[Congressional Record Volume 172, Number 47 (Monday, March 16, 2026)]
[House]
[Pages H2516-H2519]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
MITIGATION ACTION AND WATERMEN SUPPORT ACT OF 2026
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 4294) to direct the Secretary of Commerce to establish a
pilot program with respect to the sale of blue catfish caught within
the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 4294
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 ``Mitigation Action and
Watermen Support Act of 2026'' or the ``MAWS Act of 2026''.
SEC. 2. BLUE CATFISH PILOT PROGRAM.
Section 307 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration Authorization Act of 1992 (15 U.S.C. 1511d) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating subsection (e) as subsection (f); and
(2) by inserting after subsection (d) the following:
``(e) Blue Catfish Pilot Program.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, utilizing and
coordinating with applicable programs and activities
described in subsection (b)(3), shall carry out a pilot
program to enter into cooperative agreements with covered
entities for such covered entities to purchase, in accordance
with paragraph (3)--
``(A) from watermen, blue catfish caught within the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed by such watermen; and
``(B) from seafood processors, such blue catfish purchased
by seafood processors from such watermen.
``(2) Applications.--To be eligible to enter into a
cooperative agreement under the pilot program, a covered
entity shall submit to the Secretary an application in such
form, at such time, and containing such information as the
Secretary determines appropriate.
``(3) Use of amounts.--A covered entity that enters into a
cooperative agreement under the pilot program--
``(A) shall use any amounts awarded under such cooperative
agreement to purchase blue catfish from watermen or seafood
processors for at least the amount determined by the
Secretary under paragraph (5); and
``(B) may use not more than 15 percent of such amounts to
offset the cost to transport such blue catfish to
manufacturing or processing facilities.
``(4) Waterman and seafood processor eligibility.--To be
eligible to sell a blue catfish under the pilot program to a
covered entity that enters into a cooperative agreement under
the pilot program--
``(A) a waterman shall certify to such covered entity that
the waterman caught the blue catfish within the Chesapeake
Bay Watershed; and
``(B) a seafood processor shall certify to such covered
entity that the seafood processor purchased the blue catfish
from a waterman who caught the blue catfish within the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
``(5) Determination of minimum purchase amount.--With
respect to blue catfish sold by watermen or seafood
processors under the pilot program, the Secretary shall
determine the minimum price per pound, taking into
consideration--
``(A) market factors;
``(B) feedback from watermen, seafood processors, and
covered entities that participate in the pilot program, if
available; and
``(C) differentiation of price points for fillet and
byproduct.
``(6) Abundance baseline.--
``(A) Memorandum of understanding.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this subsection, the
Secretary shall seek to enter into a memorandum of
understanding with eligible non-Federal partners--
``(i) to compile existing non-Federal data necessary for
the Secretary--
``(I) to develop under subparagraph (B) an estimate of the
abundance of blue catfish in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed;
and
``(II) to provide the information described in
subparagraphs (A) through (D) of paragraph (7) in the report
required under that paragraph; and
``(ii) to adjust the collection by such eligible non-
Federal partners of relevant data such that such data can be
used as described in subclauses (I) and (II) of clause (i).
``(B) Abundance estimates.--Not later than September 30,
2027, and annually thereafter through fiscal year 2032, the
Secretary shall develop, pursuant to the memorandum of
understanding described in subparagraph (A), and make
publicly available on the website of the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration an estimate of the abundance of
blue catfish in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
``(7) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date on
which the pilot program terminates in accordance with
paragraph (9), the Secretary shall submit to Congress a
report regarding the pilot program, including the following
information:
``(A) A summary of available information regarding the size
and spawning stock biomass of the blue catfish population in
the Chesapeake Bay Watershed prior to and at the conclusion
of the pilot program, using the most recent data available.
``(B) A summary of available data regarding the size
distribution and diet of the blue catfish population in the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed during and at the conclusion of the
pilot program.
``(C) The number of blue catfish and the amount of blue
catfish (measured in pounds) caught by watermen who
participate in the pilot program during the pilot program.
``(D) The effects of the pilot program on species other
than the blue catfish in and the environment of the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed, to the extent known.
``(E) The economic effect of the pilot program on watermen
who participate in the pilot program, including--
``(i) the revenue generated by each such waterman by
selling blue catfish under the pilot program; and
``(ii) catch data with respect to and revenue generated
from other species fished by such watermen during the pilot
program.
