19–010 

Calendar No. 231 

112TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 112–94 

THE NUTRIA ERADICATION AND CONTROL ACT OF 2011 

NOVEMBER 15, 2011.—Ordered to be printed 

Mrs. BOXER, from the Committee on Environment and Public 

Works, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 899] 

[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Environment and Public Works, to which was 

referred a bill (S. 899) to provide for the eradication and control of 

nutria, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon, with 

an amendment, and recommends that the bill, as amended, do 

pass. 

GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND

Nutria are large (average 12 pounds), semi-aquatic rodents with 

a strong appetite and high reproductive potential. Nutria can consume up to 25 percent of their body weight in plants per day. Nutria feeding habits can be extremely destructive to marsh vegetation, as the animal forages directly on plant roots. This process can 

turn productive wetlands into barren mud flats. Since their introduction in the 1930’s to bolster the fur trade, nutria have damaged 

millions of acres of wetlands and countless miles of shoreline and 

have earned a spot among the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s (IUCN) list of the world’s 100 worst invasive alien 

species. 

The damage caused by nutria threaten wetlands, native wildlife 

and crops. Nutria impacts have both ecological and economic costs. 

For example, in Maryland, economic costs are estimated to be $4 

million per year. Other impacts include: 

• Wetlands—At high densities, nutria are able to convert marshland to open water by feeding on native plants in coastal marshes. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
2 

• Wildlife—Habitat destruction associated with nutria threatens 

waterfowl, muskrats, and rare marshland species of bird, fish and 

invertebrates. In marsh areas, nutria also compete with native and 

migrating wildlife for food resources. 

• Crops—Extensive damage from nutria has been reported in 

rice, soybean, and sugar cane fields both from direct predation and 

indirect means. For example, extensive damage can be done to the 

levees surrounding rice plantation ponds as a result of the nutria’s 

burrow digging. 

• Parasites and diseases—Louisiana nutria have been found to 

carry several diseases, viruses, and parasites. Most notably, they 

carry the nematode Strongyloides myopotami, which can cause a 

severe itching rash in humans. 

A 2000 USGS report indicated nutria have established viable 

populations in 15 states. Significant wetland destruction has been 

documented in Maryland, Virginia, Louisiana, and Oregon. Some 

research suggests that the highest densities of nutria in the world 

are in the Pacific Northwest in Oregon’s freshwater marshes. 

Nutria Eradication and Control Act 

The Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2003 was passed in 

2003 and signed by then-President George W. Bush, becoming Public Law 108–16. It authorized an annual appropriation of $4 million 

for Maryland and $2 million for Louisiana for each of the fiscal 

years 2004 through 2008. The Act encourages habitat protection, 

education, research, monitoring, and capacity building to provide 

for the long-term protection of coastal wetlands from destruction 

caused by nutria. 

Since 2000, funding has been provided through the Fish and 

Wildlife Service (FWS) to the Maryland Nutria Project. This effort 

has eradicated nutria from over 150,000 acres of the approximately 

400,000 acres of infested wetland habitat in the state. The success 

in Maryland’s program has also informed efforts in Louisiana. Entitled the Coastwide Nutria Control Program, Louisiana’s nutria 

eradication program provides incentives for the trapping of nutria. 

The program is funded by the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection and Restoration Act (CWPPRA) through the USDA Natural 

Resources Conservation Service and the Louisiana Department of 

Natural Resources. 

The Nutria Eradication and Control Act builds on the successful 

efforts of Maryland and Louisiana. In addition to Maryland and 

Louisiana, the Act would enable the FWS to provide assistance to 

Delaware, Oregon, North Carolina, Virginia, and Washington. 

OBJECTIVES OF THE LEGISLATION

This bill would reauthorize the Nutria Eradication and Control 

Act of 2003 and extend the program to the states of Delaware, Oregon, North Carolina, Washington, and the Commonwealth of Virginia. The program would provide assistance to eradicate and control nutria populations and restore nutria-damaged wetland. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
3 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section 1. Short title 

Section 1 provides that this bill may be cited as the ‘‘Nutria 

Eradication and Control Act of 2011.’’ 

