Owyhee Wilderness Areas Boundary Modifications Act
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 588.
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 01 · Reported to Senate with amendment(s) · Sep 6, 2016
Owyhee Wilderness Areas Boundary Modifications Act
(Sec. 2) This bill adjusts the boundaries of the North Fork Owyhee Wilderness, the Owyhee River Wilderness, and the Pole Creek Wilderness in Idaho to exclude certain land.
(Sec. 3) The holder of a grazing permit within the Pole Creek Wilderness and the Owyhee River Wilderness shall be allowed continued limited motorized use in those wilderness areas to support livestock operations if:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Read full official summaryShow less
the use occurred before the designation of the wilderness areas; and
the Department of the Interior, as part of the minimum requirements analysis required by this bill, has authorized the permittee to conduct limited motorized use within the wilderness areas.
Interior shall conduct a minimum requirements analysis for motorized use within those wilderness areas as part of the renewal process for the affected grazing permit.
As part of such analysis, Interior shall analyze the impacts of limited motorized use for livestock operations on vegetation, wildlife, and cultural resources within those wilderness areas.
Until the minimum requirements analysis is completed, Interior shall permit limited motorized use for livestock operations in those wilderness areas at not more than the level authorized.
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 588.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 114-315.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Murkowski with an amendment. With written report No. 114-315.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 114-500.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Bill text & related measures
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
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 S.1167 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 S.1167 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 S.1167 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 S.1167 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.