``(F) The market response to the pilot program, including--
``(i) the total amount awarded under the pilot program to
covered entities that enter into cooperative agreements under
the pilot program; and
``(ii) trends in the types of such covered entities.
``(G) With respect to the manufacturing or processing
practices of each covered entity that enters into a
cooperative agreement under the pilot program, information
regarding whether each such covered entity--
``(i) uses internal or third-party manufacturers or
processors;
``(ii) uses, for each type of food product produced by the
covered entity, whole fish, fillet, or byproduct; and
``(iii) if the covered entity uses only part of the fish,
sells the remainder to third parties.
``(H) How each covered entity that enters into a
cooperative agreement under the pilot program transports blue
catfish purchased by the covered entity, including--
``(i) whether the covered entity freezes such blue catfish;
``(ii) how often the covered entity picks up such blue
catfish; and
``(iii) whether the covered entity uses a seafood transport
company that is local to the Chesapeake Bay Watershed.
``(I) Policy recommendations regarding--
``(i) the continuation of the pilot program in the
Chesapeake Bay Watershed; and
``(ii) the expansion of the pilot program to other
watersheds, including--
``(I) best practices;
``(II) specific recommendations regarding invasive species
of carp in the Mississippi rivershed;
``(III) with respect to other invasive aquatic species and
watersheds that may benefit from the pilot program; and
``(IV) other strategies with respect to the mitigation of
aquatic invasive species for Congress to consider piloting.
``(J) Additional data necessary for Congress to shape
related policy, including--
``(i) data--
``(I) the Secretary was unable to collect; or
``(II) is not collected by eligible non-Federal partners;
and
``(ii) recommendations for congressional action to support
the collection of relevant data sets.
``(8) Briefings.--Not later than 90 days after the date of
the enactment of this subsection and quarterly thereafter
until the date on which the pilot program terminates in
accordance with paragraph (9), the Secretary shall provide to
the Committee on Natural Resources of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation of the Senate briefings on the status of the
implementation of this subsection.
``(9) Duration.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary shall carry out the pilot
program during the 2-year period that begins on the first day
of the fiscal year immediately following the later of the
fiscal year in which the Secretary--
``(i) first makes publicly available the first abundance
estimate under paragraph (6); and
``(ii) issues guidance under subparagraph (B).
``(B) Criteria.--Not later than 1 year after the date of
the enactment of this subsection, the Secretary, in
consultation with the Chesapeake Bay Program Invasive Catfish
Workgroup and the heads of relevant Federal agencies with
experience administering similar programs, shall issue
guidance for the pilot program.
``(10) Definitions.--In this subsection:
``(A) Animal feed.--The term `animal feed'--
``(i) means an article that is intended for use--
``(I) for food for an animal other than man; and
``(II) as a substantial source of nutrients in the diet of
such an animal; and
``(ii) is not limited to a mixture intended to be the sole
ration of such an animal.
``(B) Aquaculture feed.--The term `aquaculture feed'--
``(i) means an article that is intended for use--
[[Page H2517]]
``(I) for food for an aquacultural species, including any
species of finfish, mollusk, crustacean (or other aquatic
invertebrate), amphibian, reptile, ornamental fish, or
aquatic plant that is propagated and reared in a controlled
or selected environment; and
``(II) as a substantial source of nutrients in the diet of
such an aquacultural species; and
``(ii) is not limited to a mixture intended to be the sole
ration of such an aquacultural species.
``(C) Blue catfish.--The term `blue catfish' means the
species Ictalurus furcatus.
``(D) Chesapeake bay watershed.--The term `Chesapeake Bay
Watershed' means the region that covers--
``(i) the Chesapeake Bay;
``(ii) the portions of the States of Delaware, Maryland,
New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia that
drain into the Chesapeake Bay; and
``(iii) the District of Columbia.
``(E) Covered entity.--The term `covered entity' means a
person engaged in the business of manufacturing or
processing--
``(i) pet food;
``(ii) animal feed; or
``(iii) aquaculture feed.
``(F) Eligible non-federal partner.--The term `eligible
non-Federal partner' means--
``(i) Maryland;
``(ii) Virginia; and
``(iii) research institutions, including research
institutions with expertise in--
``(I) blue catfish research in the Chesapeake Bay
Watershed; or
``(II) acting in coordination with the Invasive Catfish
Workgroup of the Chesapeake Bay Program.
