Bird Control Bill Modernizes Rules for Fish Farms, Adds Private Lake Managers to Cormorant List

The aptly named Cormorant Relief Act of 2025 is less about new policy and more about regulatory maintenance for a very specific problem: double-crested cormorants eating fish at aquaculture facilities. This bill mandates the Secretary of the Interior to reissue and maintain the existing federal rule—known as a depredation order—that allows certain entities to control these birds. Crucially, the reissued order must remove the old June 2014 expiration date, establish a mandatory five-year renewal cycle, and apply to 12 specific states, including California, Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio (SEC. 2).

Expanding the Guest List for Bird Control

For anyone in the aquaculture business, this bill provides needed regulatory certainty by making the bird control order permanent, subject only to routine renewal. However, the biggest change for everyday people is the expansion of who can use this control method. While the original rule focused on fish farms, the new version specifically includes licensed private lake managers and licensed private pond managers (SEC. 2). If you own or manage a private recreational lake or pond that is stocked with fish, and you have the proper state license, you may now have federal authorization to manage cormorant populations that are impacting your stock. This shifts the scope of the rule from purely commercial aquaculture to include private recreational and conservation management.

Administrative Housekeeping and What Stays the Same

Beyond expanding the scope, this legislation is largely focused on administrative cleanup. It requires the Secretary to modernize the terminology, simplify the provisions for complying with other federal laws, and update the recordkeeping requirements (SEC. 2). Think of it as updating the software for a very old program. While this streamlines the process for those who need to get permits, the bill is very clear that it does not waive the Secretary’s obligation to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA). This means that while the process might be simpler, the underlying environmental protections for migratory birds and the requirement for environmental review remain legally intact (SEC. 2).

The Real-World Impact: Who Benefits?

This bill directly benefits fish farmers and now, private lake and pond managers in the covered states who are losing valuable fish stock to cormorants. For a small commercial fish farm, reducing losses to bird predation can be the difference between profit and loss. For a private lake manager, it means protecting the investment made in stocking the lake for fishing or recreation. The trade-off, of course, is that the bill facilitates the lethal control of double-crested cormorants, which will concern wildlife conservation groups. Furthermore, the bill grants the Secretary broad authority to apply this rule to any other U.S. state or territory deemed appropriate, meaning this expanded control mechanism could pop up in more places without needing further legislative action (SEC. 2).