PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.4072 / 115th Congress

Central Coast Heritage Protection Act

Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 16, 2017

Central Coast Heritage Protection Act

This bill designates specified lands in the Bakersfield Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and in the Lost Padres National Forest in California as wilderness areas and as components of the National Wilderness Preservation System.

It also designates certain land in Los Padres National Forest as the Machesna Mountain Potential Wilderness Area, which shall be incorporated into the Machesna Mountain Wilderness Area.

Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.

Read full official summaryShow less

Specified segments of the Indian, Mono, Matilija, Sespe, and Piru Creeks and Sisquoc River in California are designated as components of the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System.

Certain land in the Los Padres National Forest in California is designated as the Fox Mountain Potential Wilderness Area, which shall be incorporated into the San Rafael Wilderness.

This bill designates specified land: (1) in Los Padres National Forest as the Condor Ridge Scenic Area; and (2) in Los Padres National Forest and in the BLM Bakersfield Field Office as the Black Mountain Scenic Area.

The Department of Agriculture shall: (1) study connecting the northern and southern parts of the Los Padres National Forest using a trail corridor across parts of the Northern and Southern Santa Lucia Mountains of the Southern California Coastal Range; (2) designate the Condor National Recreation Trail, extending from Lake Piru to the Botchers Gap Campground in the Monterey County corridor in California; and (3) conduct a study to improve nonmotorized recreation trail opportunities (including mountain bicycling) on land not designated as wilderness within the Santa Barbara, Ojai, and Mt. Pinos ranger districts.

The Forest Service shall study the feasibility of opening a new trail, for vehicles measuring 50 inches or less, connecting Forest Service Highway 95 to the existing off-highway vehicle trail system in the Ballinger Canyon off-highway vehicle area.

Indian tribes shall be assured access to the wilderness areas, scenic areas, and potential wilderness areas designated by this bill for traditional cultural and religious purposes.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Carbajal, Salud O. [D-CA-24] · D–CA

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
25 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.

  2. Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

  3. Introduced in House

  4. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

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.4072 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.4072 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.4072 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.4072 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.

View full prompt & sources