Get started free →
HR 9226 119th Congress · House

Connecticut River Watershed Restoration Bill

Advocate

Official title: To direct restoration and protection efforts of the 5-State Connecticut River Watershed region, and for other purposes.

This bill directs federal restoration and protection efforts for the 5-State Connecticut River Watershed region, a major river system spanning New England. It would focus federal attention on conservation, water quality, habitat restoration, and related infrastructure needs across communities in the watershed. The measure is aimed at coordinating work among federal agencies and local partners rather than creating a broad nationwide program. People most directly affected would include residents, municipalities, farmers, businesses, and recreation users in the watershed states.

  • Directs restoration and protection efforts for the 5-State Connecticut River Watershed region.
  • Refers the bill to the Committee on Natural Resources and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
  • Targets watershed-wide conservation, water quality, and resilience work across state lines.
  • Focuses on federal coordination with local and regional partners.
  • Applies to communities in the Connecticut River basin, not the whole country.
Public Relevance 28 / 100
Niche Modest scope Broad

For people living in the Connecticut River Watershed region, this bill could bring more federal support for river cleanup, habitat restoration, flood resilience, and related infrastructure projects. That could improve water quality and recreation opportunities and may help local governments and landowners address erosion, runoff, and storm damage. If you live outside the watershed, the direct effect is likely minimal.

See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysis
FOR
  • Local residents and municipal governments in the watershed They want federal help to reduce flooding, improve water quality, and protect drinking water and public infrastructure. Coordinated watershed planning can lower costs for towns that otherwise have to tackle these problems piecemeal.
  • Conservation and outdoor recreation interests They see the Connecticut River as an ecological and economic asset that supports fisheries, wildlife habitat, boating, fishing, and tourism. Federal restoration efforts can improve habitat connectivity and long-term ecosystem health.
  • Farmers and landowners facing erosion or runoff issues Targeted watershed projects can provide technical and financial support for streambank stabilization, nutrient management, and soil conservation. That can reduce property damage and help keep working lands productive.
AGAINST
  • Fiscal conservatives and budget watchdogs They may argue that watershed restoration should be handled primarily by states and localities, not expanded federal programs. They are likely to question the cost and whether the benefits justify new federal involvement.
  • Property owners concerned about land-use restrictions Some may worry that watershed protection efforts could lead to tighter rules on development, shoreline use, or agricultural practices. They may see the bill as creating pressure for more regulation around sensitive lands.
  • Industries facing environmental compliance costs Businesses that discharge into or operate near the watershed may fear additional permitting, mitigation, or restoration obligations. They may support cleaner water goals but oppose any added costs or delays tied to project implementation.
  • “direct restoration and protection efforts”

    This points to an active federal role in organizing and supporting cleanup and conservation work across the watershed. In practice, that can mean grants, planning, and interagency coordination for projects that improve river health.

  • “5-State Connecticut River Watershed region”

    The bill is geographically focused on a multi-state river basin, so its effects would be concentrated in New England communities along the Connecticut River and its tributaries. Residents outside the region would see little direct change.

  • “referred to the Committee on Natural Resources”

    This indicates the bill is in the early committee stage in the House. Natural resources and transportation committees will review any provisions within their jurisdiction before the bill can move further.

  • “and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure”

    Transportation and infrastructure jurisdiction suggests the bill may touch flood control, waterways, or related public works. That can broaden the kinds of projects and agencies involved in implementation.

June 9, 2026

Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.

Take Action

Get more from BillBoard

Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.

Ask AI about this bill

Data sourced from api.congress.gov.

Free to use · No credit card

Understand every bill.
Make your voice count.

BillBoard turns dense U.S. legislation into plain-English summaries, helps you take a stance, and connects you to your representatives — in seconds.