Section 2. Findings and purpose 

Section 2 provides the general purpose of the bill, along with several findings which: recognize the economic and environmental importance of wetland and tidal marshes in the Chesapeake Bay, 

State of Louisiana, and other coastal states; recognize that the 

South American nutria (Myocastor coypus) is directly contributing 

to substantial marsh losses on land in the States of Maryland and 

Louisiana, and other coastal states; acknowledges that the Nutria 

Eradication and Control Act of 2003 (Public Law 108–16; 117 Stat. 

621) has eradicated and reduced nutria-impacted wetlands acres in 

the States of Maryland and Louisiana; acknowledges that proven 

techniques developed under the Nutria Eradication and Control Act 

of 2003 are eradicating and reducing the acres of nutria-impacted 

wetlands in Maryland and Louisiana and should be applied to nutria eradication or control programs in other nutria-infested coastal 

States. 

Section 3. Definitions 

Section 3 provides definitions for several terms used throughout 

the bill. 

Section 4. Nutria Eradication Program 

Section 4 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), 

subject to the availability of appropriations, to provide financial assistance to the States of Maryland, Louisiana, and the coastal 

States to eradicate or control nutria and requires that costs shall 

be matched by non-federal and in-kind contributions. As amended, 

Section 4 authorizes $6 million annually, which includes $2 million 

for the State of Maryland, $2 million for the State of Louisiana, 

and $2 million for other coastal states. 

Section 5. Report 

Section 5 requires the Secretary and the National Invasive Species Council to issue a report that continues the long-term nutria 

control or eradication program in coordination with the State of 

Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, the State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources, the State of Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, the 

State of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, the 

State of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the State of 

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

Similar legislation was introduced in the 111th Congress. In the 

112th Congress, on May 5, 2011, Senator Cardin introduced S. 899, 

which was cosponsored by Senators Hagan, Landrieu, Mikulski and 

Merkley. The bill was received, read twice and referred to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. The full committee met on July 13, 2011 to consider the bill. At the meeting, 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
4 

Senator Cardin offered an amendment that modified the bill to authorize $6 million in appropriations for each of fiscal years 2012 

through 2017. The amendment also provided that $2,000,000 shall 

be used to provide financial assistance to Maryland, $2,000,000 

shall be used to provide financial assistance to Louisiana, and the 

remaining $2,000,000 shall be used to provide financial assistance 

to other states on a competitive basis. The committee ordered S. 

899 to be reported with an amendment. 

HEARINGS

In the 111th Congress, the Senate Committee on Environment 

and Public Works, Subcommittee on Water and Wildlife, held a legislative hearing on December 3, 2009 to consider a number of bills 

including S. 1519, the Nutria Eradication and Control Act. 

ROLLCALL VOTES

The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to consider S. 899 on July 13, 2011. The bill was ordered reported favorably, as amended, by voice vote. No roll call votes were taken. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

In compliance with section 11(b) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the committee finds that S. 899 does not create any additional regulatory burdens, nor will it cause any adverse impact on the personal privacy of individuals. 

MANDATES ASSESSMENT

In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 

(Public Law 104–4), the committee notes that the CBO cost estimate found that, ‘‘S. 899 contains no intergovernmental or privatesector mandates as defined in UMRA and would impose no costs 

on state, local, or tribal governments.’’ 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

In accordance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the following identification of congressionally directed spending items contained in the 

bill, as reported: 

Section Provision Member 

4 Authorization of appropriations Sen. Cardin 

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE

AUGUST 2, 2011. 

Hon. BARBARA BOXER, Chairman, Committee on Environment and Public Works, 

U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. 

DEAR MADAM CHAIRMAN: The Congressional Budget Office has 

prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 899, the Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2011. 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
5 

If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased 

to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Jeff LaFave. 

Sincerely, 

DOUGLAS W. ELMENDORF. 

Enclosure. 

S. 899—Nutria Eradication and Control Act of 2011 

Summary: S. 899 would authorize the Secretary of the Interior 

to provide financial assistance to Maryland, Louisiana, and certain 

other coastal states for the control or eradication of South American nutria (a foreign invasive species) and for the restoration of 

marshlands damaged by the mammal. Assuming appropriation of 

the authorized amounts, CBO estimates that implementing S. 899 

would cost $30 million over the 2012–2016 period. Enacting the 

legislation would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, 

pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply. 

