PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Apr 21, 2009
Great Cats and Rare Canids Act of 2009 - (Sec. 4) Directs the Secretary of the Interior to provide assistance for projects for the conservation of rare felids and rare canids. Restricts the use of such assistance for captive breeding or display purposes.
Authorizes the Secretary to convene an advisory group consisting of individuals representing public and private organizations actively involved in felid and canid conservation to assist in carrying out this Act.
(Sec. 5) Establishes in the Multinational Species Conservation Fund as a separate account the Great Cats and Rare Canids Conservation Fund.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Defines "rare canid" to: (1) mean any of the canid species dhole, gray wolf, Ethiopian wolf, bush dog, African wild dog, maned wolf, and Darwin's fox, including any subspecies or population of such a species; and (2) exclude any subspecies or population that is native to the area comprised of the United States and Canada or the European Union.
Defines "rare felid" to: (1) mean any of the felid species lion, leopard, jaguar, snow leopard, clouded leopard, cheetah, Iberian lynx, and Borneo bay cat, including any subspecies or population of such a species; and (2) exclude any species, subspecies, or population that is native to the United States and any tiger.
(Sec. 6) Requires the Secretary to initiate a study of felid and canid species listed under the IUCN Red List (the Red List of Threatened Species Maintained by the World Conservation Union) that are not rare canids and rare felids (as defined in this Act), to determine: (1) the conservation status of the species in the wild, including identification of those that are critically endangered or endangered; and (2) any such species that should be made eligible for project assistance. Requires a report to Congress.
(Sec. 7) Authorizes appropriations.
(Sec. 8) Prohibits amounts provided as a grant under this Act from being used for any project conducted in Iran, Syria, Cuba, Sudan, or North Korea.
People & committees
Rep. Inslee, Jay [D-WA-1] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
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 the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 290 - 118 (Roll no. 194). (text: CR H4533-4534)
House roll call 194 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 290 - 118 (Roll no. 194).(text: CR H4533-4534)
House roll call 194 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H4550-4551)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 411.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H4533-4537)
Mrs. Christensen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife.
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: Sep 8, 2026. 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.411 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.411 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.411 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.411 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.