PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 13, 2010
Wasatch Wilderness and Watershed Protection Act of 2010 - Designates specified federal lands in the vicinity of the Lone Peak Wilderness and the Mount Olympus Wilderness, and specified federal lands comprising the Bear Trap Wilderness and the Wayne Owens Grandeur Peaks/ Mount Aire Wilderness within the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forests in Salt Lake County, Utah, as wilderness and as either a new component or as an addition to an existing component of the National Wilderness Preservation System.
Designates specified federal lands contiguous to the existing Mount Olympus, Twin Peaks, and Lone Peak Wilderness Areas and the Wayne Owens Grandeur Peak/Mount Aire Wilderness Area enacted by this Act as the Heliskiing Special Management Area.
Requires activities within the Special Management Area to be managed to maintain its presently existing wilderness character and potential for inclusion in the System.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) to allow heliskiing activities that have been authorized on the federal lands included within the Special Management Area to continue.
Designates the federal lands included within the Special Management Area as wilderness and as a new component of the System when the Secretary publishes a notice in the Federal Register that all commercial helicopter-assisted skiing and snowboarding activities on such lands have been terminated. Renames the Special Management Area upon designation as the Wasatch Mountain Wilderness.
Requires the Secretary to expedite a land exchange concerning certain lands in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest. Requires the land acquired by the Secretary to be included in the National Forest and to be managed to maintain its existing wilderness character for potential inclusion in the System.
People & committees
Rep. Matheson, Jim [D-UT-2] · D–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
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: Aug 14, 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.5009 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.5009 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.5009 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.5009 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.