Alpine Lakes Wilderness Additions and Pratt and Middle Fork Snoqualmie Rivers Protection Act
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 325.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Mar 18, 2010
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on March 11, 2010. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Alpine Lakes Wilderness Additions and Pratt and Middle Fork Snoqualmie Rivers Protection Act - Designates certain land in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest in the state of Washington comprising approximately 22,173 acres within the proposed Alpine Lakes Wilderness additions boundary, which shall be considered to become a part of the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, as wilderness and as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.
Makes any land and interests within the proposed additions boundary which are acquired by the United States part of such Wilderness.
Amends the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to designate the Middle Fork Snoqualmie and Pratt Rivers in Washington state as scenic and/or wild rivers.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
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.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze H.R.1769 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.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine H.R.1769 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.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine H.R.1769 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.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine H.R.1769 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.