PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 59.
Congressional Research Service
Version 79 · Reported to House without amendment · Apr 17, 2007
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve Boundary Adjustment Act of 2007 - Amends the National Parks and Recreation Act of 1978 to: (1) adjust the boundary of the Barataria Preserve Unit of Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve in Louisiana by increasing the acreage limitation; and (2) authorize the Secretary of the Interior (the Secretary) to acquire any such additional land, water, and interests in land and water by donation, purchase (but only with the owner's consent), transfer from any other federal agency, or exchange.
Requires, with respect to the Bayou aux Carpes Addition and the CIT Tract Addition, any federal land acquired in such Additions to: (1) be transferred without consideration to the administrative jurisdiction of the National Park Service; and (2) any federal land in the Additions that is transferred, be subject to any easements that have been agreed to by the Secretary and the Secretary of the Army. Permits the acquisition of any private land, water, or interests in land and water in the Unit only with the owner's consent.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Modifies and/or eliminates certain provisions related to the acquisition of property within the Unit.
Permits hunting, fishing, and trapping within the Unit, but only as to land, water, or interests in land and water managed by the Secretary. Continues to provide for the designation of zones where, and established periods when, no hunting, fishing, or trapping shall be permitted except for public safety reasons.
People & committees
Rep. Jindal, Bobby [R-LA-1] · R–LA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 59.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-94.
Reported by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 110-94.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Discharged.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.162 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.162 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.162 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.162 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.