PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 113-342.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Mar 6, 2013
Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area Act - Establishes the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area, to comprise approximately 349,850 acres of federal land within Napa, Lake, Mendocino, Solano, and Yolo Counties in California.
States that the purpose of the Conservation Area is the conservation, protection, and enhancement of the ecological, scenic, wildlife, recreational, cultural, historical, natural, educational, and scientific resources of the lands included in the Area for the benefit and enjoyment of present and future generations.
Continues to provide historical and adequate access to private inholdings in the Conservation Area.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows only those uses of the Conservation Area that would further the purposes for which it is established.
Requires a comprehensive plan for the protection and management of the federal lands included within the Conservation Area. Requires such plan to: (1) assess the impacts of climate change, (2) include a comprehensive weed management strategy, and (3) include a plan to address the public safety and environmental clean-up issues associated with illegal marijuana production.
Permits grazing in the Conservation Area: (1) to continue, if established before this Act's enactment; (2) if not established before enactment, only to the extent that it is consistent with the purposes of the conservation area; or (3) through issuing annual targeted permits for the control of noxious weeds, fire suppression, or to provide other ecological benefits.
Establishes the Berryessa Snow Mountain National Conservation Area Advisory Council to advise with respect to the preparation and implementation of the management plan. Requires the appointment of one Council member to represent Native American Tribes.
People & committees
Sen. Boxer, Barbara [D-CA] · D–CA
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 Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 113-342.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S1235)
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.483 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.483 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.483 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.483 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.