``(G) Pilot program.--The term `pilot program' means the
pilot program established under paragraph (1).
``(H) Seafood processor.--The term `seafood processor'
means a person engaged in the business of preparing or
packaging fish or fish products (including fish harvested by
the processor) for sale.
``(I) Secretary.--The term `Secretary' means the Secretary
of Commerce, acting through the Administrator of the National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Wittman) and the gentlewoman from Maryland (Ms. Elfreth)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
General Leave
Mr. WITTMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on H.R. 4294, the bill now under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 4294, the Mitigation
Action and Watermen Support Act, also known as the MAWS Act of 2026,
the legislation I was proud to cosponsor with Congresswoman Elfreth.
Having grown up on the Chesapeake Bay, I understand firsthand how
important it is to protect our marine wildlife and restore the bay's
ecosystem. In fact, I worked in the commercial fishing realm and
recreational fishing realm for a number of years there, and my son
today is also a commercial fisherman, knows the bay well, and knows how
problematic the blue catfish is to the Chesapeake Bay.
Unfortunately, the blue catfish has become an invasive species that
poses a growing threat to the biodiversity of the Chesapeake Bay's
waters and the seafood industries that depend on a healthy bay. These
fish are aggressive predators that consume many of the species that
define the Chesapeake Bay, things like blue crabs, striped bass, and
other native fish that are vital to the Chesapeake Bay's ecological
balance and to the watermen whose lives depend on them.
I hear daily from watermen across the spectrum saying how harmful the
blue catfish are to the Chesapeake Bay. When I have had a chance to go
out there and see the number of blue catfish in the bay watershed, it
is astounding the biomass that is there. It is a wonder anything in the
bay can survive based upon the volume of the blue catfish that are
there.
This does have an impact on watermen up and down the bay, not just in
Virginia, but also there in Maryland.
While positive steps we know have been taken to address this issue,
more has to be done. The MAWS Act establishes a pilot program within
the Chesapeake Bay office aimed at tackling the growing threat that
these invasive blue catfish pose to the Chesapeake Bay and the
fisheries that sustain our coastal communities. It is key to our
economics to make sure we have crabs that people go to restaurants to
enjoy and that we have striped bass that people go to restaurants to
enjoy. If not, then these blue catfish will be the only thing left in
the Chesapeake Bay.
By supporting increased harvesting of blue catfish and studying its
impact on the bay's biodiversity, this program will help protect
valuable native species like blue crabs and striped bass and the
watermen who depend on them.
The legislation also explores practical uses of these harvested fish,
including in the pet and animal food industry. This will help ensure
their removal while making sure that we have sustainable commercial
fishing industries there in the Chesapeake Bay.
We know we want to do all we can to support the hardworking men and
women who make their living on the bay.
This is a bipartisan, commonsense approach that supports our watermen
while helping to restore the balance to one of America's most important
ecosystems. The Chesapeake Bay, by far, is the most diverse and
productive water system on the face of the Earth. This imbalance is
causing big problems in the bay. This will go a long way to make sure
we create those opportunities for our watermen and also open up more
economic opportunities for the commercial fishing industry.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this measure, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. ELFRETH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
I am grateful that H.R. 4294, the MAWS Act, is included in today's
suspension package, a piece of legislation I was so proud to work in
partnership in crafting with the gentleman from Virginia.
The Chesapeake Bay, the largest estuary in the Nation that is
responsible for $100 billion in annual economic value, is facing a
critical, albeit delicious threat, the invasive blue catfish. These
blue catfish were introduced into tidal areas of the bay in the 1970s
for recreational purposes under the assumption that they would stay in
the freshwater and not venture into the brackish water of the larger
bay. That assumption has turned out to be catastrophically wrong. Blue
catfish are now not only in every tidal area of the Chesapeake Bay
watershed, but they are the most abundant biomass in many of them, and
the threat is real.
Blue catfish can live up to 20 years. They can weigh up to 100
pounds. They eat approximately 10 percent of their body weight every
day and have an extremely fast metabolism. The imbalance my colleague
from Virginia just spoke about in our ecosystem has created a situation
where because they eat so much, their meals frequently consist of
staples of our seafood industry and staples of Maryland and Virginia's
culture: baby blue crabs, rockfish, even oysters, causing significant
economic damage to our seafood industry at large, which is a central
part of our economies in the bay region.
