This bill requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to enter an interagency agreement within 180 days to coordinate prevention, surveillance, control, and eradication of New World screwworm in wildlife and non-livestock species on certain federally managed lands. The partnership must develop joint monitoring protocols, coordinate outbreak responses with State wildlife and livestock health officers, establish eradication protocols aimed at protecting wildlife while reducing risk to domestic animal agriculture, and create science- and risk-based measures to allow continuity of business for non-infected animals and unaffected areas.
The measure also mandates annual reporting to four congressional committees until the Secretary of Agriculture certifies that screwworm is quarantined south of the Darién Gap in Panama. For stakeholders — from federal land managers to ranchers who graze adjacent lands — the bill centralizes coordination around an animal-health threat that can quickly spill from wildlife into domestic herds and the food supply.
It sets procedural requirements but leaves financing, operational detail, and specific control tools to agencies to work out in the implementing agreement.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill obligates USDA and Interior to execute a memorandum of understanding within 180 days to coordinate joint surveillance, outbreak response, eradication protocols, and business-continuity systems for New World screwworm on specified Federal lands. It also requires an annual joint report to four congressional committees until a specified international quarantine condition is met.
Who It Affects
Affected parties include managers of National Parks, National Forests, BLM, Bureau of Reclamation and FWS lands; State animal health officials; livestock producers who graze near federal lands; and federal field staff tasked with surveillance and response activities.
Why It Matters
The bill aligns multiple land-management agencies behind animal-disease surveillance and response on public lands—territory where wildlife can act as a reservoir for pests that threaten domestic herds and the food supply. For compliance officers and land managers, it creates new cross-agency obligations and reporting duties that will change operational priorities and resource needs.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The SAFE CATTLE Act creates a formal, time-bound obligation for the Department of Agriculture and the Department of the Interior to work together on New World screwworm — an insect pest that infests warm-blooded animals and can move between wildlife and domestic stock. Within six months of enactment the two Secretaries must sign an MOU or similar agreement spelling out how they will coordinate to detect, contain, and remove infestations that appear on Federal lands managed by five named agencies.
The bill directs the parties to build shared surveillance and monitoring protocols so field detections on one agency’s lands feed into a common response posture. It explicitly requires mechanisms to coordinate with State wildlife and livestock health officers during outbreaks, including notification procedures, information sharing, and joint containment actions.
Agencies must also agree on eradication protocols designed to limit spread to domestic agriculture while accounting for wildlife populations on public lands.Beyond response tactics, the MOU must include science- and risk-based systems intended to preserve business operations where possible — for example, by identifying non-contaminated zones or establishing criteria for moving non-infected animals and products. These practical continuity measures are framed as separate from eradication tools; the bill leaves the technical content to agency experts but imposes the obligation to develop them.Finally, the bill creates a reporting cycle: Agriculture and Interior must file a joint annual report to two House and two Senate committees about coordination efforts, surveillance progress, any incidents, and recommended further legislative or administrative steps.
That reporting continues until USDA certifies that the species is quarantined south of the Darién Gap, an international disease-status milestone the bill uses as its endpoint rather than a domestic epidemiological yardstick.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill gives USDA and Interior 180 days after enactment to enter a memorandum of understanding or similar interagency agreement.
It lists the covered lands as managed by the National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, and the Forest Service.
The MOU must include joint surveillance/monitoring protocols, coordination with State wildlife and livestock health officers for outbreak response, eradication protocols, and systems to facilitate business continuity in non-contaminated areas.
Agriculture and Interior must submit an annual joint report to House Agriculture, House Natural Resources, Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, and Senate Energy and Natural Resources until USDA certifies screwworm is quarantined south of the Darién Gap in Panama.
The statute focuses on wildlife and non-livestock species on Federal lands; it does not itself change statutory authorities over livestock disease control or appropriate control tools, leaving those choices to agency implementation.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Gives the act its name: the Safeguarding America’s Food Economy and Controlling Agricultural Threats to Livestock and Enterprises Act (SAFE CATTLE Act). This is purely nominal but signals the bill’s dual focus on agricultural security and public-land management.
MOU requirement and deadline
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a memorandum of understanding or other interagency agreement within 180 days of enactment. Practically, that creates a firm timeline for agencies to define roles, data-sharing protocols, communication channels, and chain-of-command in advance of an outbreak rather than reacting ad hoc.
