This bill allows the states of Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming (western states) to relinquish state land grant parcels wholly or primarily within eligible areas and select, in exchange, public land within the state.
The bill defines eligible areas as lands within the outer boundaries of units or components of the National Park, National Wilderness Preservation, National Wildlife Refuge, or National Landscape Conservation Systems, areas identified by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) of the Department of the Interior through a inventory carried out in accordance with the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA) as having wilderness characteristics as of the enactment of this bill or in a land use plan that was finalized under the FLPMA, certain designated lands within the National Forest System or administered by the BLM, and sentinel landscapes designated by the Department of Agriculture, Department of Defense, or Interior.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
Interior shall create a process for the relinquishment of such parcels.
A western state may select, and Interior may convey, lands that are mineral in character.
The overall value of the state land grant parcels and the public land to be conveyed shall be equal or made equal.
The bill sets forth requirements regarding hazardous materials on land to be conveyed, water rights, grazing permits, road rights-of-ways, and protection of Indian rights.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 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.244 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.244 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.244 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.244 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.