PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2017
Multinational Species Conservation Funds Reauthorization Act
This bill reauthorizes the African Elephant Conservation Act, the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Act of 1994, the Asian Elephant Conservation Act of 1997, the Great Ape Conservation Fund, and the Marine Turtle Conservation Fund through FY2022.
This bill amends the Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 to authorize Department of the Interior to award a multi-year grant to carry out a project that is an effective, long-term conservation strategy for great apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos, orangutans, or gibbons) and their habitats.
Interior is required to convene a panel of experts to identify the greatest needs and priorities for the conservation of great apes within a year and every five years thereafter. Current law authorizes Interior to convene a panel to consider the greatest conservation needs every two years. The panel is required to consider relevant great ape conservation plans or strategies.
This bill amends the Marine Turtle Conservation Act of 2004 to make a wildlife management authority of a U.S. territory eligible for financial assistance for marine turtle conservation.
People & committees
Rep. Young, Don [R-AK-At Large] · R–AK
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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: Aug 11, 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.227 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.227 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.227 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.227 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.