S. 1187 (119th)Bill Overview

Deerfield River Wild and Scenic River Study Act of 2025

Public Lands and Natural Resources|Public Lands and Natural Resources
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Mar 27, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief

This bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to study the Deerfield River (including its North, South, East, and West branches and named tributaries) for potential addition to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

The study must be completed and a report submitted to relevant congressional committees within three years after funds are provided.

The bill amends Section 5 of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to add the Deerfield River to the list of rivers authorized for study.

Passage55/100

Narrow, low-cost study bills often pass as stand-alone or in public-lands packages, but enactment depends on appropriations and any local opposition.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory directive to study the Deerfield River and report to Congress, effectively integrated into the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act but light on execution detail.

Contention55/100

Liberals emphasize conservation and federal support benefits

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Who this appears to help vs burden50% / 50%
Federal agencies · Local governmentsLocal governments · Federal agencies
Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesCould identify protections that conserve river scenery, habitat, and water quality from federal actions.
  • Local governmentsMay improve federal, state, and local coordination for river management and conservation planning.
  • Local governmentsStudy findings could support increased recreation and tourism, potentially creating local jobs and business activity.
Likely burdened
  • Targeted stakeholdersMay create regulatory uncertainty for hydropower operators and water infrastructure during and after study.
  • Local governmentsLocal landowners and municipalities could face perceived or actual constraints on development and water use.
  • Federal agenciesThe federal government would incur costs to conduct the study and to implement any subsequent protections.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals emphasize conservation and federal support benefits
Progressive90%

Likely broadly supportive: sees the study as a necessary first step toward protecting an important river corridor and biodiversity.

Views federal study as enabling stronger, science-based conservation and funding opportunities for restoration and recreation access.

Leans supportive
Centrist75%

Generally favorable but pragmatic: supports an evidence-based study to clarify costs, benefits, and impacts before committing to designation.

Wants clear funding, stakeholder input, and attention to economic and infrastructure implications.

Leans supportive
Conservative35%

Cautious to opposed: views a federally directed study as the first step toward federal restrictions on land and water use.

Might accept a narrowly scoped, fully funded study that preserves local control and property rights.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood55/100

Narrow, low-cost study bills often pass as stand-alone or in public-lands packages, but enactment depends on appropriations and any local opposition.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Whether appropriations will be provided to start the study
  • Local stakeholder opposition (landowners, utilities, recreation interests)
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals emphasize conservation and federal support benefits

Narrow, low-cost study bills often pass as stand-alone or in public-lands packages, but enactment depends on appropriations and any local o…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise statutory directive to study the Deerfield River and report to Congress, effectively integrated into the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act but light on executio…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis