PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 108-384.
Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Oct 30, 2004
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on September 28, 2004. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Brown Tree Snake Control and Eradication Act of 2004 - (Sec. 3) Expresses the sense of Congress that there is a need for better coordinated control, interdiction, research, and eradication of the brown tree snake.
(Sec. 4) Directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to fund brown tree snake control, interdiction, research, and eradication efforts carried out by the Department of the Interior and the Department of Agriculture, other Federal agencies, States, territorial governments, local governments, and private sector entities. Includes among such activities: (1) expansion of eradication and control programs in Guam, including facilities construction; (2) expansion of interagency and intergovernmental rapid response teams in Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Freely Associated States (Palau, Micronesia, Marshall islands), and Hawaii; (3) expansion of efforts to protect and restore native wildlife damaged by such snake; (4) research funding related to brown tree snakes; (5) research funding for the Fort Collins Science Center of the U.S. Geological Survey; and (6) related technical assistance to the Freely Associated States.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes related FY 2006 through 2010 appropriations for: (1) the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, Operations; (2) the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, Methods Development; (3) the Office of Insular Affairs; (4) the Fish and Wildlife Service; (5) the United States Geological Survey, Biological Resources; and (6) planning assistance to each of the Secretaries.
(Sec. 5) Directs the Secretaries to establish quarantine protocols for baggage, cargo, and other items being shipped from Guam and other U.S. locations in order to prevent such snake's spread. Authorizes FY 2006 through 2010 appropriations.
(Sec. 6) Designates the brown tree snake as non-mailable matter.
(Sec. 7) States that the Brown Tree Snake Technical Working Group shall: (1) ensure coordinated brown tree snake efforts among Federal, State, territorial, and local agencies; (2) develop a list of control, research, interdiction, and eradication priorities; and (3) report to Congress. Authorizes FY 2006 through 2010 appropriations.
(Sec. 8) Limits administrative expenditures to not more than five percent of fiscal year appropriations.
People & committees
Del. Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [D-GU-At Large] · D–GU
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 108-384.
Became Public Law No: 108-384.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S11183)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S11183)
Received in the Senate, read twice.
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 H7686-7687)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H7686-7687)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3479.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H7686-7689)
Mr. Radanovich moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 423.
Committee on Agriculture discharged.
Committee on Agriculture discharged.
House Committee on Agriculture Granted an extension for further consideration ending not later than Sept. 15, 2004.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-687, Part I.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-687, Part I.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee by Unanimous Consent.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Livestock and Horticulture.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA, Interior.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.
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.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E2283-2284)
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: Apr 7, 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.3479 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.3479 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.3479 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.3479 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.