House Set to Vote on Misleading Bill Blocking Regulation of Lead Ammunition on Federal Lands

The United States House of Representatives is expected this Wednesday to vote on H.R. 556 – Protecting Access for Hunters and Anglers Act of 2025. This damaging legislation would strip the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture of their authority to regulate lead ammunition and lead fishing tackle on many federal lands and waters, impeding efforts to create healthier conditions that protect wildlife and hunters and anglers alike from consuming lead-poisoned fish and game.  

“Non-lead ammunition alternatives are widely available and have been used for decades in many state hunting programs,” said Mary Beth Beetham, director of legislative affairs at Defenders of Wildlife. “The title of this bill suggests that access to federal lands for hunters and anglers is under threat — it is not — and there is no legitimate reason to assume that lead regulation on federal lands would negatively impact sportspeople.”

Beyond harming hunters and anglers, lead ammunition and tackle pose an ongoing threat to dozens of species, including the endangered California condor, for which ingestion of spent lead ammunition is a leading cause of death.  

The bill includes a narrow exception allowing lead regulations only if federal agencies can prove that lead from ammunition or fishing tackle is the primary cause of wildlife population declines on a specific unit of land. Regulations could then move forward only if the state's fish and wildlife agency approves.  

“This exemption sets a nearly impossible standard. Monitoring data is rarely available at this level of management, and ongoing reductions in staffing and funding would make this requirement even more challenging to meet,” said Taylor Rush, government relations representative at Defenders of Wildlife. “Whether lead or any other individual factor is the primary cause of a population decline tells us very little about the amount of impact lead is having on a species, and this is particularly true when a species is endangered or threatened.”

Defenders strongly urges Members of the House to vote NO on H.R. 556 and to consider the policy’s potential to increase poisoning risks for both people and wildlife.  

###