S. 899 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates 

as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) and 

would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated budgetary impact of S. 899 is shown in the following table. The costs 

of this legislation fall within budget function 300 (natural resources 

and environment). 

By fiscal year, in millions of dollars— 

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2012– 

2016 

CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION 

Authorization Level ....................................................................... 6 6 6 6 6 30 

Estimated Outlays ........................................................................ 6 6 6 6 6 30 

Basis of estimate: For this estimate, CBO assumes that S. 899 

will be enacted by the end of 2011, that the authorized amounts 

will be appropriated for each fiscal year, and that funds will be provided to the states in annual lump sums. Over the 2012–2016 period, the bill would authorize the appropriation of $6 million annually, including $2 million for Maryland, $2 million for Louisiana, 

and a total of $2 million for the states of Delaware, North Carolina, 

Oregon, Virginia, and Washington. 

Intergovernmental and private-sector impact: S. 899 contains no 

intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA 

and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal governments. 

Several states would benefit from the program authorized in the 

bill. Any costs to those states would be incurred voluntarily as a 

condition of receiving federal assistance. 

Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Jeff LaFave; Impact on 

state, local, and tribal governments: Melissa Merrell; Impact on the 

private sector: Amy Petz. 

Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant Director 

for Budget Analysis. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules 

of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill as reported 

are shown as follows: Existing law proposed to be omitted is enVerDate Mar 15 2010 16:30 Nov 16, 2011 Jkt 019010 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR094.XXX SR094

emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
6 

closed in øblack brackets¿, new matter is printed in italic, existing 

law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman: 

NUTRIA ERADICATION AND CONTROL ACT OF 2003 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Nutria Eradication and Control Act 

of 2003’’. 

SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 

(1) Wetlands and tidal marshes of the Chesapeake Bay øand 

in Louisiana¿, the State of Louisiana, and other coastal States 

provide significant cultural, economic, and ecological benefits 

to the Nation. 

(2) The South American nutria (Myocastor coypus) is directly 

contributing to substantial marsh loss øin Maryland and Louisiana on Federal, State, and private land¿on Federal, State, 

and private land in the States of Maryland and Louisiana and 

in other coastal States. 

ø(3) Traditional harvest methods to control or eradicate nutria have failed in Maryland and have had limited success in 

the eradication of nutria in Louisiana. Consequently, marsh 

loss is accelerating. 

ø(4) The nutria eradication and control pilot program authorized by Public Law 105–322 is to develop new and effective 

methods for eradication of nutria.¿ 

(3) This Act authorizes the Maryland Nutria Project, which 

has successfully eradicated nutria from more than 130,000 

acres of Chesapeake Bay wetlands in the State of Maryland and 

facilitated the creation of voluntary, public-private partnerships 

and more than 406 cooperative landowner agreements. 

(4) This Act and the Coastal Wetlands Planning, Protection, 

and Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 3951 et seq.) authorize the 

Coastwide Nutria Control Program, which has reduced nutriaimpacted wetland acres in the State of Louisiana from 80,000 

acres to 23,141 acres. 

(5) The proven techniques developed under this Act that are 

eradicating nutria in the State of Maryland and reducing the 

acres of nutria-impacted wetlands in the State of Louisiana 

should be applied to nutria eradication or control programs in 

other nutria-infested coastal States. 

ø(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance to the State of 

Maryland and the State of Louisiana for a program to implement 

measures to eradicate or control nutria and restore marshland 

damaged by nutria.¿ 

(b) PURPOSE.—The purpose of this Act is to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to provide financial assistance to the States of 

Delaware, Louisiana, Maryland, North Carolina, Oregon, Virginia, 

and Washington to carry out activities— 

(1) to eradicate or control nutria; and 

(2) to restore nutria damaged wetlands. 

SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

In this Act: 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
7 

(1) COASTAL STATE.—The term ‘‘coastal State’’ means each of 

the States of Delaware, Oregon, North Carolina, Virginia, and 

Washington. 

(2) PROGRAM.—The term ‘‘program’’ means the nutria eradication program established by section 4(a). 

