PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests and Public Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 22, 2009
Recreational Shooting Protection Act - Declares that, federal public land shall be open to access and use for recreational shooting, except as limited by the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) for one or more of the following: (1) reasons of national security; (2) reasons of public safety; (3) to comply with applicable federal law; or (4) to comply with a law (including regulations) of the state in which the land is located that is applicable to recreational shooting.
Requires management of federal public land in a manner that supports, promotes, and enhances recreational shooting opportunities.
Provides that, federal public land management decisions and actions, shall to the maximum extent practicable, result in no net loss of land area available for recreational shooting on federal public land. Requires that, if any federal public land is permanently closed to recreational shooting, new acres of federal public land of comparable size and a reasonable distance from the closed location be designated for recreational shooting and be opened for the number of user-days equal to those available at the closed area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Director to submit annual reports describing: (1) any federal public land that was closed to recreational shooting; (2) the reason for the closure; and (3) federal public land that was opened to recreational hunting so as to compensate for the closure of such land.
Permits states a right of action for failure of the Director to comply with this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Flake, Jeff [R-AZ-6] · R–AZ
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 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.642 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.642 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.642 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.642 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.