To provide that the final rule of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status With Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, and False Spike, and Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot" shall have no force or effect.

Bill Number

H.R. 840

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Environmental Protection

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-01-31: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Last Updated

2025-03-04T13:51:48Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

This bill (H.R. 840) aims to nullify a specific rule issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), an agency under the Department of the Interior responsible for protecting wildlife. The rule in question designates certain freshwater mussel species in Texas as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), which is a federal law from 1973 that protects species at risk of extinction. By voiding the rule, the bill prevents these protections from taking effect.

Key Provisions

• Nullification of the FWS Rule: The bill declares that the final rule titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status With Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, and False Spike, and Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot" (published in the Federal Register on June 4, 2024, at 89 Fed. Reg. 48034) has no legal force or effect.
• The rule covers six mussel species listed as endangered (Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, and False Spike) and one as threatened (Texas Fawnsfoot), including designations of "critical habitat" (specific areas essential for their survival) and a "Section 4(d) rule" (special protections for threatened species under the ESA).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• This bill would directly override the ESA's implementation for these specific mussel species by legislatively blocking the FWS rule, effectively preventing federal protections, restrictions on development, or habitat conservation requirements in affected Texas waterways (such as the Guadalupe, Colorado, and San Antonio Rivers).
• It does not amend the ESA itself but targets this one rulemaking action, leaving other ESA listings intact.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The FWS would lose authority to enforce protections for these mussels, potentially reducing administrative workload but limiting their ability to fulfill ESA mandates. Other agencies, like the Army Corps of Engineers, might see fewer consultations required for projects in these habitats.
• On Citizens: Landowners, farmers, developers, and businesses in central Texas could face fewer federal restrictions on water use, construction, or land development in the designated habitats, possibly easing economic activities. However, environmental advocates and communities relying on healthy waterways might see increased risks to biodiversity and water quality.
• On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic species and U.S. waterways.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and Environmental Groups: They would lose tools for species conservation, potentially hindering efforts to protect these mussels from threats like habitat loss and pollution.
• Texas Landowners and Local Industries: Farmers, ranchers, and developers in affected river basins (e.g., around the Guadalupe and Colorado Rivers) could benefit from reduced regulatory burdens.
• Conservationists and Local Communities: Groups focused on wildlife protection and residents dependent on clean rivers for recreation or fishing might face challenges in maintaining ecosystem health.
• State and Local Governments: Texas state agencies involved in water management could see shifts in federal-state coordination on environmental issues.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: This represents congressional use of its oversight power to check executive agency actions under the Administrative Procedure Act (the process for federal rulemaking). It could set a precedent for future bills targeting specific environmental rules, potentially leading to court challenges over whether Congress can selectively nullify agency decisions without broader ESA reforms.
• Constitutional Implications: It highlights the balance of powers between Congress (legislative branch) and the executive branch (via FWS), affirming Congress's authority to modify or block regulations but raising questions about consistency with the ESA's intent to protect species based on scientific assessments.
• Political Implications: The bill, introduced by Texas representatives, reflects regional priorities around economic development versus federal environmental regulation, but it remains in committee and has not advanced, indicating potential partisan divides on conservation policy.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Arrington, Jodey C. [R-TX-19]

Cosponsors (2)

Rep. Pfluger, August [R-TX-11], Rep. Roy, Chip [R-TX-21]

Recent Actions

• 2025-01-31: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
• 2025-01-31: Introduced in House
• 2025-01-31: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• To provide that the final rule of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service titled "Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Endangered Species Status With Critical Habitat for Guadalupe Fatmucket, Texas Fatmucket, Guadalupe Orb, Texas Pimpleback, Balcones Spike, and False Spike, and Threatened Species Status With Section 4(d) Rule and Critical Habitat for Texas Fawnsfoot" shall have no force or effect. — issued 2025-01-31 — PDF (2 pages)