PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 16, 2002
Blunt Reservoir and Pierre Canal Land Conveyance Act of 2002 - Deauthorizes the Blunt Reservoir feature of the Oahe Irrigation Project authorized as part of the Pick-Sloan Missouri River Basin Program.Allows preferential leaseholders (original landowners or descendants, or operators of the land at the time of purchase) of parcels of the Blunt Reservoir and Pierre Canal an option to purchase from the Commission of Schools and Public Lands of South Dakota the land they lease. Sets terms for such purchases. Directs the Secretary of the Interior to convey all preferential lease parcels not purchased by the leaseholder to the South Dakota Department of Game, Fish, and Parks, to be used for mitigating the wildlife habitat that was lost as a result of the development of the Pick-Sloan project.Directs the Secretary to convey to the Department the nonpreferential leased parcels and unleased parcels of the Blunt Reservoir and Pierre Canal, to be used for mitigating the wildlife habitat that was lost as a result of the development of the Pick-Sloan project.Requires the Governor of South Dakota, or a designee of the Governor (the "Governor"), to accept certain conditions of conveyance, including that: (1) the State receives the land conveyed in "as is" condition; (2) the State assumes responsibility for any liabilities accruing after the date of conveyance as a result of ownership, operation or maintenance of such land; (3) the Federal Government retains all oil, gas, and mineral rights; (4) the property shall continue to be used for wildlife conservation; and (5) title shall revert to the United States if the land is needed for national defense purposes.Authorizes the Governor to allow a person to exchange other land in South Dakota for a nonpreferential lease parcel or unleased parcel at Blunt Reservoir or Pierre Canal.Permits the United States a perpetual easement for a water conveyance structure over, under, across, or through the Pierre Canal Feature.
People & committees
Rep. Thune, John [R-SD-At Large] · R–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Water and Power.
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: Aug 19, 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.5687 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.5687 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.5687 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.5687 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.