The Whale CHARTS Act of 2026 amends section 11303 of the James M. Inhofe NDAA (2023) to broaden an existing near real-time monitoring authority into a comprehensive mapping, surveying, monitoring, and mitigation program for migratory whales and other large cetaceans.
It directs the Under Secretary of Commerce (NOAA) to produce both high-accuracy distribution maps and predictive maps, carry out targeted surveys of understudied stocks, and run a competitive grant program—administered through the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF)—to accelerate detection technologies and mitigation approaches.
The bill also sets out funding authorizations, requires maps be made available in machine-readable formats that can be integrated with navigation products and coordinated with Coast Guard carriage requirements, and adds a statutory requirement that Marine Mammal Protection Act stock assessments consider the new distribution maps. For maritime operators, coastal communities, technology providers, and resource managers, the measure shifts the emphasis from pilot monitoring projects to a sustained data and deployment strategy intended to reduce lethal and sub-lethal whale‑vessel interactions.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires NOAA to develop high-resolution and predictive distribution maps for migratory whales, conduct surveys of understudied populations, establish a competitive grant program for detection technologies through NFWF, and create a near real-time monitoring subprogram aimed at reducing vessel strikes.
Who It Affects
Impacts NOAA/NMFS programmatic work, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation as grant administrator, maritime industries (fishing, shipping, tourism, vessel electronics), coastal and tribal governments, and marine researchers engaged in detection and modeling.
Why It Matters
Moves federal policy from pilot projects to an operational mapping-and-grants approach that can be integrated into navigation systems and regulatory stock assessments—potentially changing how vessel routing and mitigation measures are designed and enforced.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill rewrites an existing near real-time monitoring provision into a broader suite of authorities focused on migratory whales and other large cetaceans. NOAA’s Under Secretary must lead a Subprogram that combines mapping, surveying, monitoring, and technology development to reduce vessel strikes and other harmful interactions.
That Subprogram includes a near real-time monitoring and mitigation pilot as one component but places equal emphasis on building distribution and predictive maps and filling basic knowledge gaps through dedicated surveys.
Distribution mapping requires high spatial and temporal resolution products that identify calving, mating, feeding grounds, migration corridors, and other habitat uses. Maps must be produced using the best available science, can incorporate novel data sources (passive acoustics, satellite and drone imagery), and must be made available in machine-readable formats suitable for integration into NOAA electronic navigation products and other platforms.
The statute explicitly directs NOAA to coordinate with the Coast Guard regarding formats that may be used in carriage requirements for commercial and recreational vessels.To accelerate practical detection and mitigation solutions, the bill establishes a competitive grant program administered by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The grants target technology development (detection sensors, platforms), outreach and on-the-water practices, and infrastructure to disseminate real-time or near real-time information.
The measure sets priorities favoring projects that demonstrably reduce lethal or sub-lethal interactions, involve cooperation among ocean users, and provide potential economic benefits to small businesses in fisheries, tourism, and maritime services.Funding is specified: annual authorizations for mapping, surveys, and the Subprogram for FY2026–2030, and a separate $10 million authorization (available until expended) for the grant program. The Under Secretary must report to Congress every three years on mapping and survey activities, knowledge gaps, and grant outcomes.
Finally, the bill amends the Marine Mammal Protection Act to require that NOAA consider these distribution maps when preparing or reviewing stock assessments, formally tying the new data products into management evaluations.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Under Secretary (NOAA) must produce high-accuracy distribution maps and predictive maps for migratory whales that identify calving, mating, feeding grounds, migration routes, and other habitat uses.
A competitive grant program—managed by the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation—receives a $10 million authorization to fund detection technologies, outreach, on-water mitigation approaches, and related infrastructure; funds remain available until expended.
Authorizations: $2,000,000 per year (FY2026–2030) for mapping (section 11303(c)), $1,000,000 per year for understudied-species surveys, and $5,000,000 per year for the near real-time monitoring subprogram; the grant program has a separate $10,000,000 authorization.
Maps must be distributed in electronic, machine-readable formats that can be integrated into NOAA electronic navigational products and other platforms and the Under Secretary must coordinate with the Coast Guard on formats tied to carriage requirements.
The Marine Mammal Protection Act (section 117) is amended so NOAA must consider maps produced under the amended section 11303(c) when preparing, publishing, or reviewing stock assessments.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Names the measure the 'Whale CHARTS Act of 2026.' This is purely stylistic but signals the bill’s focus on mapping, charting, and technology solutions for large cetaceans.
Expands scope from near real-time monitoring to comprehensive mapping, surveying, monitoring, and mitigation
Replaces the program’s original narrow focus on near real-time location monitoring for threatened/endangered cetaceans with a broader Program that covers migratory whales and other large cetaceans and adds explicit mapping and surveying authorities. Practically, the statutory language shifts NOAA’s tasking from operating a single pilot toward delivering a suite of data products and a sustained subprogram for mitigation.
Requires high-resolution and predictive distribution maps and sets data standards
Directs NOAA to produce maps with high spatial and temporal resolution and predictive capability that account for future environmental conditions. The provision mandates use of best available science, authorizes novel data sources (passive acoustics, satellite/drone imagery), requires inclusion of life-history habitats (calving, feeding, migration), and compels machine-readable outputs for integration into navigation systems and public platforms. It also instructs NOAA to coordinate across its line offices and consult the Marine Mammal Commission and stakeholders on priorities.
