Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior (through the US Fish and Wildlife Service Director) to establish an Urban Bird Treaty Program for voluntary conservation of birds and their habitats in urban areas. The program will provide technical and financial assistance, run a competitive grant program administered via an agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and promote habitat restoration, hazard reduction, monitoring, education, and information sharing.
Funding adequacy: liberals want more; conservatives see even small spending skeptically.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a new federal program and funding authority for urban bird conservation, sets out primary duties, identifies the implementing official and a grant-administration partner, and authorizes annual funding for a defined period.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior (through the US Fish and Wildlife Service Director) to establish an Urban Bird Treaty Program for voluntary conservation of birds and their habitats in urban areas.
The program will provide technical and financial assistance, run a competitive grant program administered via an agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and promote habitat restoration, hazard reduction, monitoring, education, and information sharing.
The bill authorizes $1,000,000 annually for fiscal years 2026–2032 and defines eligible and covered entities for participation.
Content is narrow, low cost, and broadly palatable, but it still requires committee action, floor time, and appropriations to be implemented.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a new federal program and funding authority for urban bird conservation, sets out primary duties, identifies the implementing official and a grant-administration partner, and authorizes annual funding for a defined period.
Funding adequacy: liberals want more; conservatives see even small spending skeptically.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Funding adequacy: liberals want more; conservatives see even small spending skeptically.
Likely broadly supportive because the bill promotes habitat restoration, community engagement, and bird conservation in urban areas.
Supporters would view it as enhancing local nature access and public-health co-benefits, while noting funding is modest and disease-mitigation claims are somewhat speculative.
Generally favorable, viewing the bill as a low-cost, voluntary conservation program that supports local projects and public engagement.
Would emphasize clear performance metrics, oversight for the Foundation administration, and avoidance of duplication with existing programs.
Likely cautious or somewhat opposed, due to federal spending, possible federal influence over local land use, and use of a nonprofit foundation to administer grants.
Some conservatives may nevertheless accept it as a modest, voluntary conservation initiative.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow, low cost, and broadly palatable, but it still requires committee action, floor time, and appropriations to be implemented.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Funding adequacy: liberals want more; conservatives see even small spending skeptically.
Content is narrow, low cost, and broadly palatable, but it still requires committee action, floor time, and appropriations to be implemente…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a new federal program and funding authority for urban bird conservation, sets out primary duties, identifies the implementing official and a grant…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.