PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 17, 2023
Ouachita National Forest Overnight Camping Act
This bill requires the Forest Service to identify and develop campsites and related facilities within the Albert Pike Recreation Area in the Ouachita National Forest in Arkansas to be reopened for overnight camping.
Overnight camping within that area has been prohibited since several people died in a major flood on June 11, 2010.
Specifically, the Forest Service must identify areas within the Albert Pike Recreation Area that may be suitable for overnight camping and select and establish campsites and related facilities for public use within the identified areas.
The Forest Service must ensure that (1) at least 54 campsites are available, of which at least 8 have electric and water hookups; and (2) each campsite and related facility identified or established is located outside of the recreation area's 100-year floodplain, which is an area that has a 1% chance of flooding in any given year.
Not later than 30 days after the enactment of this bill, the Forest Service shall open each existing campsite within the recreation area that is located outside of the 100-year floodplain.
People & committees
Rep. Westerman, Bruce [R-AR-4] · R–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal 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: May 27, 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.1667 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.1667 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.1667 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.1667 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.