US Federal House Bill HB4180

US Federal 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/26/25
• Refer: 6/26/25

Caption

Canyon’s Law

Summary

HB4180, titled Canyon’s Law, would prohibit the use of M–44 devices on public land. M–44s are spring-loaded predator-control devices that eject sodium cyanide when triggered by an animal and are commonly referred to as “cyanide bombs.” The bill defines public land broadly to include federal lands managed by agencies such as the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, and Forest Service. The bill also requires any federal, state, or county agency that has placed an M–44 on public land to remove those devices within 30 days of enactment. Its findings section lays out Congress’s rationale, emphasizing the toxicity of sodium cyanide, the risk to people, pets, and wildlife, and documented incidents involving children, family dogs, and endangered species. The bill is framed as a public safety and wildlife-protection measure rather than a broader pesticide regulation bill.

Impact

If enacted, the bill would bar the deployment of M–44 devices on federal public lands and require prompt removal of existing devices from those lands. It would directly affect federal land management agencies and also reach state and county agencies to the extent they have installed such devices on public land. The measure would not repeal the federal registration of sodium cyanide under FIFRA, but it would create a new statutory prohibition on a specific use of that pesticide delivery device in public-land settings.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have a strongly protective and safety-oriented tone, with its findings emphasizing harm to children, pets, non-target wildlife, and endangered species. The sponsors are all Democrats, and the bill’s framing suggests support from animal welfare, conservation, and public health advocates. No committee debate or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded bipartisan support or opposition in the available materials.

Contention

The main point of contention is likely the tradeoff between predator control for livestock protection and the risks posed by M–44 devices to people, pets, and non-target wildlife. Supporters of the bill argue that the devices are indiscriminate and dangerous, while opponents may view them as a necessary tool for ranchers and land managers dealing with coyotes, foxes, and wild dogs. The bill’s reach onto public lands and its requirement that agencies remove existing devices could also draw concern from land management and agricultural interests.