3 versions

CosmeticWhat changed in REFERRED IN HOUSEcompared with ENGROSSED IN SENATE (Jun 11, 2026)

Technical corrections only. The two versions of S. 1377 are substantively identical, with the only changes reflecting the bill's procedural status update from being engrossed in the Senate to being referred in the House, including an updated attestation signature. No substantive policy changes were made between v2 and v3.

S. 1377119th CongressIntroduced Apr 9, 2025

Theodore Roosevelt National Park Wild Horses Protection Act

Passed SenatePublic Lands and Natural ResourcesSubstantive

View bill text

Sponsor: Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND]
Committees: Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
Last action: Sep 10, 2026

This analysis was written for v2 (ENGROSSED IN SENATE, Jun 11, 2026). REFERRED IN HOUSE changed too little to need its own, so it reuses that one rather than a rewrite. The differences between the two are summarized above. View v2

Bottom line

The bill legally enshrines the presence of a minimum population of wild horses in Theodore Roosevelt National Park and directs their management.

What it actually does

This bill mandates the Secretary of the Interior to maintain a genetically diverse herd of at least 150 horses in the South Unit of Theodore Roosevelt National Park. It requires a management plan within 120 days to ensure cost-effective management without adversely impacting natural resources. The bill also restricts horse removal to specific circumstances, such as maintaining genetic diversity, emergencies, or public health and safety, and mandates annual monitoring and public reporting.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue this bill protects a historically significant and iconic herd of wild horses, preserving a unique aspect of the park's cultural and natural heritage for future generations. They contend it provides a clear mandate for the National Park Service to manage these animals responsibly, ensuring their genetic health and preventing their complete removal, which would be a loss to the park's character.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that mandating a specific population number for a non-native species could interfere with the National Park Service's ecological management principles, potentially leading to overgrazing or adverse impacts on native flora and fauna. They may contend that such a mandate could divert resources from other critical park management needs and that the decision on herd size should be left to scientific ecological assessment rather than legislative decree.

The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for a quick review.

Section 2, amending 16 U.S.C. 245

Mandated Maintenance of Wild Horse Herd in Theodore Roosevelt National Park

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision requires the Secretary of the Interior to keep a herd of at least 150 genetically diverse horses in the South Unit of Theodore Roosevelt National Park. It also directs the Secretary to create a management plan within 120 days that ensures cost-effective management and protects natural resources. Horses can only be removed if it's part of the genetic diversity plan, an emergency, or for public safety. The Secretary must also monitor and report on the herd annually.

GroupImpactMechanismScale

GroupNational Park ServiceImpactMandated management responsibility, resource allocation.MechanismDirect legislative order to maintain a specific population and develop a plan.ScaleOperational impact on park management, potentially affecting budget and staffing for horse management.

GroupWild Horse Advocates/EnthusiastsImpactAssurance of horse presence and protection.MechanismLegal guarantee of a minimum herd size and management.ScaleSignificant positive impact for those who value the horses' presence.

GroupTheodore Roosevelt National Park EcosystemImpactPotential ecological impact from maintaining a non-native species at a mandated population level.MechanismGrazing, habitat alteration, competition with native species.ScaleLocalized ecological effects within the South Unit.

GroupTaxpayersImpactFunding for horse management.MechanismFederal appropriations for the National Park Service.ScaleModest, ongoing operational costs.

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this provision ensures the preservation of a unique and historically significant wild horse population within the park, which contributes to the park's distinct character and visitor experience. They believe it provides necessary protection against potential future decisions to remove the herd entirely, while still allowing for responsible management.

Critics contend

Critics might contend that this provision overrides the scientific judgment of park managers by legislating a specific population number for a non-native species. They could argue that such a mandate might lead to ecological imbalances, strain park resources, and set a precedent for political interference in wildlife management decisions that should be based on ecological science.

Tradeoffs

The bill balances the desire to preserve an iconic, historically present wild horse population with the ecological principles of managing a national park, which typically prioritizes native species and natural processes. It also creates a tension between legislative mandates and the professional discretion of park scientists and managers.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.