Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 6568
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Water Resources Development
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2026-02-04: Subcommittee Hearings Held
- Last Updated
- 2026-01-30T09:05:18Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act (H.R. 6568) aims to confirm that the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation maintains full ownership, control, and funding responsibility for the Lower Yellowstone Fish Bypass Channel. This ensures ongoing protection for the endangered pallid sturgeon and other native fish in the Yellowstone River, while shielding the Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project and District from any added costs or duties related to the channel.
Key Provisions
- Findings (Section 2): Outlines the channel's federal origins as a mitigation measure under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) for pallid sturgeon impacts, its construction by federal agencies, and its separation from the irrigation project. It emphasizes that endangered species recovery is a federal duty and that shifting costs to local entities would contradict the original intent.
- Definitions (Section 3): Defines key terms, including the "Lower Yellowstone Fish Bypass Channel" (a 2.1-mile engineered passage for fish around Intake Diversion Dam), the "Lower Yellowstone Irrigation District" (a state-chartered entity managing irrigation), the "Lower Yellowstone Irrigation Project" (a federal system for agricultural water delivery), "operations and maintenance" (all necessary actions to keep the channel functional), and the "Secretary" (Secretary of the Interior via the Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner).
- Reaffirmation of Federal Ownership (Section 4): Mandates perpetual federal ownership, operation, and funding of the channel; prohibits any shifts to non-federal entities like the irrigation district; allows federal coordination but not delegation.
- Preservation of ESA Obligations (Section 5): Assigns exclusive federal responsibility for pallid sturgeon recovery under the ESA to the Bureau and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS); exempts the irrigation district from any ESA-related duties; requires coordination with state agencies without burdening local operations.
- Prohibition of Transfers (Section 6): Bans delegating responsibilities to non-federal entities; voids any prior agreements attempting such shifts and requires termination of inconsistent provisions.
- Legal Enforcement (Section 7): Allows the irrigation district or stakeholders to sue in federal court (U.S. District Court for Montana) for declaratory relief if responsibilities are improperly transferred; grants exclusive jurisdiction to that court; clarifies no private lawsuits against non-federal entities for channel operations.
- Funding and Reporting (Section 8): Requires the Bureau to fully fund operations, maintenance, repairs, and adaptive management; authorizes $1,000,000 annually starting in fiscal year 2026 for these purposes, with no delegation of funds; mandates biennial reports to Congress on channel status, costs, and coordination.
- Effects (Section 9): Preserves the irrigation project's purposes, water rights, and state laws; imposes no new burdens on non-federal entities; upholds federal ESA and environmental obligations without alteration.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Clarifies and codifies federal exclusivity over the channel, preventing future administrative attempts to impose costs on the irrigation district, which could arise from ambiguous prior authorizations like the Water Resources Development Act of 2007.
- Invalidates any existing agreements that shift responsibilities, providing retroactive protection.
- Introduces specific annual funding authorization and reporting requirements, strengthening federal commitment beyond general ESA mandates.
- Establishes judicial review mechanisms and prohibitions on delegation, creating enforceable barriers against cost transfers not explicitly present in prior laws.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The Bureau of Reclamation and USFWS face ongoing funding and operational duties, potentially increasing federal budgets for conservation but ensuring compliance with ESA without local involvement. State agencies (e.g., Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks) benefit from coordination without added costs.
- Citizens: Farmers and irrigators in eastern Montana and western North Dakota gain protection for reliable agricultural water supplies, avoiding potential fee hikes or disruptions from channel maintenance. Broader public supports long-term fish conservation, aiding ecosystem health in the Yellowstone River.
- International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic federal-state water and conservation issues in the U.S.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Bureau of Reclamation: Primary owner and operator, bearing all costs and responsibilities.
- Lower Yellowstone Irrigation District and Project: Local and federal irrigation managers, protected from financial or operational burdens.
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Shares ESA compliance duties for pallid sturgeon recovery.
- State Agencies: Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks and North Dakota Game and Fish Department, involved in coordination for conservation.
- Environmental and Conservation Groups: Indirectly benefit from secured federal funding for endangered species protection.
- Local Farmers and Communities: Rely on the irrigation project for agriculture, gaining stability.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces federal supremacy in ESA compliance by prohibiting unauthorized delegations, potentially limiting administrative flexibility under laws like the ESA or National Environmental Policy Act. Provides clear pathways for judicial enforcement, reducing litigation risks over cost-sharing while upholding declaratory judgment rights (a standard federal remedy for clarifying legal duties).
- Constitutional: Aligns with the federal government's plenary authority over endangered species and interstate waters (under the Commerce Clause), without infringing on state water rights or local governance.
- Political: Balances conservation priorities with agricultural interests in the rural West, mitigating tensions between federal environmental mandates and local economies; the bill's introduction by a Montana representative highlights bipartisan support for clarifying federal roles to prevent "burden-shifting" disputes.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2026-02-04: Subcommittee Hearings Held
- 2026-01-28: Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Wildlife and Fisheries.
- 2025-12-10: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-12-10: Introduced in House
- 2025-12-10: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Lower Yellowstone River Native Fish Conservation Act — issued 2025-12-10 — PDF (14 pages)