Making matters worse, these blue catfish, because they are invasive,
have no natural predators in the bay to control that population growth.
Because of this, they now estimate there are tens of millions of these
fish throughout the entire Chesapeake Bay region, and that is growing
rapidly.
The good news, Madam Speaker, is that blue catfish are nutritious and
delicious, and they are high in protein and omega-3s. According to a
new report from bay scientists, these catfish do not retain PFAS like
other fish.
The market for human consumption has grown significantly across the
region, due to a concerted marketing campaign, processors who make bold
investments, chefs who are willing to take a risk with blue catfish
dishes popping up in restaurant menus, and filets on sale at your local
market.
However, that market has a few critical limitations that are
inhibiting our ability to control this catastrophe. First, blue catfish
are the only fish inspected by the USDA. All other fish are under the
jurisdiction of the FDA, and this adds significant hurdles for seafood
processors and watermen who want to sell blue catfish for human
consumption.
I would be remiss, Madam Speaker, if I didn't highlight that this
very red
[[Page H2518]]
tape, this bureaucracy, is a limitation placed on the industry by the
Congress itself.
Second, State health regulations indicate that blue catfish filet is
safe for human consumption in fish no larger than 25 pounds. This means
there are tens of millions of fish over 25 pounds or up to 85 pounds
actually, that watermen struggle to sell because they cannot be
processed for human consumption, and the market is not there.
Fortunately, they are completely safe for inclusion in the pet food
industry.
Third, on the other end of the spectrum, there are millions of more
than 1- to 2-pound blue catfish that are not big enough to filet and
consequently aren't sold for processing for people. The smallest fish
are among the most aggressive predators of the species that our
industry relies on, stealthily eating eggs in otherwise hard-to-access
habitats.
We have made significant critical progress like the USDA grant
program which provides financial support to processors and food banks,
but there remains the problem that only the very narrow window of 2- to
25-pound fish can be sold for human consumption.
We are left without a solution to the question: What are watermen
supposed to do with every other size?
They can't just throw them back.
We can do our part, everybody here, and everybody watching at home,
including my mother, can do their part in ordering the blue catfish
when we see it on a menu. Again, it is delicious and nutritious. This
is not a problem we are capable of eating our way out of.
{time} 1700
That is why I introduced the bipartisan MAWS Act, alongside House
Natural Resources Vice Chairman Wittman, to invest funds to address
invasive blue catfish and strengthen our local seafood economy, while
also providing a new source of protein to pets nationwide.
The MAWS Act establishes this pilot program within the NOAA
Chesapeake Bay Office to facilitate a market for Chesapeake Bay blue
catfish in the pet and animal food industry.
This program will complement the growing market for human consumption
by forging new partnerships with pet and animal food manufacturers
nationwide that otherwise do not have a footprint in the Chesapeake
Bay, and it would establish a sustainable outlet for fish that are
outside the window for human consumption by giving watermen and
processors more opportunities to sell the smallest and largest blue
catfish.
NOAA will enter into cooperative agreements with pet and animal food
manufacturers to ensure watermen and processors are properly
incentivized to catch blue catfish in the bay, and establish
transportation, processing, and manufacturing structures for that long-
term market need.
By having a customer base with consistent and reliable price points,
watermen can feel confident that it is worth their while to catch blue
catfish of all shapes and sizes, knowing there will be somebody at the
end of the dock to buy it for a fair price.
Price points for this pilot program will be established in a
collaborative effort between watermen, processors, manufacturers,
scientists, and economists.
We spent a year crafting this bill, compromising to make sure that
everybody's voices were heard and everybody had a seat at the table,
ensuring every corner of the industry has a seat and a voice in the
decision of what the baseline market price for fillet, byproduct, and
whole fish will be for this program.
Additionally, in the many months of engagement on this bill with
watermen, processors, and manufacturers, we learned that transportation
mechanisms are a complex web of coordinated pickups, often with
processors going right to the front door of the homes of watermen to
pick up their daily catch.
In order to make participation in this program feasible and promote
the establishment of long-term transportation processes, 15 percent of
the total grant funding can be used by grantees to establish these new
routes across the Chesapeake Bay in partnership with established routes
led by processors.
