PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Feb 2, 2005
Right-to-Ride Livestock on Federal Lands Act of 2005 - Amends Public Law 91-383 to direct the Secretary of the Interior to preserve and facilitate the continued use and access of pack and saddle stock animals on parts of National Park System lands where there is a historical tradition of such use. Directs that as a general rule, all trails, routes, and areas used by such animals shall remain open and accessible for such use. Allows the Secretary of the Interior to implement a proposed reduction in the use and access of pack and saddle stock animals on such lands only after complying with the full review process required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. Makes the same amendments to other laws regarding other public lands as follows: (1) the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, with respect to Bureau of Land Management lands; (2) the National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, with respect to National Wildlife Refuge System lands; and (3) the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, with respect to National Forest System lands (with the Secretary directed to act in this case being the Secretary of Agriculture).
Directs the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture to issue final rules to define the meaning of a historical tradition of use of pack and saddle stock animals on federal lands for purposes of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Radanovich, George [R-CA-19] · R–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H2601-2802)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H2601-2802)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 586.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2601-2603)
Mr. Radanovich moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries and Oceans.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
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: 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.586 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.586 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.586 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.586 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.