Overview
Title
To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to reauthorize the feral swine eradication and control pilot program, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
S. 1207 is a plan to keep wild pigs, which can cause problems, from hurting farms and the environment. It gives money to help get rid of these pigs, but people are worried about how the money will be spent fairly and how well it's working.
Summary AI
S. 1207 seeks to amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to continue and enhance efforts to eradicate and control feral swine in the United States. The bill removes "pilot" from the existing program, indicating a transition to a more permanent status, and expands funding to $75 million through fiscal years 2025 to 2030. It defines "eligible areas" as those where feral swine pose a threat and mandates ongoing monitoring after eradication. Additionally, the bill requires reports assessing the program's success and offers recommendations for improvements.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
The bill titled "Feral Swine Eradication Act," introduced as S. 1207, aims to amend existing legislation related to the control and eradication of feral swine. This amendment revises the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 by transitioning the feral swine control initiative from a "pilot" program to a fully recognized program. The bill's primary objective is to identify and manage areas where feral swine threaten agriculture, ecosystems, or health, and it allocates funding and establishes monitoring and reporting requirements for these activities.
General Summary of the Bill
This legislative proposal focuses on enhancing the efforts to control feral swine populations in the United States. The key aspects of the bill involve removing the term "pilot" to signify an ongoing program rather than a temporary or test initiative. It also redefines which areas can receive intervention under this program, termed "eligible areas," and adjusts the allocation of funding. Importantly, the bill includes mandates for regular reporting on the program's effectiveness and impact, providing transparency and framework for continuous assessment.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several notable concerns stem from the bill's contents:
Transition from Pilot to Full Program: The removal of the "pilot" designation implies a long-term commitment, yet the bill does not clearly outline new evaluation metrics or criteria for success, raising questions about financial accountability and justification.
Funding Allocation: The legislative text provides for a $75 million budget from fiscal years 2025 to 2030. However, it lacks specific guidelines or a detailed allocation plan, potentially risking inefficient use or misdirection of funds.
Definition of Eligible Areas: The Secretary of Agriculture holds considerable discretion in designating eligible areas, which could lead to inconsistent application across states, possibly impacting fairness in program implementation.
Funding Split Change: The adjusted funding distribution may advantage particular states or regions, though the criteria for these financial changes remain unspecified, prompting concerns about regional favoritism.
Reporting and Accountability: While the bill requires periodic reporting, it does not address potential consequences or corrective actions if the found outcomes are unfavorable. This lacks a clear mechanism for accountability.
Measurement Methodologies: The absence of clear methodologies for assessing reductions in damage or enhancements to health and safety could lead to ambiguous interpretations of the program's success.
Potential Impact on the Public
The broader public may see positive outcomes if the program successfully mitigates the threats posed by feral swine. These animals are known to cause significant agricultural damage and ecological disruption, hence managing their population could benefit agricultural sectors and preserve natural habitats.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Farmers and Landowners: They stand to benefit the most from reduced agricultural damage and risk posed by feral swine. The program might offer them more substantial support through funding and technical assistance.
Local Ecosystems: By controlling feral swine populations, native ecosystems might be better preserved, enhancing biodiversity and environmental health.
Government and Regulatory Bodies: Agencies like the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service will play crucial roles in the implementation and success of this program.
Regional Interests: States with higher incidences of feral swine could gain more resources and attentiveness, albeit at the potential expense of equity across all states due to the undefined criteria for financial and operational distribution.
Overall, the Feral Swine Eradication Act proposes a continuation and expansion of efforts to manage a significant environmental and agricultural issue but also requires careful consideration of its broader implications and specific operational decisions.
Financial Assessment
The proposed legislation, S. 1207, focuses on transitioning the feral swine eradication and control initiative from a pilot to a permanent program within the United States. This move has several financial implications, which are detailed below:
Financial Overview and Allocation
The bill authorizes funding of $75 million for the program over the fiscal years from 2025 to 2030. This allocation marks a significant commitment to address the challenges posed by feral swine, which are identified as threats to agriculture, native ecosystems, and human or animal health. The legislation, therefore, establishes a strong financial foundation intended to support eradication and control efforts over a five-year period.
Issues Related to Funding
One of the primary concerns highlighted is the lack of detailed justification or allocation strategy for this $75 million funding. Without clear guidelines or an allocation strategy, there is a risk of resource mismanagement or wasteful spending, as noted in Issue 3. This financial commitment reflects a long-term investment in the program, but the absence of specific allocation details may hinder its effective implementation.
Additionally, the bill modifies the funding allocation percentages from a previously equal 50/50 split to a new 40/60 division. This alteration is significant as it could disproportionately benefit certain regions or states over others, raising concerns regarding regional favoritism and transparency in funding decisions, which is outlined in Issue 4. Clear criteria for these decisions would be beneficial to ensure fair and effective distribution of resources across eligible areas.
Financial Accountability and Reporting
While the bill mandates reports assessing the program's successes, it does not specify consequences for any unfavorable findings. This lack of defined accountability suggests ambiguity in monitoring and financial oversight. As reiterated in Issue 5, outlining potential outcomes or adjustments based on these findings could enhance the program's financial and operational accountability.
