H.R.1894 - Federally Integrated Species Health Act of 2025; FISH Act of 2025 (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R. 1894, the Federally Integrated Species Health Act of 2025 (FISH Act of 2025), proposes amending the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The bill aims to transfer authority over anadromous and catadromous fish species from the Secretary of Commerce and the National Marine Fisheries Service to the Secretary of the Interior.
This transfer includes all functions related to these species under the Endangered Species Act. The bill also provides for the reconsideration of certain administrative determinations made by the National Marine Fisheries Service within three years prior to the transfer.
The Act includes miscellaneous provisions addressing references to transferred functions in other federal laws and ensures the continuation of existing legal documents and proceedings.
Expected Effects
The primary effect of this bill would be a shift in responsibility for managing and protecting certain fish species. Specifically, it consolidates authority within the Department of the Interior.
This could lead to changes in how these species are managed, potentially affecting conservation efforts and related industries. The reconsideration clause may also result in altered administrative decisions.
Potential Benefits
- Streamlined Management: Consolidating authority within a single department (Interior) may lead to more efficient and coordinated management of anadromous and catadromous fish species.
- Potential for Focused Expertise: The Department of the Interior may develop specialized expertise in these specific types of fish, leading to better conservation strategies.
- Reconsideration of Past Decisions: Allows for a review of previous administrative determinations, which could correct errors or adapt to new scientific information.
- Clarity in Regulatory Framework: By clearly defining the roles of different agencies, the bill reduces potential confusion and overlap in jurisdiction.
- Adaptability: The bill allows the Secretary of Interior to exercise authorities under the ESA, allowing for adaptability in the performance of transferred functions.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Disruption During Transition: The transfer of functions could cause temporary disruptions in ongoing conservation efforts and regulatory processes.
- Potential Loss of Expertise: Transferring functions away from the National Marine Fisheries Service could result in a loss of specialized knowledge and experience.
- Increased Bureaucracy: Consolidating authority in the Department of the Interior could lead to increased bureaucracy and slower decision-making.
- Uncertainty for Stakeholders: The reconsideration clause could create uncertainty for stakeholders who rely on existing administrative determinations.
- Potential for Conflicting Priorities: The Department of the Interior may have competing priorities that could negatively impact the conservation of these fish species.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill appears to align with the US Constitution, particularly Article I, Section 8, which grants Congress the power to regulate commerce, including interstate commerce, which can be interpreted to include the management of fish species that migrate across state lines and into ocean waters.
The bill does not appear to infringe upon any specific individual rights or liberties protected by the Bill of Rights. The transfer of functions is an administrative matter within the purview of Congress.
However, the constitutionality of specific actions taken under the amended Endangered Species Act would still be subject to judicial review, particularly if those actions are challenged as exceeding congressional authority or violating individual rights.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).