S. 365 (119th)Bill Overview

Bolts Ditch Act

Public Lands and Natural Resources|ColoradoLakes and rivers
Cosponsors
Support
Democratic
Introduced
Feb 3, 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
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill amends section 1101(a) of the John D. Dingell, Jr.

Why people may split

Environmental oversight versus expedited local maintenance

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies the provision to be changed and the entities to be added, but it omits implementation details (effective date, procedural requirements), funding considerations, safeguards, and accountability measures.

This bill amends section 1101(a) of the John D.

Dingell, Jr.

Conservation, Management, and Recreation Act to explicitly allow the Eagle River Water and Sanitation District and the Upper Eagle Regional Water Authority to carry out maintenance work on Bolts Ditch and the Bolts Ditch Headgate within Colorado’s Holy Cross Wilderness.

Passage75/100

Very narrow, low-cost technical fix with limited controversy; main obstacles are procedural holds or local environmental objections.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies the provision to be changed and the entities to be added, but it omits implementation details (effective date, procedural requirements), funding considerations, safeguards, and accountability measures.

Contention35/100

Environmental oversight versus expedited local maintenance

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governmentsFederal agencies · Local governments

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsAuthorizes local water agencies to perform maintenance, likely improving responsiveness to urgent repairs.
  • Potential benefitMay increase water supply reliability for downstream users by enabling timely ditch and headgate upkeep.
  • Local governmentsAllows agencies with local expertise to carry out specialized maintenance, potentially lowering contractor costs.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesPermitting non-federal maintenance in wilderness areas may increase risks to wilderness character and habitat.
  • Federal agenciesSets precedent for expanded non-federal activities in protected lands, potentially eroding protections over time.
  • Local governmentsCould create regulatory complexity over oversight, permits, and compliance between federal and local authorities.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Environmental oversight versus expedited local maintenance
Progressive65%

Views the bill as a narrowly focused operational change.

Will cautiously welcome locally‑provided maintenance if environmental safeguards and public oversight are preserved.

Split reaction
Centrist80%

Sees the bill as pragmatic and narrowly targeted to allow capable local entities to address infrastructure needs.

Prefers clear oversight and cost/ liability clarity but generally supportive.

Leans supportive
Conservative90%

Likely favorable as a limited, local‑control measure that reduces federal bottlenecks.

Regards empowering regional water authorities as efficient and appropriate.

Leans supportive
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 likelihood75/100

Very narrow, low-cost technical fix with limited controversy; main obstacles are procedural holds or local environmental objections.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Absence of cost estimate or federal agency implementation guidance
  • Potential opposition from wilderness/environmental advocates
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

Environmental oversight versus expedited local maintenance

Very narrow, low-cost technical fix with limited controversy; main obstacles are procedural holds or local environmental objections.

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a narrowly focused statutory amendment that clearly identifies the provision to be changed and the entities to be added, but it omits implementation details (effec…

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