PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 1, 2015
California Minerals, Off-Road Recreation, and Conservation Act
Specified off-highway vehicle recreation areas are designated or expanded in San Bernardino County, California.
Certain wilderness areas in California are also designated or expanded, and specified study areas released from further study.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
The boundaries of Death Valley National Park and Mojave National Preserve are revised.
The California Desert Protection Act of 1994 is amended to revise the boundaries of Joshua Tree National Park and authorize a visitor center.
The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act is revised to designate certain wild, scenic, and recreational rivers in California.
There are established the Black Lava Butte and Flat Top Mesa Area of Critical Environmental Concern, the Mojave Trails Special Management Area, and the Sand to Snow National Monument
Federal reversionary interests in certain land in the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California are released.
Certain requirements of the California Desert Protection Act of 1994 for specified California state school land are revised.
Development of renewable energy generation facilities on Juniper Flats is prohibited.
Specified land exchanges are authorized in the San Gorgonio Wilderness and other specified areas.
Requirements are prescribed for conveyance of certain federal lands for the Apple Valley Off-Highway Vehicle Recreation Area and to the city of Twentynine Palms, California.
The Department of the Interior shall ensure that members of specified Indian tribes have access to designated areas for traditional cultural and religious purposes.
Interior may accept landowner-requested deed restrictions on land donated to or acquired by the United States or, consistent with existing rights, create deed restrictions, easements, or other third-party rights relating to any public land necessary to fulfill certain mitigation requirements or to satisfy the conditions of a habitat conservation plan or general conservation plan.
No extension or establishment of any national monument that would include any designated area may be undertaken by the President except by express authorization of Congress.
A project to install and operate a fiberoptic cable by Inyo County, California, along a certain route shall be eligible for a categorical exclusion from requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
People & committees
Rep. Cook, Paul [R-CA-8] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
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 12, 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.3668 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.3668 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.3668 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.3668 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.