The Republican controlled U.S. Senate is set up to reject many of U.S. President Donald Trump’s proposed cuts to NOAA Fisheries, proposing a slight decrease for the agency instead.
NOAA has been one of the agencies targeted by the Trump administration for cuts; during the first several months of Trump’s second term, the government has laid off hundreds of NOAA employees and rescinded much of the agency’s climate-related funding. Trump is seeking even deeper cuts, however, to NOAA Fisheries.
In its fiscal year 2026 budget request, the administration is seeking USD 422.5 million (EUR 363.4 million) in cuts to NOAA Fisheries, representing a 33 percent decrease from fiscal year 2024 funding. Roughly half of those cuts will directly impact the agency’s conservation and recovery programs, with USD 150 million (EUR 129 million) slashed from NOAA Fisheries’ Protected Resources Science and Management budget and the elimination of the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund (PCSRF), which typically receives USD 65 million (EUR 56 million) in federal funding. In proposing the termination of the PCSRF, NOAA noted that it “will continue to support Pacific salmon and steelhead recovery and Tribal treaty fishing rights through other NOAA programs as resources allow.”
Lawmakers in Congress may not be on the same page.
The Senate’s version of the bill funding the Department of Commerce – and therefore funding NOAA Fisheries – includes a small decrease to the agency’s budget, but nowhere near what the Trump administration has requested. The Senate legislation, which was released and approved by the Senate Committee on Appropriations 17 July, includes roughly USD 1.2 billion (EUR 1 billion) in funding for NOAA Fisheries, including the USD 65 million in annual funding for the Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Fund. That’s just USD 77 million (EUR 66 million), or 6 percent, less than what was approved for fiscal year 2024.
The House version of the same bill cuts funding for NOAA, but, again, not nearly as much as requested by the Trump administration. As of publication, House Republicans have not released a report detailing NOAA Fisheries’ funding within that budget, although it does retain the USD 65 million for the PCSRF as well.
Notably, the Senate legislation rejects the Trump administration’s request to transfer NOAA Fisheries’ administration of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) over to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS).
“Due to the extremely late submission of the NOAA congressional budget justification, the Committee lacks the necessary information to evaluate the validity of the proposed consolidation and therefore continues to fund the [Office of Protected Resources] within [NOAA Fisheries],” the Senate Committee on Appropriations said in its report.
Senators also rejected the Trump administration’s request to terminate funding for Saltonstall-Kennedy Grant Program, instead providing USD 10 million (EUR 8.6 million) for the program.
The bill also includes millions of dollars in congressionally directed spending – special projects deemed worthy of funding by lawmakers.
The legislation still needs to be voted on by the full Senate and House in order to become law, with lawmakers aligning any differences between their versions of the budget bill.
Adding to uncertainty around the budget process is the Trump administration’s willingness to not spend funds appropriated by Congress if they don’t align with the president’s policy preferences and recent Republican recissions of previously allocated funding. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act rescinded millions in funding, including climate-related spending provided through the Inflation Reduction Act, and Republicans recently passed a separate package of recissions.
“I do have to acknowledge the elephant in the room here,” U.S. Senator Patty Murray (D-Washington) said ahead of the Commerce bill markup. “It is no secret the path to advancing more of our bills is going to be harder because of the unprecedented, partisan rescissions bill that Republicans just passed. It is extremely frustrating to see so many of the colleagues that have worked with us to pass funding bills turn around and vote to rip away the funding that we all agreed on.”