Throughout this 2-year pilot program, NOAA will collect data on the
ecological and economic impacts of the program. NOAA will report back
to Congress on best practices, lessons learned, and recommendations for
additional species in other watersheds that may benefit from this
program.
Our seafood industry across the Chesapeake Bay is the heart of our
economy, but many factors far outside the control of watermen and
processors have left the industry in a dire situation. Extreme weather,
deep freezes, unexpected waterway discharge, and a national
affordability crisis are threatening the livelihoods of our watermen,
not to mention the ever-increasing blue catfish population.
The MAWS Act, again, is the result of intensive collaboration and
creativity of stakeholders across the watershed as we sought to address
the ecological and economic damage of the invasive species in a way
that complements--again, complements--and strengthens the growing
market for human consumption.
This is not an either/or approach. This is a yes/and, all-hands-on-
deck approach.
If this innovative approach is successful, it is our hope that a
similar tool can be utilized to combat invasive aquatic species in
other waterways across the Nation. Think carp that are wreaking havoc
in the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes. Think snakeheads that are
invading North Carolina, Missouri, Arkansas, and more.
I am proud to lead the effort of this one-of-a-kind legislation in
partnership with my colleagues from Virginia, Representative Wittman
and Representative Kiggans, as well as Representative Hoyer.
I thank the chair and his staff for providing such technical
assistance to this bill, and I thank my colleagues for supporting this
bill.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Texas (Mr. Self).
Mr. SELF. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 4294, and I am
here to represent the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Harris) in his
opposition to H.R. 4294.
I include a letter titled ``Coalition Letter from Maryland Blue
Catfish Processors Opposing the MAWS Act.''
March 12, 2026.
Coalition Letter From Maryland Blue Catfish Processors Opposing the
MAWS Act
We write as a coalition of small, family-owned seafood
processing businesses, which are among the only facilities in
Maryland actively processing blue catfish for human
consumption, to express our serious concerns with the
proposed MAWS Act introduced by Representative Sarah K.
Elfreth and co-led by Representative Robert J. Wittman.
For several years, our businesses have worked alongside the
Maryland Department of Agriculture and other state and
federal partners to invest significant time and financial
resources into building a viable commercial market for wild-
caught blue catfish. This effort has required overcoming
longstanding public stigma and educating consumers that blue
catfish is not only safe, but a highquality and desirable
protein-rich seafood product. Progress has been hard-won.
The MAWS Act, however well-intentioned, risks undermining
this progress by shifting public messaging toward the use of
blue catfish primarily for pet food or similar byproducts.
Headlines suggesting that blue catfish is destined for pet
food damage consumer perception and directly threaten the
emerging market for human consumption--the very market that
sustains Maryland watermen, processors, and our Bay
communities. Our shared goal has always been to add value to
this fishery, increase demand, and raise dockside prices so
that watermen are incentivized to harvest more invasive blue
catfish from Maryland waters.
It is also important to note that the utilization of
processing byproducts for rendering or pet food is already
occurring through existing private-sector relationships that
we have worked hard to establish, typically at prices between
$0.10 and $0.20 per pound. Government subsidies directed
toward a new, bureaucratically-selected recipient would
therefore not create innovation, but instead introduce market
distortion and unfair competitive advantage--jeopardizing
longstanding partnerships and destabilizing an industry that
is only beginning to succeed.
Currently, many processors struggle to secure sufficient
supply to meet growing consumer demand. Introducing a
government-funded competitor capable of paying above-market
prices for whole fish would further strain supply chains and
place small Maryland processors at significant risk. Fish in
[[Page H2519]]
the one- to two-pound range, as well as larger specimens, are
already valuable components of our processing operations and
product lines, despite misleading claims made by entities
like the Chesapeake Bay Foundation.
We are equally troubled by the legislative process that
produced this proposal without meaningful consultation from
the processors who have pioneered Maryland's on-the-ground
response to the blue catfish invasion. Members of our
coalition attempted outreach to Representative Elfreth's
office but were unfortunately met with a resistance to engage
in substantive dialogue regarding the bill's impacts on
private industry.
Ultimately, we share the goal of addressing the ecological
challenges posed by invasive blue catfish and strengthening
Maryland's seafood economy. However, we believe public funds
would be far more effective if directed toward initiatives
that can help the watermen, the processors, and the people in
our working waterfront communities. For example, USDA grant
funding secured by Congressman Andy Harris has helped several
Maryland processors to make investments into costly new
facilities upgrades that we otherwise would not have been
able to make. New programs should build upon, not undercut,
investments that have already been made by taxpayers.
