Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill adds a roughly 163-mile segment of the Hatchie River in Tennessee to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act list for study. The Secretary of the Interior must complete a study within three years after funds are available and report to Congress, identifying partnership opportunities with state, regional, local, and community stakeholders.
Extent of federal involvement versus state/local control
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory addition to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act that designates a defined segment of the Hatchie River for study and requires the Secretary of the Interior to complete the study and report results within 3 years after funds are made available.
This bill adds a roughly 163-mile segment of the Hatchie River in Tennessee to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act list for study.
The Secretary of the Interior must complete a study within three years after funds are available and report to Congress, identifying partnership opportunities with state, regional, local, and community stakeholders.
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, so passage is plausible; success depends on committee action, funding availability, and absence of local opposition.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory addition to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act that designates a defined segment of the Hatchie River for study and requires the Secretary of the Interior to complete the study and report results within 3 years after funds are made available. It integrates neatly into existing law and sets basic accountability via a reporting deadline and identified addressee.
Extent of federal involvement versus state/local control
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Extent of federal involvement versus state/local control
Likely supportive as a measured, evidence-based step toward federal protection for an ecologically important river.
Would view the study as an opportunity to document values and build conservation partnerships, while pushing for timely funding and strong protections if warranted.
Generally favorable to a study as a prudent, incremental approach that gathers facts before imposing federal restrictions.
Will emphasize cost control, clear timeline, and meaningful stakeholder engagement to avoid needless conflict or unfunded mandates.
Likely skeptical or somewhat opposed because federal study status often precedes regulatory restrictions.
Concerned about federal overreach, property-rights impacts, and long-term costs, while possibly accepting locally led conservation without added federal footprint.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, so passage is plausible; success depends on committee action, funding availability, and absence of local opposition.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Extent of federal involvement versus state/local control
Content is narrow and administratively straightforward, so passage is plausible; success depends on committee action, funding availability,…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward statutory addition to the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act that designates a defined segment of the Hatchie River for study and requires the Secretary…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.