PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 23, 2019
This bill provides for the continuation of certain military land withdrawals and makes changes to the administration of natural resources on military installations.
The bill removes the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as the acting agency that provides for the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources on military installations, except in the case of a military installation or state-owned National Guard installation in Alaska.
Each integrated natural resources management plan for a military installation or state-owned National Guard installation outside Alaska must be reviewed (1) jointly by the military department concerned and the Department of the Interior, and (2) in a manner that provides affected states and Indian tribes and the public an opportunity to comment on any significant revisions to the plan that may be proposed.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The bill eliminates the withdrawal termination date for lands including (1) the El Centro Naval Air Facility in California, (2) the Juniper Butte military range in Idaho, (3) the Barry M. Goldwater military range in Arizona, and (4) the Fort Irwin military land withdrawal in California.
The land withdrawals for the Fort Greely and Fort Wainwright military training ranges in Alaska shall be terminated on November 6, 2026.
People & committees
Rep. Bishop, Rob [R-UT-1] · R–UT
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 Water, Oceans, and Wildlife.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee for Indigenous Peoples of the United States.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Readiness.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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 Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, 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: Jun 6, 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.2945 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.2945 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.2945 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.2945 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.