PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-509.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 14, 2016
Spearfish Canyon and Bismarck Lake Land Exchange Act
This bill directs the Department of Agriculture (USDA), if South Dakota conveys to it four parcels of specified nonfederal lands, comprising 1,954 acres, to convey to South Dakota in exchange 1,468 acres known as the "Spearfish Canyon Area" and 524 acres known as the "Bismarck Lake Area" in the Black Hills National Forest in South Dakota.
The values of the federal and nonfederal lands to be exchanged shall be equal.
USDA shall complete any environmental analyses required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 regarding the land exchange carried out under this bill.
The nonfederal lands acquired by USDA shall be added to and administered as part of the forest.
The federal lands acquired by South Dakota shall be managed by it for public recreation uses and the conservation of natural resources.
People & committees
Sen. Thune, John [R-SD] · R–SD
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 114-509.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
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
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 S.3254 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 S.3254 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 S.3254 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 S.3254 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.