Furthermore, the methodology for evaluating the reduction in agricultural and natural resource damage and improvements to health and safety remains unspecified. The absence of a clear assessment method, as pointed out in Issue 6, could lead to inconsistent and possibly misleading interpretations of the program's financial utility and overall success.
Conclusion
In summary, while S. 1207 earmarks considerable funds for feral swine control, several financial uncertainties and potential issues of inequity and efficiency in fund allocation may affect its long-term success. Greater transparency and detailed financial strategies would aid in addressing the concerns of equitable distribution, effective use, and accountability within the program's financial framework.
Issues
The amendment transitions the feral swine eradication and control effort from a 'pilot' to a full 'program', potentially increasing long-term financial commitments without fully explained evaluation metrics. (Section 2, Issue 1)
The allocation of $75,000,000 for fiscal years 2025 through 2030 lacks detailed justification or allocation strategy, which could lead to potential wasteful spending. (Section 2, Issue 3)
The definition of 'eligible area' grants significant discretion to the Secretary in determining threats, potentially resulting in inconsistent application across states, which could raise concerns about fairness and favoritism. (Section 2, Issue 2)
The change in funding allocation between subparagraphs (A) and (B) from a 50/50 to a 40/60 split may favor certain regions or states without sufficient transparency on decision criteria, highlighting potential regional favoritism. (Section 2, Issue 4)
The reporting requirements outline periodic reports but do not specify the consequences of unfavorable findings, leading to ambiguity in program accountability and effectiveness assessment. (Section 2, Issue 5)
The methodology for estimating reductions in agricultural and natural resource damage, and improvements to health and safety, is not clearly defined, risking misleading interpretations of program success. (Section 2, Issue 6)
Section 1 consists only of a short title, lacking detailed information on the Act's contents, making it difficult to assess specific issues, such as potential spending concerns or favoritism without additional context. (Section 1, Issue 1)
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the bill provides its short title, allowing it to be officially referred to as the "Feral Swine Eradication Act."
2. Feral swine eradication and control program Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section updates the Feral Swine Eradication and Control Program by removing the word “pilot” from its name, redefining “eligible areas” where the program operates, and adjusting funding and participation requirements. It mandates reports on the program's progress and impact, requiring federal agencies to continue monitoring areas where feral swine have been eradicated.
Money References
- (a) In general.—Section 2408 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (7 U.S.C. 8351 note; Public Law 115–334) is amended— (1) in the section heading, by striking “pilot”; (2) in subsection (a), by striking “pilot program” and inserting “program (referred to in this section as the ‘program’)”; (3) in subsection (b)— (A) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by striking “pilot”; (B) in each of paragraphs (1) and (2), by striking “the pilot areas” and inserting “eligible areas”; (C) in paragraph (4), by striking “pilot” and inserting “eligible”; (D) by redesignating paragraphs (3) and (4) as paragraphs (4) and (5), respectively; and (E) by inserting after paragraph (2) the following: “(3) after the Secretary determines that feral swine have been eradicated from an eligible area, require the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service to continue monitoring the eligible area for the reoccurrence of feral swine for a period of 1 year;”; (4) in each of subsections (c), (e), (f), and (g), by striking “pilot program” each place it appears and inserting “program”; (5) in subsection (c)(1), by striking “the pilot areas” and inserting “eligible areas”; (6) by striking subsection (e) and inserting the following: “(e) Definition of eligible area.—In this section, the term ‘eligible area’ means an area of a State in which feral swine have been identified as a threat to agriculture, native ecosystems, or human or animal health, as determined by the Secretary.”; (7) in subsection (g)— (A) in paragraph (1)— (i) by striking “2023 and” and inserting “2023,”; and (ii) by striking the period at the end and inserting “, and $75,000,000 for the period of fiscal years 2025 through 2030.”; and (B) in paragraph (2)— (i) in subparagraph (A), by striking “50” and inserting “40”; and (ii) in subparagraph (B), by striking “50” and inserting “60”; and (8) by adding at the end the following: “(h) Reports.—Not later than 2 years, and not later than 4 years and 6 months, after the date of enactment of this subsection, the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service, acting jointly, shall submit to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate and the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and make publicly available on the website of the Department of Agriculture a report that— “(1) describes, for the period beginning on the date of the establishment of the program and ending on the date of the submission of the report— “(A) activities carried out under the program, including— “(i) the number of counties in which feral swine are no longer present; and “(ii) estimated reductions in agriculture and natural resource damage, and improvements to human and livestock health and safety, as a result of feral swine removal; “(B) the use of funding made available under this section, including the number of counties in each State provided funding; and “(C) the roles of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Natural Resources Conservation Service and agricultural producers provided financial assistance under this section in carrying out activities under the program; and “(2) includes— “(A) a determination by the Administrator of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and the Chief of the Natural Resources Conservation Service as to the extent to which the program has been successful; and “(B) any recommendations for improvements to the program.”. (b) Conforming amendment.—The table of contents for the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (Public Law 115–334; 132 Stat. 4491) is amended by striking the item relating to section 2408 and inserting the following: “Sec. 2408.