H.R. 655 (119th)Bill Overview

Dalles Watershed Development Act

Public Lands and Natural Resources|Geography and mappingLand transfers
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 23, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 233.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill directs the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Forest Service, to convey approximately 150 acres of National Forest System land in Mount Hood National Forest to the City of The Dalles, Oregon, if the City requests it within one year. The transfer would be by quitclaim deed, without consideration, subject to valid existing rights, and the City must pay administrative and survey costs.

Why people may split

Left emphasizes environmental review and tribal consultation needs

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly focused conveyance statute that is well-specified in its primary mechanics (who, what parcel, conditions of conveyance, payment of administrative costs, and reversion for misuse).

The bill directs the Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Forest Service, to convey approximately 150 acres of National Forest System land in Mount Hood National Forest to the City of The Dalles, Oregon, if the City requests it within one year.

The transfer would be by quitclaim deed, without consideration, subject to valid existing rights, and the City must pay administrative and survey costs.

Conveyed land must be used for public purposes, including municipal water supply and related infrastructure, and reverts to the United States if used inconsistently.

Passage55/100

Narrow, local, low-cost conveyance with safeguards increases prospects, though Senate procedural holds or environmental objections create moderate uncertainty.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly focused conveyance statute that is well-specified in its primary mechanics (who, what parcel, conditions of conveyance, payment of administrative costs, and reversion for misuse).

Contention20/100

Left emphasizes environmental review and tribal consultation needs

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Local governments · CitiesLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Local governmentsEnables The Dalles to secure land for municipal water supply and related infrastructure expansion.
  • Local governmentsTransfers local control, potentially speeding project planning and permitting for city authorities.
  • CitiesConveyance without purchase reduces up-front land acquisition costs for the City.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenRemoves approximately 150 acres from National Forest public ownership and management.
  • Potential burdenPotential loss or alteration of forest habitat and recreational access on the parcel.
  • Potential burdenSets a precedent for no‑consideration conveyances that could encourage similar transfers elsewhere.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Left emphasizes environmental review and tribal consultation needs
Progressive75%

Likely cautiously supportive because it serves municipal water needs and public use.

Concerned about transferring federal forest land without payment, potential environmental impacts, and tribal or public process gaps.

The reversion clause and Secretary authority are mitigating but may not fully address conservation or public-access protections.

Leans supportive
Centrist80%

Generally supportive as a pragmatic local conveyance that addresses municipal needs and shifts costs to the city.

Wants clarity on legal, fiscal, and environmental steps, and assurance that valid existing rights and federal interests are protected.

Sees the one-year request window and reversion clause as reasonable guardrails.

Leans supportive
Conservative90%

Likely supportive because it reduces federal land holdings and returns land to local control for municipal needs.

Views conveyance without consideration and city-paid costs as fiscally efficient.

May welcome minimal federal oversight, while seeing reversion and valid-rights protections as acceptable.

Leans supportive
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood55/100

Narrow, local, low-cost conveyance with safeguards increases prospects, though Senate procedural holds or environmental objections create moderate uncertainty.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
24%
Complexitylow
Why this could stall
  • Presence or intensity of local or national conservation opposition
  • Whether environmental reviews or NEPA processes are required
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Left emphasizes environmental review and tribal consultation needs

Narrow, local, low-cost conveyance with safeguards increases prospects, though Senate procedural holds or environmental objections create m…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, narrowly focused conveyance statute that is well-specified in its primary mechanics (who, what parcel, conditions of conveyance, payment of admi…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis