PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 388.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 12, 2010
Great Ape Conservation Reauthorization Amendments Act of 2010 - Amends the Great Ape Conservation Act of 2000 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to award a multiyear grant to an eligible person to implement a great ape conservation project that the person demonstrates is an effective, long-term conservation strategy for great apes and their habitats.
Requires the Secretary to convene a panel of experts to identify the greatest needs and priorities for the conservation of great apes within a year of this Act's enactment and every five years thereafter (current law authorizes the Secretary to convene a panel to consider the greatest conservation needs every two years). Requires the panel to consider relevant great ape conservation plans or strategies, including: (1) applicable strategies or plans developed or initiated by the Secretary; (2) the Global Strategy for the Survival of Great Apes and their Habitat, or subsequent reports, developed by the United Nations Environment Programme Great Apes Survival Partnership; (3) regional or species-specific action plans developed by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature Primate Specialist Group; (4) relevant conservation strategies, plans, or initiatives developed by the Species Survival Network Primate Working Group; and (5) other applicable strategies, plans, or scientific research and findings related to the conservation needs and priorities of great apes. Authorizes the Secretary to pay expenses of convening and facilitating meetings of the panel.
Authorizes appropriations for the Great Ape Conservation Fund for FY2011-FY2015.
People & committees
Rep. Miller, George [D-CA-7] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 388.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-650.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 111-650.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee on Insular Affairs, Oceans and Wildlife Discharged.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
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.
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.4416 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.4416 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.4416 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.4416 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.