SB 1823, the Black Vulture Relief Act of 2025, would create a specific federal authorization allowing livestock producers and their employees, when actively engaged in livestock production, to take black vultures that are causing or are reasonably believed to cause death, injury, or destruction to livestock. The bill defines “take” broadly to include capturing, killing, dispersing, or transporting a black vulture carcass, but it expressly prohibits the use of poison.
The measure would operate notwithstanding the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, carving out an exception from existing federal bird-protection rules for black vultures in the livestock context. It also directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to develop a reporting form within 180 days of enactment and requires covered persons who take black vultures to submit annual reports to the appropriate regional office, once the form is available. The reporting requirement is intended to document use of the authorization while keeping the process no more burdensome than comparable permitted-take forms under current law.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would amend the practical application of federal wildlife protections by creating a livestock-specific exception to the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for black vultures. It would give livestock producers and qualifying employees a clearer legal pathway to respond to black vulture threats without risking liability under federal bird-protection statutes, while also imposing a modest federal reporting obligation administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The bill would primarily affect livestock producers, ranchers, and wildlife regulators, and it would likely reduce legal uncertainty around lethal or nonlethal control of black vultures in agricultural settings.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have a generally supportive, pro-agriculture sentiment based on its sponsorship by a group of senators and its straightforward protective framing for livestock producers. There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so there is no evidence of formal opposition in the record here. The bill’s structure suggests an effort to balance producer concerns with wildlife oversight by allowing take only under specified circumstances and by banning poison.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be the tension between livestock protection and migratory bird conservation. Supporters are likely to emphasize losses to calves, lambs, and other livestock and the need for immediate defensive action, while critics may worry that the bill weakens protections for a federally protected bird species and could encourage broader killing beyond truly necessary cases. Another possible issue is implementation: the bill relies on a future Fish and Wildlife Service reporting form, and some stakeholders may question whether the reporting requirement is sufficient to monitor use of the exemption.