The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
S. 2128·119th Congress·Introduced Jun 18, 2025

MONARCH Act of 2025

IntroducedAnimalsSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Sen. Merkley, Jeff [D-OR]
Committees
Environment and Public Works Committee (primary)
Last action
Jun 18, 2025

Bottom line

The MONARCH Act of 2025 seeks to prevent the extinction of western monarch butterflies by providing federal funding for habitat restoration, conservation projects, and the implementation of a comprehensive conservation strategy.

What it actually does

This bill establishes a federal grant program and a dedicated fund to support projects aimed at conserving western monarch butterflies and other pollinators within their range. It also mandates an agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation to update and implement an existing Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan. The bill authorizes $12.5 million annually for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030 for both the grant program and the conservation plan implementation, totaling $125 million over five years.

Proponents argue

Supporters emphasize the urgent need to address the drastic decline of western monarch butterflies, citing their ecological importance as pollinators and the potential for extinction within two decades. They argue that coordinated federal funding for habitat restoration, protection, and community engagement is critical for species survival and broader pollinator health, benefiting agriculture and wildlife ecosystems.

Opponents contend

Potential critics might raise concerns about the allocation of federal funds, suggesting that such conservation efforts could be better handled by state or private initiatives, or that the authorized amounts are either insufficient or excessive compared to other pressing environmental or budgetary priorities. Some may also question the effectiveness of federal intervention in localized ecological issues.

The bill is concise and clearly written, allowing for a quick and thorough understanding of its provisions within the time typically allotted for legislative review.

Section 4

Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Grant Program

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to provide grants from the newly established Western Monarch Butterfly Rescue Fund for projects focused on conserving western monarch butterflies and other pollinators within their habitat range. Eligible entities include local and Tribal government agencies, research institutions, and non-profit organizations with relevant expertise. State and Federal agencies can participate as partners but cannot be lead grant recipients. Project proposals must detail their purpose, implementation methods, anticipated outcomes, and include assurances of consultation with relevant authorities and non-conflict with food safety measures.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupWestern Monarch Butterflies and other pollinatorsImpactDirect conservation and habitat restorationMechanismFunding for targeted projectsScaleRegional (California, Arizona, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Utah)
GroupLocal governments, Tribal governments, research institutions, non-profit organizationsImpactOpportunity to receive federal funding for conservation projectsMechanismGrant programScaleLocal and regional

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this program provides crucial direct funding to local and expert groups best positioned to implement on-the-ground conservation efforts, ensuring that resources are directed efficiently to critical habitats and communities. This approach leverages local knowledge and fosters community engagement.

Critics contend

Critics might suggest that a federal grant program, even with local recipients, could lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies or that local entities might lack the capacity for effective project management without more direct federal oversight and technical support.

Tradeoffs

This provision balances the desire for direct local action and expertise in conservation with the need for federal funding and oversight mechanisms. It aims to empower local stakeholders while ensuring accountability.

Section 5

Western Monarch Butterfly Rescue Fund and Authorization of Appropriations

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section formally establishes the 'Western Monarch Butterfly Rescue Fund' within the U.S. Treasury to serve as the financial vehicle for the grant program and administrative expenses. It authorizes the appropriation of $12,500,000 for deposit into this Fund for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030. These funds are designated to remain available until expended, providing sustained financial support for conservation efforts over a five-year period.

Section 6

Implementation of the Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section directs the Secretary of the Interior to enter into an agreement with the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) to facilitate the updating and implementation of the existing Western Monarch Butterfly Conservation Plan, originally prepared by the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. It also authorizes a separate appropriation of $12,500,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to specifically carry out this agreement with NFWF, providing an additional $62.5 million over five years for this strategic conservation effort.

FOUND

Requires that all project proposals for conservation grants include assurances that the proposed conservation efforts do not conflict with food safety measures or practices.

Section 4(b)(3)(E)

Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice to address potential conflicts with other established practices, ensuring broad applicability and minimizing unintended negative consequences, rather than being evasive. It aims to facilitate cooperation with agricultural stakeholders.

Case for: Proponents argue this clause is essential for ensuring that monarch conservation efforts can proceed without negatively impacting agricultural production or food safety standards, thereby fostering broader acceptance and cooperation from farming communities and reducing potential opposition.

Case against: Critics might argue that this clause could potentially limit the scope or effectiveness of certain habitat restoration projects if strict interpretations of 'food safety measures' are applied, potentially prioritizing agricultural concerns over ecological ones in some instances, especially in areas critical for monarch breeding or migration.

Estimated impact: Ensures agricultural interests are considered in conservation planning, potentially facilitating cooperation and preventing conflicts, but could also subtly influence project design towards less impactful areas if conflicts are perceived.

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.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Buried treasure
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this