PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.
H.R.952 / 105th Congress

Theodore Roosevelt Wildlife Legacy Act of 1997

Executive Comment Requested from Interior.

Official summary

Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 5, 1997

Theodore Roosevelt Wildlife Legacy Act of 1997 - Declares the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System to be to preserve a network of lands and waters for the conservation and management of U.S. fish, wildlife, and plants for present and future generations. Establishes as the System's priority public uses: (1) wildlife observation and photography; (2) hunting; (3) fishing; and (4) environmental education and interpretation. Directs the Secretary of the Interior, in administering the System, to: (1) resolve any conflict between the primary purpose of a National Wildlife Refuge and any purpose of the System in a manner that first fulfills the primary purpose of the refuge; (2) plan, propose, and direct System expansion to accomplish the mission and purposes of the System and of each refuge and to contribute to the conservation of U.S. ecosystems; and (3) inventory and monitor the status and trends of fish, wildlife, and plants in each refuge. Prohibits the Secretary, effective three years after enactment of this Act, from initiating or permitting a new use of a refuge or an expansion of an existing allowed use unless such use is compatible with the primary purposes of the refuge and the mission and purposes of the System. Directs the Secretary to: (1) propose within 15 years and revise every 15 years comprehensive conservation plans for each refuge in the System, except refuges in Alaska; (2) develop and implement a process to ensure an opportunity for active public involvement in the preparation and revision of such plans; (3) manage each refuge in a manner consistent with its conservation plan; and (4) prepare a conservation plan for a refuge established after enactment of this Act not later than two years after the Secretary determines that sufficient land has been acquired to warrant comprehensive planning.

Read the summary on Congress.gov
PlainBill analysis is coming later. This page presents official source data. We have not yet published a PlainBill explanation for this bill.

Who introduced it

Rep. Miller, George [D-CA-7] · D–CA

Committees

  • Natural Resources Committee
44 cosponsorship records, including any withdrawals

Actions

A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.

  1. Executive Comment Requested from Interior.

  2. Referred to the Subcommittee on Fisheries Conservation, Wildlife and Oceans.

  3. Referred to the House Committee on Resources.

  4. Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E387-388)

  5. Introduced in House

  6. Introduced in House

Bill text & related measures

Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.

Related bills identified by Congress.gov

No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.

Source last updated: Aug 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.

Explore the bill from different angles

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.

Neutral evidence review

Objective

Analyze H.R.952 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.

View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact

Progressive lens

Examine H.R.952 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.

View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope

Conservative lens

Examine H.R.952 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.

View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power

Liberty lens

Examine H.R.952 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.

View full prompt & sources