Imagine a fish so small yet so significant that its protection could influence water supplies for millions of people. H.J.RES.78 is a bill that aims to remove federal protections for the longfin smelt, a tiny fish in California's Bay-Delta, by overturning its endangered species status. This decision could have big implications for water use, agriculture, and the environment in California.
What This Bill Does
H.J.RES.78 is a resolution that seeks to cancel a rule by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This rule currently lists the longfin smelt, a fish found in the San Francisco Bay-Delta, as an endangered species. If the bill passes, the longfin smelt would lose its federal protections under the Endangered Species Act. This means that there would be no federal restrictions on activities like water projects or land development that could harm the fish.
The bill uses a special legislative tool called the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to nullify the rule. This tool allows Congress to overturn recent federal regulations with a simple majority vote. If successful, the Fish and Wildlife Service would not be able to issue a similar rule in the future unless Congress passes new legislation allowing it.
Without federal protections, there would be no requirement for federal agencies to consult on actions that might harm the longfin smelt. This could lead to more water being available for agriculture and urban areas in California, as restrictions meant to protect the fish would be lifted.
Why It Matters
The outcome of this bill could have a significant impact on water availability in California. Farmers in the Central Valley, who rely on water from the Bay-Delta for irrigation, could see fewer restrictions, potentially boosting agricultural production. Urban water users in Southern California and the Bay Area might also benefit from more reliable water supplies.
However, removing protections for the longfin smelt could harm the Bay-Delta ecosystem. The longfin smelt is considered an indicator species, meaning its health reflects the overall health of the ecosystem. If the fish population declines further, it could signal broader ecological problems, affecting other native fish and wildlife.
The decision also raises questions about the balance between federal environmental protection and local economic needs. It could set a precedent for how endangered species are protected when economic interests are at stake.
Key Facts
- Cost/Budget Impact: No Congressional Budget Office score is available, but CRA resolutions typically have minimal direct budget impact.
- Timeline for Implementation: If passed, the FWS rule would be immediately nullified, removing federal protections at once.
- Number of People Affected: The Central Valley Project and State Water Project supply water to over 25 million people and 3 million acres of farmland.
- Key Dates: Passed the House on May 1, 2025; received in the Senate on May 5, 2025.
- Other Important Details: The longfin smelt population has declined by over 99% since the 1980s. California already lists the longfin smelt as threatened, so some protections would remain at the state level.
Arguments in Support
- Water Supply and Agriculture Protection: Supporters argue that delisting the longfin smelt would help maintain water reliability for millions of Californians and protect the state's agriculture industry from water restrictions.
- Economic Impact Mitigation: Removing the listing could prevent costly regulatory requirements, reducing compliance costs for water agencies, farmers, and developers.
- Questioning Scientific Basis: Some believe the decision to list the longfin smelt as endangered is based on insufficient science, suggesting other factors like water quality or climate change are to blame for population declines.
- Regulatory Overreach and Local Control: Supporters see the federal listing as unnecessary, arguing that state and local agencies can manage the species effectively.
- Precedent and Predictability: They warn that the listing could lead to further ESA listings in the Bay-Delta, potentially causing more water restrictions.
Arguments in Opposition
- Biodiversity and Ecosystem Health: Opponents argue that removing protections could accelerate the decline of the longfin smelt and harm the Bay-Delta ecosystem.
- Legal and Conservation Obligations: The Endangered Species Act is a key conservation law, and overturning science-based listings undermines its integrity.
- Long-Term Economic and Social Costs: Healthy ecosystems provide essential services, and short-term economic gains from delisting could be outweighed by long-term losses.
- Ignoring Scientific Consensus: The listing was based on peer-reviewed science documenting dramatic population declines, and overturning it disregards expert recommendations.
- Precedent for Political Interference: Using the CRA to overturn species listings could politicize endangered species decisions, making them vulnerable to lobbying.