PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 23, 2024
Utah State Parks Adjustment Act
This act requires the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service to convey certain federal lands to Utah for inclusion in the following Utah State Parks: Antelope Island State Park, Wasatch Mountain State Park, and Fremont Indian State Park. Utah must use the lands for public purposes, including parks, campgrounds, recreation, and permitted livestock grazing.
Utah must also cover any costs relating to the conveyances for the Antelope Island State Park and the Wasatch Mountain State Park, including costs for surveys and other administrative costs.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
As a condition of the conveyance to the Fremont Indian State Park, the Forest Service must (1) reserve easements to the conveyed land to be included in Fremont Indian State Park for all National Forest System roads and trails that originate at, terminate at, or traverse the conveyed land; and (2) convey to Utah only certain water rights that provide water to the Castle Rock Campground and the Belknap Historic Guard Station interpretive site. The act also authorizes the Forest Service to enter into an agreement with Utah with respect to additional terms and conditions applicable to the conveyance, such as maintenance of roads and trails.
People & committees
Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 118-181.
Became Public Law No: 118-181.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S7087)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Received in the Senate. Read twice. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 660.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6269-6270)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H6269-6270)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 7332.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H6269-6270)
Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 622.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-737.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 118-737.
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Subcommittee on Federal Lands Discharged
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal 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.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 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.7332 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.7332 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.7332 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.7332 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.