Pacific Northwest Gray Wolves Relief Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- H.R. 5171
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Animals
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-09-08: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-16T14:55:33Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Pacific Northwest Gray Wolves Relief Act of 2025 aims to reinstate protections removal for gray wolves in specific states, allowing for state-level management of wolf populations. It targets relief for local communities affected by federal endangered species regulations.
Key Provisions
- Reissuance Requirement: The Secretary of the Interior must reissue a specific 2020 final rule (titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Removing the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife," published in the Federal Register on November 3, 2020) within 60 days of the bill's enactment.
- Limited Application: The reissued rule applies exclusively to gray wolf populations in the states of Oregon and Washington, effectively removing federal endangered or threatened status for wolves in those areas under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This bill reverses aspects of subsequent federal actions that may have reinstated or modified protections for gray wolves after the 2020 delisting rule was challenged or altered in court.
- It narrows the scope of the ESA's protections (which generally prohibit harming, harassing, or killing listed species without permits) to exclude gray wolves in Oregon and Washington, shifting authority to state wildlife agencies for population management.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), under the Department of the Interior, would be compelled to implement the delisting quickly, potentially reducing federal oversight and resources dedicated to wolf monitoring in these states.
- Citizens: Residents in Oregon and Washington, particularly farmers, ranchers, and hunters, may benefit from reduced restrictions on livestock protection and hunting, potentially decreasing conflicts between wolves and human activities. Environmental groups might oppose it, leading to increased litigation.
- International Relations: Minimal direct impact, as gray wolves are not a cross-border issue here, though it could indirectly affect U.S. wildlife conservation credibility in international forums like those under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Government: Secretary of the Interior and USFWS, responsible for reissuing and enforcing the rule.
- State Governments: Oregon and Washington wildlife agencies, which would gain primary authority to manage wolf populations, including potential hunting seasons or control measures.
- Local Communities: Agricultural producers (e.g., ranchers facing livestock predation) and rural residents in the Pacific Northwest who support delisting for economic reasons.
- Conservation Advocates: Environmental organizations and wildlife biologists who may view delisting as a threat to wolf recovery and biodiversity.
- Indigenous Groups: Tribes in Oregon and Washington with traditional interests in wolf management, potentially influencing state-level decisions.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: The bill mandates agency action, which could face challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act if seen as bypassing scientific review or court precedents on ESA delistings. It highlights ongoing debates over the ESA's balance between species protection and human economic needs.
- Constitutional: Raises questions about federalism, as it delegates more wildlife management to states, aligning with the 10th Amendment's reservation of powers to states, but potentially conflicting with Congress's authority over interstate commerce and species protection.
- Political: Introduced by representatives from Oregon and Washington, it reflects regional tensions over federal wildlife policy, possibly signaling broader efforts to reform the ESA amid partisan divides on conservation versus land use.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (3)
Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4], Rep. Simpson, Michael K. [R-ID-2], Rep. Baumgartner, Michael [R-WA-5]
Recent Actions
- 2025-09-08: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-09-08: Introduced in House
- 2025-09-08: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Pacific Northwest Gray Wolves Relief Act of 2025 — issued 2025-09-08 — PDF (2 pages)