negotiations that lie ahead. It is very disappointing and part of a
growing pattern of striking deals and then immediately walking away
from them.
Turning to this bill, sharks are critical to healthy ocean
ecosystems. As the oceans' apex predators, they help shape marine food
webs, and they are a key indicator of ocean health. Unfortunately, many
shark species are also threatened or endangered. Oceanic sharks and
rays have declined by a whopping 71 percent since 1970. That happened
in many of our lifetimes. Three-quarters of these remaining species are
at risk of going extinct.
In the seventies and eighties, a fundamental lack of understanding of
shark biology and their ecological importance, combined with widespread
fear, was partially responsible for dramatic increases in the
recreational harvest of sharks in the U.S.
Some shark populations are recovering now, but human activities are
reversing even those meager gains. Scientific estimates are that humans
are causing nearly 100 million shark deaths every single year, and
current levels of fishing pressure will cause the majority of shark
populations to continue to decline. According to the International
Union for Conservation of Nature, overfishing threatens half of coastal
sharks and rays with extinction.

[[Page H242]]

Given these declines and their causes, any effort to address shark
depredation must align with our Nation's goal to recover shark
populations and consider the impact of heightened fishing pressure and
climate change.
Last year, we passed the SHARKED Act in the House. However, I
recognize the concern over whether this legislation goes far enough to
ensure good outcomes for shark populations and isn't just a slippery
slope toward increasing shark harvests.
Through a collaborative effort, we refocused this bill on changing
angler behavior and managing expectations, as well as building out the
scientific understanding of shark ecology and the impacts of climate
change on predators and prey in the ocean. This is vital because
nonlethal deterrents and simple changes in angler behavior are proven
to reduce the probability of sharks taking fish by 65 percent.
NOAA admitted in the legislative hearing on this bill that
depredation research is complex and requires sustained investment due
to sharks' high intelligence and adaptability.
Another area of concern is that this bill doesn't include funding.
Without it, NOAA will be unable to expand their work to address shark
conservation and depredation.
I hope my colleagues who support this bill will also work with us to
ensure robust funding for shark conservation priorities, like increased
shark stock assessments.
This bill should promote better collaboration between the fishing
community and shark researchers. That is a good thing. This partnership
is necessary to reduce risks to both sharks and humans from depredation
events and build our understanding of the importance of sharks and how
to conserve them. These are goals we should all support.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the lead sponsor of this bill.
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I rise today to urge support for my bill,
H.R. 207, the Supporting the Health of Aquatic systems through Research
Knowledge and Enhanced Dialogue Act, also known as the SHARKED Act. As
a lifelong recreational fisherman, I am particularly passionate about
this bill.
Picture this: A charter boat fisherman takes an excited group of
anglers 90 miles off the coast in hopes of reeling in a bluefin tuna,
tarpon, or other big game species. One of the individuals hooks the
first fish and starts to fight to reel it in, but before the fish ever
gets to the boat, sharks have bitten and eaten the fish. This
phenomenon is called depredation, which occurs when sharks interfere
with fishing activities. It is essentially a massive impact on the
coastal recreational fishing industry, especially the charter industry.
Shark depredation is accepted as a natural part of fishing, but it
has become a widespread issue in our waters and has increased rapidly
in recent years.
During the House Natural Resources Committee hearing for the SHARKED
Act last year, we heard from experts discussing the impact of this
phenomenon.
According to the American Sportfishing Association, 52.4 million
people went fishing in the United States in 2023, supporting 826,000
jobs and contributing $129 billion to the economy.
The American Sportfishing Association also found that 87 percent of
charter guides surveyed said they experienced depredations with
clients, resulting in negative impacts on their business.
Anglers are losing their catch and tackle to sharks at alarming
rates, and they are understandably becoming increasingly frustrated by
it.
I introduced the SHARKED Act to study this issue and evaluate how we
can improve sportfishing conditions for anglers while protecting
sharks.
This bill establishes a fishery management task force to focus on
identifying research opportunities, recommending management strategies,
and developing educational materials for fishermen. The task force's
membership would be appointed by the Secretary of Commerce and include
representatives from the Regional Fishery Management Councils, marine
fisheries commissions, the National Marine Fisheries Service, and State
fish and wildlife agencies, as well as folks who enjoy recreational
fishing.
This legislation will help fishermen and -women understand which
species of sharks have higher rates of depredation and where you are
most likely to run into that species. It will also serve as the first
major step in improving communication and coordination among fisheries
managers in addressing shark depredation nationwide.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the passage of H.R.
207.
Mr. HUFFMAN. Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support the bill,
and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WESTERMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
Madam Speaker, I again thank my colleague, Mr. Wittman, for taking
action to address the challenge that fishing communities across the
United States currently face.
I have had the opportunity to do some recreational fishing in the
western and eastern Gulf. I have had the opportunity to go out on
research vessels and even down in the Florida Keys and on the Atlantic
Coast. There is one thing in common, and it is you can be certain
somebody is going to be reeling in a fish and a shark is going to take
everything but pretty much the lips off of the hook.
People who fish more than I do and who are around this will tell you
that it has gotten much more common over the years. Improving
coordination between fisheries managers, State agencies, and other
experts to solve the challenge of shark depredation is an approach that
respects the bottom-up approach that has allowed the United States to
be the gold standard in fisheries management.
Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to support the bill, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Westerman) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 207.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________