PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Became Public Law No: 106-353.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 13, 2000
Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area and Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness Act of 2000 - Establishes the Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area, consisting of specified public land in Grand Valley, Colorado.Designates certain lands in Mesa County, Colorado, as wilderness and designates such area as the Black Ridge Canyons Wilderness.Requires the Secretary of the Interior to manage both the Conservation Area and the Wilderness. Withdraws all lands within the Conservation Area and Wilderness from all forms of entry under the public land laws, including mining laws and mineral and geothermal leasing laws.Directs the Secretary to develop a comprehensive plan for the long-range protection and management of the Conservation Area and the Wilderness. Prohibits buffer zones around such lands.Authorizes the Secretary to establish interpretive sites in the Conservation Area.Directs the Secretary to: (1) establish the Colorado Canyons National Conservation Area Advisory Council; and (2) continue to allow certain public and private access to the Conservation Area and Wilderness.Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. McInnis, Scott [R-CO-3] · R–CO
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 106-353.
Became Public Law No: 106-353.
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 S9975-9976, S9990)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S9975-9976, S9990)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 907.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 106-460.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski without amendment. With written report No. 106-460.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Forests and Public Land Management. Hearings held.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
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 H6870-6872)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H6870-6872)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate H.R. 4275.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6870-6875)
Mr. Hansen moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks and Public Lands.
Executive Comment Requested from Interior.
Referred to the House Committee on 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.4275 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.4275 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.4275 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.4275 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.