Joint surveillance and state coordination
Requires the MOU to establish joint surveillance and monitoring protocols for early detection and to coordinate with State wildlife and livestock health officers on response procedures, notifications, and information distribution. This clause pushes agencies to harmonize field diagnostics, reporting thresholds, and communications flow between federal land units and state animal-health systems.
Eradication protocols and business-continuity systems
Charges the agencies with coordinating eradication protocols that both protect wildlife and reduce risk to domestic agriculture, and with developing science- and risk-based approaches to enable continuity of business for non-infected animals and non-contaminated areas. The provision separates eradication tactics from continuity measures, cementing an expectation that agencies will weigh control measures against economic impacts and movement restrictions.
Reporting requirement and lands covered
Mandates an annual joint report to four congressional committees detailing interagency coordination, surveillance progress, incidents of infestation, and recommended legislative or administrative actions. Reporting continues until USDA certifies that screwworm has been quarantined south of the Darién Gap in Panama. The act defines 'covered lands' to mean lands managed by NPS, FWS, BLM, Bureau of Reclamation, or the Forest Service, thereby limiting the MOU’s geographic scope to those federal holdings.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Agriculture across all five countries.
Explore Agriculture in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Livestock producers near Federal lands — improved early detection and coordinated containment reduce the risk that wildlife-borne screwworm will jump to domestic herds and disrupt production.
- Federal land managers (NPS, Forest Service, BLM, FWS, Bureau of Reclamation) — receive a formal framework for cross-agency cooperation, standardized surveillance protocols, and clearer lines for escalating responses.
- State animal health agencies — gain a required federal coordination mechanism for notification and joint response, which can improve resource targeting and reduce duplicated efforts.
- Rural agribusiness and food-supply chain participants — the bill’s emphasis on business-continuity systems aims to limit unnecessary movement bans and zone closures for non-contaminated animals and products.
- Wildlife and veterinary researchers — centralized surveillance and interagency data-sharing create richer datasets for studying screwworm ecology and control effectiveness.
Who Bears the Cost
- Department of Agriculture and Department of the Interior — both agencies must allocate staff time, field resources, and program funds to negotiate and implement the MOU and the surveillance/response systems called for.
- Federal land field units and rangers — expect added monitoring and response duties, equipment needs, and training obligations that can strain local budgets and personnel.
- State wildlife and livestock health officers — the bill requires coordination and potential response activities that may increase workload and expenses, particularly in states with limited budgets.
- Grazing permit holders and recreational permittees adjacent to infested areas — could face temporary movement restrictions, testing, or operational constraints under eradication or containment actions.
- Congressional oversight committees — will receive recurring reports and may be expected to act on recommendations, potentially pressuring additional appropriations or statutory changes.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between aggressive, potentially disruptive eradication measures to shield domestic agriculture and the mandates to conserve wildlife and manage public lands for multiple uses: actions that maximize biosecurity can harm wild populations, interfere with recreational use, and conflict with environmental law, while measures designed to minimize harm to wildlife may fall short of protecting the food supply. The bill forces agencies to choose trade-offs without specifying budgetary or legal mechanisms to reconcile those competing obligations.
The statute establishes process and reporting obligations but leaves critical implementation choices—funding, control tools, legal authorities, and operational thresholds—to agency agreements. It does not appropriate funds or amend the statutory authorities that govern animal-disease control, so agencies will need to retrofit this coordination into existing budgets and programs.
That gap raises the risk that the MOU becomes a paper exercise unless Congress provides targeted resources or agencies reprioritize operations.
Emergency eradication tools that work on wildlife populations (for example, sterile insect technique, targeted pesticide application, or mass capture and treatment) can clash with other statutory obligations for public land stewardship and endangered species protection. The bill requires eradication protocols that 'protect wildlife' but provides no metrics or decision rules for reconciling conservation law (e.g., ESA, NEPA) with aggressive pest control.
The endpoint tied to certification that screwworm is quarantined south of the Darién Gap introduces an international dependency: U.S. agencies must sustain domestic programs until an external geographic disease boundary is met, a standard that may be politically and technically difficult to verify and is outside U.S. control.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.