HR-9299-119
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsored by Hillary Scholten (D-MI)
What it does
This bill would direct the Secretary of the Interior, through the U.S. Geological Survey, to establish a grant program funding the use of environmental DNA (eDNA) — genetic material collected from water or sediment samples — in sport fish surveys. Eligible recipients would include state, local, and tribal governments, universities, and nonprofit organizations. The bill would authorize $4 million per year from fiscal years 2027 through 2033 (totaling $28 million), with grants used to expand survey coverage, improve population estimates, detect invasive species, and monitor endangered fish species.
Who benefits
Recreational anglers and the sport fishing industry, who would benefit from more accurate fish population data and better-managed fisheries. State and tribal fish and wildlife agencies, which would gain access to modern survey tools and federal funding. Universities and research institutions that would receive grants to develop eDNA methodology. Boating and outdoor recreation businesses that depend on healthy fisheries. Communities in rural or remote areas where traditional fish surveys are infrequent, and which would gain expanded monitoring coverage. Conservation organizations focused on endangered freshwater fish species.
Who is hurt
Contractors and firms that currently provide traditional fish survey services (e.g., electrofishing, netting) may see reduced demand if eDNA methods displace conventional approaches. Taxpayers bear the cost of the $28 million authorization. Entities that do not qualify as eligible recipients — such as private companies — are excluded from grant competition. States or tribes that lack the technical capacity to implement eDNA programs may be at a disadvantage in competing for grants relative to well-resourced universities or larger agencies.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that eDNA technology offers a faster, less invasive, and more cost-effective method of detecting fish species than traditional netting or electrofishing, and that it can reach remote or under-surveyed waters where conventional surveys are impractical. They contend that better population data directly improves fisheries management decisions — such as setting catch limits — which protects both fish stocks and the $49 billion recreational fishing industry. They also argue the program's collaborative structure, which prioritizes applicants working across agencies, maximizes the return on a modest federal investment.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that eDNA technology, while promising, remains scientifically immature for large-scale fisheries management — studies have shown that eDNA signals can degrade rapidly, vary with water temperature and flow, and may not reliably distinguish between live populations and shed genetic material from deceased fish. They contend that $28 million in federal spending duplicates research already underway at state agencies and universities with existing funding streams, and that the bill lacks performance benchmarks or accountability mechanisms strong enough to ensure grants produce actionable management data rather than academic research with limited practical application.