Overview
Title
To require the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to convey certain Federal land to the State of Utah for inclusion in certain State parks, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The bill wants to give some land owned by the government to Utah so they can make more parks where people can play and have fun. If Utah stops using the land for parks, it goes back to the government.
Summary AI
H.R. 7332, known as the "Utah State Parks Adjustment Act," directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer certain federal lands to the State of Utah to be included in state parks such as Antelope Island State Park, Wasatch Mountain State Park, and Fremont Indian State Park. The transfers should occur within 180 days of the act's enactment and must comply with existing rights. The federal government will not charge for these transfers, but Utah is responsible for associated costs like surveys. The bill also allows Utah to use the lands for public purposes like parks and recreation, requiring the land to revert to federal ownership if it stops being used this way.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill at hand requires the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to transfer certain federal lands to the State of Utah. These lands are intended for use within state parks, notably including Antelope Island State Park, Wasatch Mountain State Park, and Fremont Indian State Park. The process mandates that the transfer occur within 180 days of the bill's enactment and that Utah covers all associated costs. Furthermore, should the conveyed lands cease to be used for public purposes, they could revert to federal ownership.
Summary of Significant Issues
One primary issue with this bill is the conveyance of federal land to the State of Utah "without consideration," meaning the state is not required to compensate the federal government. This has raised concerns regarding the loss of federal assets without monetary return. Additionally, while Utah must bear all costs related to the transfer, this could impose financial strains on the state. The language regarding "valid existing rights" before conveyance is somewhat vague and could lead to legal complexities.
Another concern is the lack of a clear definition for what constitutes "minor modifications" to maps, which may lead to ambiguity and potential misuse during the mapping process. Furthermore, the reservation of easements for roads and trails, along with the transfer of specified water rights, may lead to potential conflicts about the management of land and resources between federal and state entities.
Lastly, the reversionary interest clause, which allows land to revert to federal ownership if not used for public purposes, does not specify how compliance with these public use requirements will be monitored, opening doors for disputes.
Broad Public Impact
For the general public, the bill could result in expanded and potentially enhanced state parks in Utah, providing more recreational spaces and opportunities. If managed well, these parks could generate increased tourism and economic activity in surrounding communities. However, if the management of the land, roads, and water rights becomes embroiled in legal or operational difficulties, it could diminish the intended benefits.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
The stakeholders most directly affected include the residents of Utah, who stand to gain new state park resources, potentially with expanded amenities and recreational areas. The local economy might experience a boost due to increased visitation to these parks. On the other hand, Utah's financial burden might affect state budgets and require reallocations from other public services.
Federal entities like the Bureau of Land Management and the National Forest Service may face challenges regarding the oversight and compliance of land usage. Potential lawsuits or disputes arising from ambiguous language around rights and modifications could divert resources away from other priorities. Environmental advocacy groups might express concerns about the conveyance process and its impact on public lands and natural resources, particularly if the land's public use is disputed or mismanaged.
Issues
The conveyance of federal land to the State of Utah 'without consideration' may result in a significant loss of federal assets without compensation, raising concerns about the ethical and financial implications of transferring valuable land to a state without receiving anything in return. This issue is present in Section 2(a), 2(b), and 2(c).
The requirement for the State of Utah to bear all costs related to the land conveyances, including surveys and administrative costs, might place an undue financial burden on the state without federal financial support, potentially affecting state budgets and priorities. This is relevant to Sections 2(a)(2), 2(b)(2), and 2(c)(4)(B).
The language around 'valid existing rights' concerning land conveyance could lead to legal ambiguities or disputes if not clearly defined. This might affect the interpretation and enforcement of land rights and is relevant to Section 2(a)(1), Section 2(b)(1), and Section 2(c)(1).
The bill allows for 'minor modifications' to maps for the conveyance but lacks a clear definition of what constitutes a 'minor modification.' This could open up possibilities for discrepancies or misuse, affecting the transparency and accountability of the process, as found in Section 2(d).
The reservation of easements for roads and trails, along with specified water rights conveyances, poses potential conflicts concerning land use and water management. There might be ongoing disputes over how these resources are managed post-conveyance, highlighted in Section 2(c)(2) and Section 2(c)(3).
The reversionary interest clause states that the land will revert to the United States if not used for public purposes but lacks a defined process for determining compliance. This omission could lead to disputes or misunderstandings over land use, as noted in Section 2(e)(2).
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The opening section of the bill specifies that it may be referred to as the “Utah State Parks Adjustment Act.”
2. Conveyance of certain Federal land to the State of Utah Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section describes how certain federal lands are to be transferred to the State of Utah to be included in state parks like Antelope Island, Wasatch Mountain, and Fremont Indian State Parks. The transfer must happen within 180 days, and Utah will cover any associated costs; if the land stops being used for public purposes, it might revert to federal ownership.