(3) PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP.—The term ‘public-private 

partnership’ means a voluntary, cooperative project undertaken 

by governmental entities or public officials and affected communities, local citizens, nongovernmental organizations, or other 

entities or persons in the private sector. 

(4) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of 

the Interior. 

SEC. ø3¿4. NUTRIA ERADICATION PROGRAM. 

ø(a) GRANT AUTHORITY.—The Secretary of the Interior (in this 

Act referred to as the ‘‘Secretary’’), subject to the availability of appropriations, may provide financial assistance to the State of Maryland and the State of Louisiana for a program to implement measures to eradicate or control nutria and restore marshland damaged 

by nutria.¿ 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary may, subject to the availability 

of appropriations, provide financial assistance to the States of 

Maryland and Louisiana and the coastal States to implement measures— 

(1) to eradicate or control nutria; and 

(2) to restore wetlands damaged by nutria. 

(b) GOALS.—The goals of the program shall be to— 

(1) eradicate nutria in the State of Maryland; 

(2) eradicate or control nutria in Louisiana and øother 

States¿the coastal States; and 

(3) restore ømarshland¿wetlands damaged by nutria. 

ø(c) ACTIVITIES¿(c) ACTIVITIES IN THE STATE OF MARYLAND.—In 

the State of Maryland, the Secretary shall require that the program consist of management, research, and *622 public education 

activities carried out in accordance with the document published by 

the United States Fish and Wildlife Service entitled ‘‘Eradication 

Strategies for Nutria in the Chesapeake and Delaware Bay Watersheds’’, dated March 2002, and updated in March 2009. (d) COST SHARING.— (1) FEDERAL SHARE.—The Federal share of the costs of the 

program may not exceed 75 percent of the total costs of the 

program. 

(2) IN-KIND CONTRIBUTIONS.—The non-Federal share of the 

costs of the program may be provided in the form of in-kind 

contributions of materials or services. 

(e) LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.—Not more than 5 

percent of øfinancial assistance provided by the Secretary under 

this section¿the amounts made available under subsection (f) to 

carry out the program may be used for administrative expenses. 

ø(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—For financial assistance under this section, there is authorized to be appropriated to 

the Secretary $4,000,000 for the State of Maryland program and 

$2,000,000 for the State of Louisiana program for each of fiscal 

years 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008.¿ 

(f) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Subject to subsection 

(e), there is authorized to be appropriated to the Secretary to carry 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING
8 

out the program $6,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2012 through 

2016, of which— (1) $2,000,000 shall be used to provide financial assistance to 

the State of Maryland; (2) $2,000,000 shall be used to provide financial assistance to 

the State of Louisiana; and (3) $2,000,000 shall be used to provide financial assistance, 

on a competitive basis, to other coastal States. 

SEC. ø4¿5. REPORT. 

No later than 6 months after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, the Secretary and the National Invasive Species Council 

shall— 

(1) give consideration to the 2002 report for the Louisiana 

Department of Wildlife and Fisheries titled ‘‘Nutria in Louisiana’’, and the ø2002 document entitled ‘‘Eradication Strategies for Nutria in the Chesapeake and Delaware Bay Watersheds’’¿March 2009 update of the document entitled ‘Eradication Strategies for Nutria in the Chesapeake and Delaware 

Bay Watersheds’ and originally dated March 2002; and 

(2) ødevelop¿continue, in cooperation with the State of Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the State of 

Maryland Department of Natural Resources, a long-term nutria control or eradication program, as appropriate, with the 

objective to significantly reduce and restore the damage nutria 

cause to coastal wetlands in the States of Louisiana and Marylandø.¿; and 

(3) develop, in cooperation with the State of Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, the 

State of Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, 

the State of Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, the State 

of North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources, and the State of Washington Department of Fish and 

Wildlife, long-term nutria control or eradication programs, as 

appropriate, with the objective of— 

(A) significantly reducing and restoring the damage nutria cause to coastal wetlands in the coastal States; and 

(B) promoting voluntary, public-private partnerships to 

eradicate or control nutria and restoring nutria-damaged 

wetlands in the coastal States. 

* * * * * * * 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with HEARING