PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 116-382.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Jul 20, 2020
Bonneville Shoreline Trail Advancement Act
This bill modifies the wilderness designations of certain lands in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Utah.
The bill designates approximately 334.16 acres in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest as part of the Mount Olympus Wilderness.
The bill also removes the following lands in the Uinta-Wasatch-Cache National Forest from designation as wilderness:
approximately 19.06 acres in the Mount Naomi Wilderness,
approximately 197.4 acres in the Mount Olympus Wilderness,
approximately 9.8 acres in the Twin Peaks Wilderness, and
approximately 107.9 acres in the Lone Peak Wilderness Area.
The lands removed from designation as wilderness shall be managed as part of the forest.
People & committees
Sen. Romney, Mitt [R-UT] · R–UT
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 Senate Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 116-382.
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.4215 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.4215 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.4215 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.4215 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.