Targets surveys for poorly known stocks and requires uncertainty reporting
Requires NOAA to conduct abundance and distribution surveys for understudied migratory whale stocks, to identify key habitats in each survey, and to state the degree of scientific certainty for those identifications. The clause permits opportunistic data collection on other species and allows stakeholder input on priority setting. The explicit requirement to report uncertainty is important for downstream users who must decide how much weight to place on map outputs.
Creates an NFWF‑administered competitive grant program focused on detection and mitigation
Requires NOAA to establish a competitive grant program and enter into a cooperative agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to manage it. Eligible applicants include states, tribes, NGOs, research institutions, industry participants, and consortia. Grants finance detection technology R&D, outreach, on-the-water mitigation methods, and dissemination infrastructure. The statute limits distribution to non‑U.S. persons except through partnerships and directs NFWF to prioritize projects with clear potential to reduce lethal/sub-lethal interactions and demonstrable benefits to small businesses.
Authorizations and administrative limits
Specifies dollar authorizations: mapping $2M/year, surveys $1M/year, Subprogram $5M/year for FY2026–2030; grants $10M (available until expended). It allows NFWF to use up to 5% or $80,000 (whichever is greater) of grant funds annually for administration. These figures set an explicit, relatively modest funding floor and define how much federal money is earmarked for program components versus pass-through grant activity.
Reporting, construction with other laws, and definitions
Requires periodic reporting to Congress (initial report in two years, then every three years) on mapping, surveys, knowledge gaps, and grant effectiveness. It contains a 'notwithstanding' clause directing NOAA to carry out the section regardless of other planning, while also clarifying the bill does not relieve NOAA of obligations to issue timely regulations or permit other statutory processes—creating an instruction to prioritize this work without overriding existing legal duties. The section also adds detailed definitions (e.g., migratory whale, United States person, Foundation) used across the new authorities.
Requires consideration of distribution maps in stock assessments
Adds an instruction to the Secretary to consider distribution maps produced under the amended 11303(c) when preparing, publishing, or reviewing marine mammal stock assessments. This ties the new mapping outputs directly into formal population and management assessments under the MMPA.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Coastal fishing and tourism small businesses — The grant program prioritizes projects that prove economic benefits to small businesses reliant on fishing, tourism, and maritime activities, aiming to reduce strike risk while protecting livelihoods.
- Maritime technology and detection firms — Competitive grants fund R&D and deployment of detection technologies (passive acoustics, imaging, onboard sensors) and create commercial opportunities for vendors that can integrate products with navigation systems.
- NOAA and marine scientists — Receive statutory authority and dedicated funds to produce standardized, machine-readable distribution and predictive maps, improving the scientific basis for management and research.
- Port authorities and vessel operators — Will gain access to maps and potentially real‑time guidance that can reduce collision risk and inform operational decisions (routing, speed reductions), subject to how Coast Guard carriage requirements evolve.
- Conservation organizations and coastal managers — Benefit from expanded data on understudied stocks and a formal reporting cadence that documents gaps and progress, supporting better targeted conservation measures.
Who Bears the Cost
- NOAA/NMFS (Under Secretary) — Must design, coordinate, produce maps, run surveys, manage the Subprogram, and coordinate across line offices and with the Coast Guard using the authorized funds; implementation will demand staff time, technical capacity, and cross-office integration.
- National Fish and Wildlife Foundation — Assumes administrative and program management responsibilities for the grant program under a federal cooperative agreement and must administer grant selection, disbursement, and reporting within the administrative cap.
- Commercial and recreational vessel operators — May face new carriage or operational expectations if the Coast Guard adopts requirements referencing the maps; operators will also need to integrate new electronic products and potentially adjust routes or speeds.
- Grant applicants and local partners — May need to supply matching resources or absorb administrative overhead to meet competitive criteria; partnerships that include non‑U.S. entities must structure distribution carefully to comply with the domestic-use restriction.
- State and local agencies — Expected to consult and coordinate on prioritization and may be asked to contribute data or participate in surveys, adding workload without guaranteed offsetting funds.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between producing timely, actionable navigational information to reduce whale‑vessel collisions and the scientific limits of those products: policymakers want usable, integrated maps that crews can rely on, but imperfect models and uneven data could create false confidence, impose economic burdens through operational restrictions, or skew stock assessments—so the law must balance operational utility with rigorous standards for accuracy and transparency.
The bill directs NOAA to produce high-resolution and predictive maps and to make them machine-readable for integration into navigation products, but it leaves important methodological and operational details unspecified. The statute mandates use of the best available science and allows novel data sources, yet it does not set minimum standards for model validation, uncertainty thresholds, or how to combine disparate data streams—leaving room for divergent methodologies and uneven map quality across regions.
Because the statute requires maps to be considered in MMPA stock assessments, methodological inconsistencies could have downstream regulatory consequences if those maps are later used to propose management actions.
The grant structure channels federal funds through NFWF, which can speed distribution and leverage private partnerships, but that approach reduces direct federal program management and raises questions about transparency, selection criteria, and federal oversight. The prohibition on distributing grant resources to non‑U.S. persons except through partnerships protects domestic control but may limit international scientific collaborations or multinational projects that are important for migratory species.
Finally, the bill directs coordination with the Coast Guard on carriage formats but stops short of directing the Coast Guard to adopt specific regulations; this coordination could lead to strong operational requirements in some regions but not others, producing a patchwork of expectations for vessel operators.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.