PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 237.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jun 29, 2017
Hunting Heritage and Environmental Legacy Preservation for Wildlife Act or the HELP for Wildlife Act
This bill revises a variety of existing programs to expand access to, and opportunities for, hunting, fishing, and recreational shooting.
The bill reauthorizes through FY2022 the North American Wetlands Conservation Act, the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation Establishment Act, the Neotropical Migratory Bird Conservation Act, and the Chesapeake Bay Program. It also reauthorizes through FY2023 the Chesapeake Bay Gateways and Watertrails Network and the Chesapeake Bay Gateways Grants Assistance Program.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The proportion of funding from the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act that states may use for public target ranges is increased.
The bill revises standards for determining what a baited area is for purposes of the prohibition on taking migratory game birds.
The Department of the Interior must reissue two rules that removed protections under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 for the gray wolf populations located in the western Great Lakes (all of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Minnesota, as well as portions of North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio) and Wyoming. Interior's prior rules that removed the protections were overruled by district courts.
Components of firearms and ammunition and sport fishing equipment and its components (such as lead sinkers) are exempted from regulations of chemical substances under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
The National Fish Habitat Board is established to: (1) promote, oversee, and coordinate the implementation of the National Fish Habitat Action Plan; (2) establish national goals and priorities for fish habitat conservation; (3) recommend the designation of Fish Habitat Partnerships; and (4) review and make recommendations regarding fish habitat conservation projects.
People & committees
Sen. Barrasso, John [R-WY] · R–WY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 237.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Barrasso with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-168. Additional and Minority views filed.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Reported by Senator Barrasso with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 115-168. Additional and Minority views filed.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Ordered to be reported with amendments favorably.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 115-77.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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 S.1514 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 S.1514 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 S.1514 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 S.1514 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.