Tammy Baldwin (D-WI)
Northern Great Lakes Wolf Recovery Act
A Democratic bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is known as the Northern Great Lakes Wolf Recovery Act. It requires the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to update the Post-delisting Monitoring Plan for the gray wolf in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The bill also establishes a Northern Great Lakes Region Gray Wolf Advisory Committee to consult on the monitoring plan. Once the monitoring plan is updated, the Secretary of the Interior is required to issue a rule delisting the gray wolf population in this region under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. Finally, the bill expands the gray wolf population described in the 1978 rule for Minnesota to include the entire Northern Great Lakes Region.
Yes· 3 of 7
- Scored +4
Would farmers be better off under this?
Delisting the gray wolf allows state authorities greater flexibility in managing wolf predation on livestock, benefiting agricultural producers in the region.
- Scored +4
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The legislation shifts management authority and consultation roles regarding gray wolves to state agencies and local advisory committees within the Northern Great Lakes Region.
- Scored +3
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
The bill includes representatives of federally recognized Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations on the Northern Great Lakes Region Gray Wolf Advisory Committee.
The opposite
- Scored -5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The bill mandates the delisting of the gray wolf in the Northern Great Lakes Region under the Endangered Species Act, which reduces federal protections for the species.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Section 4: This section establishes the Northern Great Lakes Region Gray Wolf Advisory Committee, which includes representatives of federally recognized Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations, state agency heads nominated by governors, and individuals with expertise on wolf biology, management, and predation. This provision is positive because it brings diverse local and expert voices into the consultation process for updating the monitoring plan and issuing the delisting rule.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Section 3(c): This section requires the Secretary to issue a rule delisting the gray wolf population within the Northern Great Lakes Region under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 after the monitoring plan is updated. For individuals or groups who rely on the federal protections of the Endangered Species Act to safeguard the gray wolf population in Minnesota, Wisconsin, and the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, removing these specific federal protections could be viewed as a negative outcome.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would farmers be better off under this? — Delisting the gray wolf allows state authorities greater flexibility in managing wolf predation on livestock, benefiting agricultural producers in the region. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — The bill includes representatives of federally recognized Indian Tribes and Tribal organizations on the Northern Great Lakes Region Gray Wolf Advisory Committee. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents gain formal representation through state agency heads and local experts on the advisory committee overseeing wolf recovery and management.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The legislation shifts management authority and consultation roles regarding gray wolves to state agencies and local advisory committees within the Northern Great Lakes Region.
- Education And Technology
- Does this put more money into scientific research? — The bill requires updating the post-delisting monitoring plan using biological and predation expertise, supporting ongoing scientific oversight of the wolf population.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The legislation establishes an advisory committee to coordinate science-based monitoring and management of gray wolf populations across state and federal lands. Does this invest in rural communities? — By involving state agencies and agricultural inspection services in management decisions, the bill supports rural and agricultural interests dealing with wildlife management. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The bill mandates the delisting of the gray wolf in the Northern Great Lakes Region under the Endangered Species Act, which reduces federal protections for the species.
- 9/24/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Amy KlobucharDemocrat · Minnesota