Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
This bill amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate many segments of the Gila River system in New Mexico as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, classifying them as wild, scenic, or recreational. It withdraws federal land within those boundaries from certain mineral and leasing authorities (subject to valid existing rights), authorizes native fish habitat restoration projects under conditions, and transfers about 440 acres from the Forest Service to the National Park Service, adjusting monument and forest boundaries accordingly.
Conservation benefits versus economic and development restrictions
Relative to its intended legislative type (substantive policy change), this bill is legally specific and well-integrated with existing statutes, with thorough treatment of rights, exceptions, and boundary/map rules.
This bill amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate many segments of the Gila River system in New Mexico as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System, classifying them as wild, scenic, or recreational.
It withdraws federal land within those boundaries from certain mineral and leasing authorities (subject to valid existing rights), authorizes native fish habitat restoration projects under conditions, and transfers about 440 acres from the Forest Service to the National Park Service, adjusting monument and forest boundaries accordingly.
Substantive but non-transformative conservation measure with many built-in protections; plausibly passable if local stakeholders and bipartisan supporters coalesce.
Relative to its intended legislative type (substantive policy change), this bill is legally specific and well-integrated with existing statutes, with thorough treatment of rights, exceptions, and boundary/map rules. It clearly identifies the segments and classifications to be added to the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System and sets out administrative transfers and mapping responsibilities.
Conservation benefits versus economic and development restrictions
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Conservation benefits versus economic and development restrictions
Likely broadly supportive because the bill protects river corridors, wilderness character, and native species recovery.
The explicit allowance for native fish restoration, tribal consultation, and preservation of wilderness areas aligns with conservation and environmental justice priorities.
Generally favorable but pragmatic: supports conservation and clarified administration while noting potential costs and local impacts.
The preservation of existing rights and requirement for management planning makes the bill more acceptable, but funding and implementation details matter.
Likely skeptical or opposed due to expanded federal protections and restrictions on future land use.
The bill's protections could be seen as federal overreach that limits economic development, despite the bill preserving many existing rights.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Substantive but non-transformative conservation measure with many built-in protections; plausibly passable if local stakeholders and bipartisan supporters coalesce.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Conservation benefits versus economic and development restrictions
Substantive but non-transformative conservation measure with many built-in protections; plausibly passable if local stakeholders and bipart…
Relative to its intended legislative type (substantive policy change), this bill is legally specific and well-integrated with existing statutes, with thorough treatment of rights, exceptions, and boundary/map rules. It…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.