Without a strong processing sector, Maryland cannot sustain
a viable blue catfish industry. We remain ready and willing
to work collaboratively with Representative Elfreth,
Representative Wittman, and other sponsors of this
legislation to identify policies that genuinely support
watermen, processors, and working waterfront communities
while continuing to remove invasive blue catfish from the
Chesapeake Bay.
Sincerely,
Nick Hargrove,
Tilghman Island Seafood, Tilghman, MD.
Stephanie Pazzaglia,
J.J. McDonnell Seafood, Elkridge, MD.
Amanda Williams,
BSA Seafood, Grasonville, MD.
Patrick Welsh Jr.,
Reliant Fish Company, Jessup, MD.
Ms. ELFRETH. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Madam Speaker, again, I reiterate my appreciation to the gentleman
from Virginia (Mr. Wittman), the committee staff, and all the
stakeholders who spent the last year crafting this creative solution to
a problem that threatens the economy and ecology of the greatest
natural resource we have in Maryland and Virginia, the Chesapeake Bay.
This is an innovative solution. When you visit with other folks who
are policymakers, what we hate to hear is, ``We have always done it
this way,'' or, ``We have never done it that way.''
This moment, this crisis that we are experiencing in the Chesapeake
Bay, requires innovation, creativity, partnerships, and collaboration.
That is exactly what the MAWS Act represents, and I urge my colleagues
to support this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. WITTMAN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to
close.
Madam Speaker, as we have heard, this bill does quite a bit to open
up free markets for fishermen who want to be able to use this very
abundant resource. Blue catfish are incredibly abundant--in fact, to
the detriment of other species that everybody loves.
Opening up free markets and opening up opportunities for those
fishermen is incredibly important. What this also does is to take down
bureaucratic impediments.
We know, right now, because of the structure that USDA has to inspect
these plants that process catfish, it creates an inordinate stress on
that industry. For many of them, because they don't predominate in
processing blue catfish, they can't afford to have a full-time USDA
inspector in their plant.
What this will do is to say: Let's look at other ways to be able to
utilize it. This is a great source of protein. As the world today looks
for protein--remember, there is a protein deficit around the world, and
we have an overabundance of protein here in the Chesapeake Bay with
these blue catfish--we ought to be looking at other ways to do that,
not just for human consumption.
As Ms. Elfreth talked about, there is a place for human consumption
of these fish, but there is also a place outside of that that
commercial fishermen could fill if we allow them to be used for other
purposes, especially for pet food.
If you look at one of the industries today that is the fastest
growing industry in the United States, it is the pet industry. Why
wouldn't we look at these opportunities that will help our watermen,
help the environment, and help other populations like crabs and striped
bass? We want to do that. We want to make sure we are doing those
things that will help our economy and that will alleviate some of the
bureaucratic impediments for these individuals to work hard and make a
living on the water.
As I said, my son is a waterman. He goes out every day with no
assurance about what he will catch. He is one of the true last
independent businesspeople left in the United States. When you go out
today, you are not sure if you are going to catch anything.
If you have something that creates undue pressure on what you are
relying on to make a living, then you want to try to alleviate that and
create that balance there. This does that.
This takes some of the pressure off the blue crab population that,
for the last decade, has been under tremendous pressure in the
Chesapeake Bay. It takes pressure off the striped bass populations that
right now are in decline.
Watermen in Virginia and Maryland rely on the striped bass. It is a
heavily managed fishery, but when you have these other pressures on
there, we want to make sure that we have the right balance.
What this does is to open up the door to make sure that those things
happen, that we look to enhance coastal economies that right now are
under significant duress. Watermen struggle and have to fish multiple
species in order to make a living. This would be a great enhancement
for them.
If we can do this, it helps the area economically. It also takes away
some of the burdens on seafood processors that have those burdens.
Sometimes, they can't get into this industry because of the regulatory
burdens. This is a great way for us to do that.
The economic impact is going to be significant, I would argue, not
just for the Chesapeake Bay but also for the surrounding areas that
rely upon the bounty that comes out of the Chesapeake Bay.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 4294, and I yield
back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wittman) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 4294, as amended.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds
being in the affirmative, the ayes have it.
Mr. SELF. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further
proceedings on this motion will be postponed.
____________________