PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Sep 8, 2009
(This measure has not been amended since it was introduced. The summary has been expanded because action occurred on the measure.)
Modifies the boundaries of Roosevelt National Forest, Colorado, to exclude from it a parcel of real property consisting of approximately seven acres that was erroneously included within the Crystal Lakes Subdivision, North Filing, as a result of the failure of a 1975 survey of the Subdivision to correctly locate the original quarter corners as specified.
Directs the Secretary of Agriculture to use the authority provided by the Small Tracts Act to convey all interest of the United States in and to the real property excluded from the boundaries of Roosevelt National Forest under this Act to the landowners whose real property adjoins the excluded land and who have occupied the excluded land in good faith reliance on the erroneous survey.
Reduces by a specified amount, and cancels the amount so reduced, the amount available for obligation from the unobligated balance in the special account for the deposit and expenditure of fees and revenues established for the Forest Service under the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act.
People & committees
Rep. Markey, Betsy [D-CO-4] · D–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks. Hearings held jointly with Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 111-721.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H9292)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H9292)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 1858.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9292-9293)
Mr. Grijalva moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E843)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. 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.1858 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.1858 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.1858 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.1858 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.