Who it affects
- U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Stalled in the SenateOverturns a ruleEnvironment
Barred owl management rule repeal
S.J.Res. 69 · Resolution · Introduced July 24, 2025
This bill would cancel the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s barred owl management rule for Washington, Oregon, and California.
At a glance
Where it stands
A Senate vote to start debate failed 25 to 72 on Oct. 29.
How South Carolina voted
Lobbying and money
8 groups lobbied on it: advocacy group or nonprofit.
Top link: Ridgeline Advocacy Group lobbied on it and gave $0 via PACs; $2,000 via lobbyists; $0 via employees to 1 SC members.
See who gave to whom ↓What it would do
- The bill would cancel the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s rule on its barred owl management strategy.
- The rule covers Washington, Oregon, and California.
- The agency issued the rule on September 6, 2024.
Written with AI from the official bill text, because no CRS summary is available. Read the bill text ↗
How South Carolina voted
Senate vote
Vote to start debate
Oct. 29, 2025 · Rejected 25 to 72
- Republicans
- 22 yes
- 29 no
- Democrats
- 2 yes
- 42 no
- Independents
- 1 yes
- 1 no
Groups that lobbied on it and gave to SC's members
PAC, lobbyist campaign and qualifying employee money this election, shown separately and never added together. Lobbying reports name the bills a group worked on, not which side it took.
| Group | What it is | Gave SC members | Members |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ridgeline Advocacy Group | Lobbying firm | Lobbyists: $2,000 | 1 |
| Animal Wellness Action | Advocacy group or nonprofit | PAC: $1,000 | 1 |
See all groups, by member
Members without a final recorded vote are grayed out and excluded from totals. Events and honors are not campaign money and aren't included. Matches use exact organization names.
| Organization | Darline GrahamNo vote | Lindsey GrahamNo | Tim ScottYes | Jim ClyburnNo vote | Joe WilsonNo vote | Nancy MaceNo vote | Ralph NormanNo vote | Russell FryNo vote | Sheri BiggsNo vote | William TimmonsNo vote | Members |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ridgeline Advocacy Group | – | Lobbyists: $2,000 | – | – | – | – | – | – | – | Lobbyists: $6,500 | 1 |
| Animal Wellness Action | – | PAC: $1,000 | – | – | – | PAC: $2,000 Lobbyists: $1,000 | – | – | – | – | 1 |
Official record
Official title, sponsor and status
- Official title
- A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service relating to "Record of Decision for the Barred Owl Management Strategy; Washington, Oregon, and California".
- Sponsor
- Sen. Kennedy, John (R-LA)
- Introduced
- July 24, 2025
- Cosponsors
- 5
- Committees
- Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
- Latest action
- Oct. 29, 2025 · Motion to proceed to consideration of measure rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 25 - 72. Record Vote Number: 597.
Official summary from the Congressional Research Service
Congress hasn't published an official summary.
Summary on Congress.gov ↗Everyone who lobbied on this bill (8 groups)
19 reports. Fees cover each report's whole lobbying effort, not just this bill.
Businesses and trade groups (0)
None.
Labor unions (0)
None.
Advocacy groups and nonprofits (8)
- Humane World Action Fund ↗4 reports
- Center for Biological Diversity ↗6 reports
- Defenders of Wildlife ↗2 reports
- National Parks Conservation Association ↗1 report
- Earthjustice Action ↗1 report
- Public Citizen ↗1 report
- Animal Wellness Action ↗3 reports
- Humane America Animal Foundation ↗1 report
Not classified (0)
None.
Lobbying firms (8)
- Humane World Action Fund and Affiliates (Formerly Known As Humane Society Legislative Fund) ↗Lobbying firms · 4 reports
- Center for Biological Diversity ↗6 reports
- Defenders of Wildlife ↗2 reports
- National Parks Conservation Association ↗1 report
- Earthjustice Action ↗1 report
- Public Citizen ↗1 report
- Ridgeline Advocacy Group ↗Lobbying firms · 3 reports
- Thegroup Dc, Llc ↗Lobbying firms · 1 report
We sorted these groups by name and industry. The labels are ours, not legal categories.