PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 15, 1995
Montana Wilderness Act of 1995 - Designates specified National Forest lands in Montana as wilderness and as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System. (Sec. 4) Regulates water rights relating to this Act. (Sec. 5) Designates certain National Forest System lands in Montana for the purposes of conserving, protecting, and enhancing exceptional scenic, fish and wildlife, biological, educational, and recreational values. Withdraws, subject to valid existing rights, all federally-owned lands in the areas from all forms of entry, appropriation, and disposal under the mining and public land laws, and disposition under the geothermal and mineral leasing laws. Regulates commercial timber harvesting. (Sec. 6) Designates certain areas as wilderness study areas. (Sec. 7) Designates the Badger-Two Medicine Area as a wilderness study area, subject to existing rights of the Blackfeet Nation. (Sec. 8) Transfers administrative jurisdiction over certain lands from the Bureau of Land Management to the Forest Service. (Sec. 9) Directs the President to establish an independent scientific panel for the study of the ecosystems and economics of Federal lands and resources in Montana. (Sec. 10) Redesignates specified lands as the Rattlesnake National Education and Recreation Area and Wilderness. Withdraws specified lands around Gibson Reservoir from mineral and geothermal entry, appropriation, and disposal. Incorporates the Great Bear Wilderness and the Scapegoat Wilderness into the Bob Marshall Wilderness. (Sec. 11) Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Williams, Pat [D-MT-At Large] · D–MT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Resource Conservation, Research and Forestry.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: Aug 21, 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.2799 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.2799 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.2799 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.2799 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.