SGLF Act of 2025
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6053
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Public Lands and Natural Resources
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-11-17: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-04T09:06:47Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Save Great Lakes Fish Act of 2025 (H.R. 6053) aims to address the threat of invasive mussel species (non-native mussels that harm ecosystems) in the Great Lakes by authorizing the Great Lakes Fishery Commission to develop coordinated strategies to combat them. This builds on international efforts to protect fish populations and water quality in the region.
Key Provisions
- Authorization for Action: The United States Section of the Great Lakes Fishery Commission is empowered to create initiatives against invasive mussels, working in partnership with federal agencies, interstate agreements (formal pacts between states), Tribal governments, state governments, and local authorities.
- Federal Assistance: The Secretary of the Interior (through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and U.S. Geological Survey) and the Secretary of Commerce (through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) must provide support for these efforts.
- Funding: Authorizes $500 million in federal funding for fiscal years 2026 through 2035, specifically allocated to the Commission and in addition to any existing funds for related activities.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This bill amends the Great Lakes Fishery Act of 1956 by adding a new section (Section 6A) focused on invasive mussels. Previously, the Act emphasized sea lamprey control and general fishery management under the U.S.-Canada Convention on Great Lakes Fisheries; this expands the Commission's role to explicitly include mussel-specific threats, introducing mandatory federal coordination and dedicated funding that were not previously outlined.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: Enhances coordination among federal entities like the Fish and Wildlife Service, Geological Survey, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, potentially increasing their workload in research, monitoring, and implementation while providing new resources.
- Citizens: Benefits residents and communities around the Great Lakes by protecting fisheries, water infrastructure, and recreation from mussel-related damage (e.g., clogging water systems or disrupting food chains), which could support local economies tied to fishing and tourism.
- International Relations: Strengthens U.S.-Canada cooperation through the binational Great Lakes Fishery Commission, as invasive species cross borders, potentially improving joint environmental management without altering treaty obligations.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Great Lakes Fishery Commission: Gains expanded authority and funding to lead anti-mussel efforts.
- Federal Agencies: Including the Departments of Interior and Commerce, which must assist and may receive indirect benefits from the funding.
- State, Tribal, and Local Governments: Involved in coordination, with potential access to resources for regional implementation.
- Environmental and Fishing Interests: Groups, industries, and communities reliant on Great Lakes ecosystems, such as commercial fishers, recreational users, and conservation organizations, who face direct threats from invasive mussels.
- U.S. and Canadian Governments: As partners in the Commission, both benefit from shared ecosystem protection.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Provides clear statutory authority for federal involvement in invasive species control, aligning with existing environmental laws like the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act, but introduces mussel-specific measures that could set precedents for funding targeted conservation.
- Constitutional: No apparent conflicts; it operates within Congress's commerce clause powers to regulate interstate waters and international fisheries, while respecting state and Tribal sovereignty through required coordination.
- Political: Signals bipartisan support (introduced by representatives from Michigan) for Great Lakes restoration, potentially influencing future appropriations debates and highlighting the growing priority of invasive species in regional policy, though the large funding authorization may face scrutiny over fiscal priorities.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (9)
Rep. Walberg, Tim [R-MI-5], Rep. Kaptur, Marcy [D-OH-9], Rep. Bergman, Jack [R-MI-1], Rep. Scholten, Hillary J. [D-MI-3], Rep. Kennedy, Timothy M. [D-NY-26], Rep. McDonald Rivet, Kristen [D-MI-8], Rep. Thanedar, Shri [D-MI-13], Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25], Rep. Huizenga, Bill [R-MI-4]
Recent Actions
- 2025-11-17: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-11-17: Introduced in House
- 2025-11-17: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Save Great Lakes Fish Act of 2025 — issued 2025-11-17 — PDF (3 pages)