PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Feb 13, 2003
Wild Sky Wilderness Act of 2003 - Designates certain lands in the Skykomish River valley, Washington, as the Wild Sky Wilderness, to be managed by the Secretary of Agriculture.Directs the Secretary to establish a trail plan. Authorizes the use of helicopter access to construct and maintain a joint Forest Service-Snohomish County communication repeater site to provide improved communication for safety, health, and emergency purposes.Allows the continued use of floatplanes on Lake Isabel in the Wild Sky Wilderness, subject to reasonable restrictions.Authorizes the Secretary to acquire lands in the Wild Sky Wilderness by purchase, donation, or exchange, with priority to be given to specified Priority Acquisition Lands. Requires the boundaries of the Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest and the Wild Sky Wilderness to be adjusted to encompass any lands so acquired. Directs the Secretary to assure adequate access to private in-holdings within the Wild Sky Wilderness. States that valuation of private lands shall be determined without reference to any restrictions on access or use which arise out of designation as a wilderness area.Requires the Secretary to accept specified lands within the Snoqualmie National Forest, Washington from the Chelan County Public Utility District if the District offers such lands to the Secretary (in title acceptable to the Secretary and provided there is no hazardous material on the site) in exchange for a permanent easement, including helicopter access, to maintain an existing snowtel site on land within the Wenatchee National Forest, Washington.Provides for extinguishment of the easement and reversion of all conveyed rights to the United States if the District no longer needs to maintain a snowtel site.
People & committees
Sen. Murray, Patty [D-WA] · D–WA
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 Forests and Forest Health.
Executive Comment Requested from USDA.
Referred to the House Committee on Resources.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S15865-15872; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S15865-15866; text as passed Senate: CR S15866-15867)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with amendments by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S15865-15872; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S15865-15866; text as passed Senate: CR S15866-15867)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 255.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici under authority of the order of the Senate of 07/29/03 legislative day 07/21/03 with amendments. With written report No. 108-131.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Reported by Senator Domenici under authority of the order of the Senate of 07/29/03 legislative day 07/21/03 with amendments. With written report No. 108-131.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment favorably.
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands and Forests. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 108-68.
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.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
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.391 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.391 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.391 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.391 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.