PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 23, 2015
Pacific Northwest Gray Wolf Management Act of 2015
This bill prohibits any wolf species, subspecies, or population segment of Canis lupus in Washington, Oregon, and Utah (covered states) from being treated under any status of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, including as an endangered species, a threatened species, an essential experimental population, or a nonessential experimental population.
The covered states shall have exclusive jurisdiction over the management of wolves within their borders.
A covered state may not provide protections to wolves that are greater than the protections that would be provided under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
People & committees
Rep. Newhouse, Dan [R-WA-4] · R–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E581)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1985 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1985 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1985 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1985 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.