Bill · S. 2701· Senate(119-S-2701)
Headwaters Protection Act of 2025
- Introduced
- 9/3/2025
- Last activity
- 9/3/2025 — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- Sponsored by
- Michael Bennet
- Cosponsors
- - 2 - 2
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Headwaters Protection Act of 2205 seeks to amend the Healthy Forests Restoration Act of 2003. It focuses on reauthorizing and improving the Water Source Protection Program. The bill expands the types of entities involved in the program and broadens the scope of project requirements. It provides new priorities for projects, such as managing risks from wildfires, droughts, and flooding. Additionally, the bill establishes rules for working on adjacent non-Federal lands. Finally, it updates funding levels and authorization periods for various watershed activities.
Yes· 3 of 10
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?+7
The bill prioritizes watershed health, wildfire risk reduction, and nature-based solutions like wetland and riparian restoration.
Would farmers be better off under this?+4
The bill prioritizes protecting and restoring agricultural water supply systems and managing risks like drought and flooding.
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?+4
The bill enhances the protection of water infrastructure and supplies that are critical to rural life and economy.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Expanded Entity Participation: The bill adds several groups to the program, including acequia associations, land-sgrant mercedes, and entities managing stormwater or water infrastructure (Section 2, subsection (a)). This allows more community-based and local water organizations to be involved in water protection.
-
Enhanced Risk Management: The Secretary is directed to prioritize projects that provide benefits regarding drought, wildfire, extreme weather, and flooding (Section 2, subsection (b)(3)(A)). This could help protect municipal and agricultural water supply systems.
-
Support for Disadvantaged Communities: Priority is given to projects involving partners with a strong likelihood of success in disadvantaged communities that have historically lacked access to adequate resources (Section 2, subsection (b)(3)(C)(ii)).
-
Environmental Resilience: Projects are encouraged to use nature-based solutions, such as restoring wetland and riparian ecosystems, to improve resilience to climate change and fire (Section 2, subsection (b)(3)(D)).
-
Increased Funding for Partnerships: The bill increases funding for specific years and mandates that at least 10 percent of certain funds be used for non-Federal partner technical assistance and capacity-building (Section 2, subsection (g)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Land Management Restrictions: While the bill states it does not change ownership, it does specify that no project can be carried out on adjacent land unless the owner is a willing and engaged partner (Section 2, subsection (b)(4)(A)). This establishes a specific requirement for participation for any activity involving non-Federal land.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Environmental Protections+7Improves Rural Development+3Reduces Carbon Emissions+2
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Farmers+4Good For Rural Residents+4Good For Low Income Households+2Good For Hispanic Americans+1
- Economy And Finance
- Increases Job Creation+2Improves Fiscal Responsibility+1
- Social Issues And Justice
- Improves Poverty Reduction+1
- 9/3/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Mike CrapoRepublican · Idaho
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Ben LujánDemocrat · New Mexico
James RischRepublican · Idaho