Feral Swine Eradication Act
- Bill Number
- S. 1207
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Agriculture and Food
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-03-31: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- Last Updated
- 2025-06-09T15:45:41Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The Feral Swine Eradication Act (S. 1207) aims to reauthorize and expand a program originally established as a pilot in the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018. The legislation focuses on eradicating and controlling feral swine populations, which damage crops, ecosystems, and pose risks to human and animal health, by making the program permanent and providing additional resources.
Key Provisions
- Program Structure: Establishes the "Feral Swine Eradication and Control Program" (removing the "pilot" designation), administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) through the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS).
- Eligible Areas: Defines these as regions in states where feral swine are identified as threats to agriculture (e.g., crop damage), native ecosystems (e.g., soil erosion or habitat destruction), or human/animal health (e.g., disease transmission), as determined by the USDA Secretary.
- Activities: Supports feral swine removal efforts, including trapping, shooting, and other control methods. Requires APHIS and NRCS to monitor eradicated areas for one year to check for reoccurrence.
- Funding and Cost-Sharing: Authorizes $75 million for fiscal years 2025 through 2030 (in addition to prior funding through 2023). Adjusts cost-sharing so the federal government covers 40% of costs (down from 50%), while non-federal partners (e.g., states, producers) cover 60% (up from 50%).
- Reporting Requirements: Mandates joint reports from APHIS and NRCS administrators to Congress and the public at 2 years and 4 years and 6 months after enactment. Reports must detail program activities (e.g., counties cleared of swine, damage reductions), funding use, stakeholder roles, success assessments, and improvement recommendations.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- From Pilot to Permanent Program: Converts the temporary pilot program into an ongoing initiative, expanding its scope beyond initial test areas to any "eligible areas" nationwide.
- Enhanced Monitoring and Accountability: Adds a one-year post-eradication monitoring requirement and new biennial reporting obligations, which were not in the original 2018 law.
- Funding Extension and Adjustment: Extends authorization through 2030 with new funding and shifts cost-sharing to encourage more non-federal contributions, potentially making the program more sustainable.
- Terminology Updates: Replaces "pilot areas" with "eligible areas" throughout and updates the section heading and table of contents in the 2018 Act for clarity.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: USDA's APHIS and NRCS will see increased responsibilities, including expanded operations, monitoring, and reporting, supported by additional funding. This could strain resources if feral swine issues grow but also streamline federal coordination on agricultural pests.
- Citizens and Communities: Farmers, ranchers, and rural residents in affected areas may experience reduced economic losses from crop/livestock damage (estimated in billions annually) and improved public safety by lowering disease risks from feral swine. Broader environmental benefits include protected wildlife habitats and water quality.
- International Relations: No direct impacts, as the program is domestic-focused, though it indirectly supports U.S. agricultural exports by maintaining farm productivity.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Agricultural Producers: Farmers and ranchers who receive financial assistance for control efforts and benefit from damage mitigation.
- USDA Agencies: APHIS (focuses on animal health and pest control) and NRCS (handles conservation and land management) lead implementation.
- State and Local Governments: Partner in funding and operations, particularly in high-infestation states like Texas, Georgia, and Alabama (based on sponsors' states).
- Environmental and Public Health Groups: Indirectly benefit from ecosystem restoration and reduced health threats from diseases like swine brucellosis.
- Taxpayers: Fund the federal portion, with potential returns through preserved agricultural output.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Strengthens existing USDA authority under the 2018 Act without creating new regulatory burdens; the cost-sharing shift promotes partnerships but could face challenges if non-federal funding falls short. No litigation risks apparent, as it builds on voluntary participation.
- Constitutional: Aligns with Congress's spending power (Article I, Section 8) for agricultural welfare; involves no federalism issues, as states opt into eligible areas.
- Political: Bipartisan sponsorship (e.g., from Senators Cornyn, Lujan, Tuberville) signals broad support for rural and agricultural priorities. Could influence future farm bills by demonstrating effective pest control models, potentially encouraging similar expansions for other invasive species.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (5)
Sen. Lujan, Ben Ray [D-NM], Sen. Tuberville, Tommy [R-AL], Sen. Warnock, Raphael G. [D-GA], Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL], Sen. Ossoff, Jon [D-GA]
Recent Actions
- 2025-03-31: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- 2025-03-31: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Feral Swine Eradication Act — issued 2025-03-31 — PDF (5 pages)