H.R. 1897
ESA Amendments Act of 2025
Sponsor: Bruce Westerman
26 cosponsors
- Michael A. Rulli
- Andy Biggs
- Celeste Maloy
- Cliff Bentz
- Dan Newhouse
- Doug LaMalfa
- Harriet M. Hageman
- Jeff Hurd
- Mark E. Amodei
- Mike Ezell
- Nicholas J. Begich III
- Paul A. Gosar
- Pete Stauber
- Russ Fulcher
- Thomas P. Tiffany
- Wesley Hunt
- Troy Downing
- Addison P. McDowell
- Lauren Boebert
- Glenn Thompson
- Ken Calvert
- Mike Collins
- Clay Higgins
- Tim Walberg
- Glenn Grothman
- Robert E. Latta
Official summary
Written by the Congressional Research Service.
ESA Amendments Act of 2025
This bill reauthorizes through FY2031 the Endangered Species Act and generally narrows protections provided under the act.
The bill directs the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service to submit a National Listing Work Plan that establishes a five-year schedule and plan for addressing listing of endangered or threatened species and designation of critical habitats for such species. Under the plan, the bill gives the Services flexibility on the timing of acting on listing petitions and eliminates the requirement for the Services to act within 12 months on listing petitions.
The bill limits what land may be designated as critical habitat for an endangered or threatened species.
It also limits protections provided to threatened species and allows a state to regulate the recovery of such species if the Services determine the state's proposed recovery strategy would conserve the species.
The bill provides statutory authority for Conservation Benefit Agreements, which allow private landowners to voluntarily enter agreements to reduce threats to candidate species in exchange for being allowed to continue their operations if the species is later listed.
The bill also modifies the permitting process for certain other voluntary conservation agreements, including by exempting incidental take permits (e.g., permits to harm or kill a species) from environmental review requirements.
The bill also makes a variety of other changes to the act, including limiting consultation requirements, judicial review, and awards for attorneys’ fees in certain cases.
Text of the bill
I Optimizing conservation through resource prioritization
II Incentivizing wildlife conservation on private lands
III Providing for greater incentives to recover listed species
IV Creating greater transparency and accountability in recovering listed species
V Streamlining permitting process
Where this section came from
-
Mar 6, 2025 · Introduced in House Referred to House Committee on Natural Resources, Mar 6
-
Mar 24, 2026 · Reported in House Marked up by House Committee on Natural Resources, Dec 17 Reported by House Committee on Natural Resources, Mar 24 Committee members' individual votes aren't in our records.
… 2 unchanged passages …
(5)
For
(A)
the
In
purposes
carrying
of
out
a consultation
carried
under
out pursuant to
paragraph (2) or a conference
carried out
under paragraph (4), the Secretary
— (i) except as provided in clause (ii),
may only
determine
consider
that
the effects of
the action that is the subject of such consultation or conference
is
that
likely
the Secretary determines, based on clear and substantial information, using the best scientific and commercial data available, and in accordance with subparagraphs (B) and (C), respectively, are caused by the action itself and are reasonably certain
to
jeopardize
occur; and (ii) shall consider as a beneficial effect of
the
continued
action
existence
that is the subject
of
an
such consultation or conference any avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measure proposed by the
applicable
species
Federal agency
or
result
the applicant, if any. (B) In determining whether an effect of an action described
in
subparagraph (A)(i) is caused by
the
destruction
action itself, the Secretary shall consider whether— (i) the effect is so remote in time from the action under consultation that it is not reasonably certain to occur; (ii) the effect is so geographically remote from the immediate area involved in the action that it is not reasonably certain to occur; (iii) the effect is only reached through a lengthy causal chain such that the effect not reasonably certain to occur; (iv) the applicable Federal agency does not have the ability to prevent the effect due to its limited statutory authority;
or
adverse
(v)
modification
would occur regardless
of
habitat
whether the action is carried out. (C) In determining whether an effect
of
such
an
a
action
species
described
which
in subparagraph (A)(i)
is
determined
reasonably
by
certain to occur,
the Secretary
, after
shall
consultation
consider
as
factors
appropriate
including the following: (i) Experiences
with
affected
other
States
such actions that are similar in scope
,
nature, and magnitude
to
the applicable such action. (ii) Plans for such action. (iii) Any economic, administrative, or legal requirement necessary for the action to
be
critical
carried
if
out that has not been fulfilled. (iv) Whether
the
effect has been observed previously and to what extent. (D) In carrying out a consultation under paragraph (2) or a conference under paragraph (4), the
Secretary
determines,
may
based
not
on
consider an effect of
the
best
action
scientific
that is the subject of such consultation or conference for which there is not clear
and
commercial
substantial
data
information
available,
for the Secretary to base a determination on under subparagraph (A)(i)
that the
effects
effect
that
of
are
the action is
reasonably certain to
be
occur.
caused
(E)
by
In this paragraph,
the
action
terms
are
effect
likely
of
to
the
result
action
in
and effects of
the action
itself
mean
causing
a
such
consequence
jeopardy
or all consequences, respectively, to listed species or critical habitat that is or are caused by the proposed action
.
]
What is a markup?
A markup is a committee meeting where members go through a bill and vote on changes before sending it to the full chamber.
Section 7(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1536(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
(5)
(A) In carrying out a consultation under paragraph (2) or a conference under paragraph (4), the Secretary—
(i) except as provided in clause (ii), may only consider the effects of the action that is the subject of such consultation or conference that the Secretary determines, based on clear and substantial information, using the best scientific and commercial data available, and in accordance with subparagraphs (B) and (C), respectively, are caused by the action itself and are reasonably certain to occur; and
(ii) shall consider as a beneficial effect of the action that is the subject of such consultation or conference any avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measure proposed by the applicable Federal agency or the applicant, if any.
(B) In determining whether an effect of an action described in subparagraph (A)(i) is caused by the action itself, the Secretary shall consider whether—
(i) the effect is so remote in time from the action under consultation that it is not reasonably certain to occur;
(ii) the effect is so geographically remote from the immediate area involved in the action that it is not reasonably certain to occur;
(iii) the effect is only reached through a lengthy causal chain such that the effect not reasonably certain to occur;
(iv) the applicable Federal agency does not have the ability to prevent the effect due to its limited statutory authority; or
(v) would occur regardless of whether the action is carried out.
(C) In determining whether an effect of an action described in subparagraph (A)(i) is reasonably certain to occur, the Secretary shall consider factors including the following:
(i) Experiences with other such actions that are similar in scope, nature, and magnitude to the applicable such action.
(ii) Plans for such action.
(iii) Any economic, administrative, or legal requirement necessary for the action to be carried out that has not been fulfilled.
(iv) Whether the effect has been observed previously and to what extent.
(D) In carrying out a consultation under paragraph (2) or a conference under paragraph (4), the Secretary may not consider an effect of the action that is the subject of such consultation or conference for which there is not clear and substantial information for the Secretary to base a determination on under subparagraph (A)(i) that the effect of the action is reasonably certain to occur.
(E) In this paragraph, the terms effect of the action and effects of the action mean a consequence or all consequences, respectively, to listed species or critical habitat that is or are caused by the proposed action.
VI Eliminating barriers to conservation
VII Restoring congressional intent