PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.For Further Action See S.341.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 3, 1993
Authorizes Eagle and Pitkin Counties in Colorado to offer for exchange to the United States specified lands of the White River National Forest. Requires the Secretary of Agriculture to convey to the Counties all rights of the United States to specified lands of the Mt. Sopris Tree Nursery (MSTN). Requires the Secretary, in the deed of conveyance to the Counties, to provide that all rights in and to lands and water rights conveyed shall revert to the United States in the event that such lands or water rights are sold or otherwise conveyed by the Counties or are used other than for public purposes. Provides that, if the values of exchanged lands are not equal, any cash equalization which would otherwise be owed to the Counties by the United States shall be waived and any equalization amount which may be owed to the United States by the Counties shall be satisfied through conveyance to the United States of additional lands or interests in lands acceptable to the Secretary. Provides that: (1) the National Forest inholdings acquired by the United States pursuant to this Act shall become a part of the White River, Gunnison, and Arapaho National Forests, or a part of an appropriate existing wilderness area; and (2) the Quiet Title Act shall be the sole legal remedy of any party claiming any rights in or to any National Forest inholdings conveyed by the Counties to the United States pursuant to this Act. Requires the Counties to reimburse the United States for National Forest inholdings that the United States acquires under this Act that are lost in a final title determination adverse to the United States. Allocates and provides for the management of the existing water rights in the MSTN, including water well and irrigation ditch rights adjudicated under Colorado law, together with the right to administer, maintain, access, and further develop such rights. Transfers the White River National Forest Headquarters and administrative offices in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, from the jurisdiction of the U.S. General Services Administration to that of the Secretary, who shall retain such facilities.
People & committees
Rep. McInnis, Scott [R-CO-3] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
For Further Action See S.341.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and Natural Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Jan 2, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1199 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1199 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1199 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1199 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.