Sponsors (6)
Want the plain-English version? I'll explain what this bill does.
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Expands an existing feral swine pilot into a broader federal feral swine eradication and control program run by APHIS and NRCS, sets which areas are eligible for program activities, and requires one year of post‑eradication monitoring after control activities. It also requires public reports at two years and at four years and six months describing activities, county-level outcomes, funding use, program success, and recommendations. The amendment increases program oversight and transparency by mandating joint agency reporting and monitoring timelines intended to measure results and guide future actions to reduce feral swine impacts on agriculture, natural resources, and communities.
Amends Section 2408 of the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (7 U.S.C. 8351) to change language throughout the section (e.g., replacing references to “pilot areas” with “eligible areas” and replacing “pilot” with “program”).
In paragraphs (1) and (2) and elsewhere, strikes the phrase “the pilot areas” and inserts the phrase “eligible areas,” and in multiple places replaces the word “pilot” with “program.”
After the Secretary determines that feral swine have been eradicated from an eligible area, requires APHIS and NRCS to continue monitoring that eligible area for reoccurrence of feral swine for a period of 1 year.
Adds a definition of “eligible area” to mean 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.
Makes specific textual edits in subsection (g), including striking “2023 and” and inserting “2023,” in paragraph (1) and further edits in paragraph (2) subparagraphs (text shown in the amendment).
Who is affected and how:
Farmers, ranchers, and owners/operators of commercial farms: Likely to benefit if the program reduces crop, pasture, and livestock losses caused by feral swine and improves disease risk management (e.g., Brucella, pseudorabies). They may also be called on to cooperate with programs on their land.
Agricultural communities and rural local governments: Localities with eligible areas can see reduced damage and costs over time, but may need to coordinate with federal agencies during implementation and monitoring.
Federal agencies (APHIS and NRCS): Will assume expanded program responsibilities, including planning, implementation, monitoring, and producing the required public reports. That raises administrative workload and requires coordination across program offices.
Wildlife and natural resources: Eradication/control efforts could reduce feral swine impacts on native habitats, ground‑nesting species, and water quality; methods used may also have ecological side effects that agencies should evaluate.
Private rural landowners and tribal lands (if eligible): May be directly affected by control operations on or near their properties; tribal lands could be included if they meet eligibility rules.
Public transparency and local stakeholders: Communities and stakeholders will have access to periodic public reports summarizing outcomes and funding use, improving information for decisionmaking.
Potential tradeoffs and considerations:
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Introduced March 31, 2025 by John Cornyn · Last progress March 31, 2025
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Introduced in Senate