PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 396.
Congressional Research Service
Version 17 · Reported to House with amendment(s) · Sep 7, 2004
Grey Towers National Historic Site Act of 2004 - Designates all lands and improvements formerly encompassed within Grey Towers National Historic Landmark in Milford, Pennsylvania, as Grey Towers National Historic Site.
Directs that the Site be administered for specified purposes, including: (1) education, public demonstration projects, and research related to natural resource conservation, management, and use; (2) leadership development within the natural resource professions and the Federal civil service; (3) study and interpretation of the life and works of Gifford Pinchot who was the first Chief of the Forest Service and a major influence in formulating and implementing forest conservation policies in the early 20th century; and (4) protection and enjoyment of the scenic and natural environs.
Requires the Secretary of Agriculture (the Secretary) to administer federally owned lands and interests at the Site and associated lands and improvements outside of the Grey Towers National Historic Landmark within Pike County, Pennsylvania, as components of the National Forest System.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior to cooperate in promoting public use of Grey Towers and Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area and in furthering the administration and purposes for which both areas were designated.
Allows the Secretary to impose fees and charges for admission to and use of facilities on Grey Towers. Requires any monies received by the Forest Service in administering Grey Towers to be deposited into the Grey Towers National Historic Site Fund for support of programs at Grey Towers and any other expenses.
People & committees
Rep. Sherwood, Don [R-PA-10] · R–PA
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. 396.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-652.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Resources. H. Rept. 108-652.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
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.
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.4494 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.4494 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.4494 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.4494 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.