Overview

Title

To modify the boundaries of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, and for other purposes.

ELI5 AI

H.R. 9826 is a plan to make a big animal and plant park called the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge even bigger, by adding more land to it. This can only happen if landowners want to sell their land, and the park will also be a fun place where people can watch animals, fish, and hunt.

Summary AI

H.R. 9826 aims to change the boundaries of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge by adding approximately 5,658 acres to it. The bill allows the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land and water from willing sellers to expand the refuge, but explicitly prohibits using condemnation or eminent domain to do so. It emphasizes public participation in planning and prioritizes recreational activities like hunting, fishing, and wildlife observation. Additionally, the bill includes technical amendments to update language in existing laws about the administration of the refuge.

Published

2024-09-25
Congress: 118
Session: 2
Chamber: HOUSE
Status: Introduced in House
Date: 2024-09-25
Package ID: BILLS-118hr9826ih

Bill Statistics

Size

Sections:
3
Words:
1,129
Pages:
6
Sentences:
30

Language

Nouns: 366
Verbs: 68
Adjectives: 57
Adverbs: 9
Numbers: 44
Entities: 76

Complexity

Average Token Length:
4.36
Average Sentence Length:
37.63
Token Entropy:
4.97
Readability (ARI):
21.33

AnalysisAI

General Summary of the Bill

The "San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge Expansion Act of 2024" aims to expand the boundaries of the San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge in California. This legislative initiative proposes including approximately 5,658 additional acres of diverse ecological landscapes, such as lands, marshes, tidal flats, salt ponds, submerged lands, and open waters. The bill outlines the means for the Secretary of the Interior to acquire these lands, emphasizing that transactions must occur with willing sellers and that eminent domain will not be used. The legislation includes provisions for public participation in planning processes and sets forth the priority uses for these new lands, including recreational activities like hunting and fishing. The bill also includes technical amendments for consistency in language and administrative responsibilities.

Summary of Significant Issues

Several issues arise from the bill's current form:

  1. Ambiguity in Land Size: The use of "approximately" to describe the 5,658-acre expansion area could create uncertainty about the precise amount of land involved and might lead to disputes or confusion.

  2. Financial Implications: The bill does not clearly outline specific budget or cost implications associated with the boundary expansion and land acquisitions. This omission could result in oversight in financial planning and efficient use of resources.

  3. Transfer of Federal Property: The provision allowing for the transfer of Federal property without consideration raises concerns regarding transparency and equity, as it does not clarify the potential impacts on other Federal agencies.

  4. Cooperative Agreements: The absence of specific guidelines for these agreements may lead to inconsistent application and potentially disadvantage some stakeholders.

  5. Balancing Public Uses and Conservation: Clarification is needed on how priority public uses, such as hunting and fishing, will be balanced with conservation efforts, as these activities may sometimes conflict with broader preservation goals.

  6. Public Participation: The bill lacks detail on how public participation will be facilitated, which may affect the effectiveness and transparency of engaging local communities and stakeholders.

Impact on the Public

The broad impact of this bill on the public hinges on the successful integration of additional land into the wildlife refuge and the creation of new recreational opportunities. Expanding the refuge could enhance environmental conservation efforts, promote biodiversity, and contribute to the local economy through increased tourism and recreational activities. However, if financial and administrative planning lacks clarity, taxpayers might be concerned about the efficient use of public funds. The engagement of local communities, if properly managed, could foster a sense of ownership and support for conserving natural resources.

Impact on Specific Stakeholders

The impact on stakeholders varies:

  • Local Communities and Landowners: Those in Napa, Marin, Sonoma, and Solano Counties may benefit from environmental improvements and potential economic boosts due to an increase in visitors. Conversely, landowners may be wary of expanded governmental oversight and the implications for property rights, despite assurances of voluntary acquisition.

  • Conservationists: This group might view the act positively due to its potential to strengthen ecological preservation. The unspecified balance between recreation and conservation could, however, lead to apprehension.

  • Federal and State Agencies: Agencies may need to address the ambiguity concerning property transfers, which could affect their operations and resource allocations.

  • Recreational Users: The focus on enabling public uses like hunting and fishing is likely beneficial for these users, but clarity on how these activities align with conservation aims is necessary to prevent ecological degradation.

In conclusion, while the bill offers potential benefits for environmental conservation and recreation, careful consideration of the outlined issues is crucial to ensure it effectively serves both the public interest and stakeholder needs.

Issues

  • The allowance for the transfer of Federal property without consideration in Section 2(f) could lead to concerns over transparency and equity in handling public resources, potentially drawing criticism from those worried about the implications of such transfers on other Federal agencies.

  • The use of the term 'approximately' in Section 2(a) to describe the 5,658 acres intended for the Proposed Boundary Expansion Area introduces ambiguity regarding the exact size, which might lead to disputes or confusion over the actual land area involved in the expansion.

  • The lack of specific budget or cost implications outlined in Section 2 regarding the boundary modification and acquisition of lands could lead to oversight in financial planning and resource allocation, raising concerns about the efficient use of taxpayer money.

  • In Section 2(e), the absence of specific guidelines for cooperative agreements could result in inconsistent interpretations and implementations, potentially disadvantaging certain stakeholders and affecting the uniform administration of the National Wildlife Refuge.

  • Clarification is needed in Section 2(g) on how 'priority public uses' will be balanced with conservation efforts, as hunting, fishing, and wildlife observation might conflict with broader preservation goals, leading to potential conflicts between conservationists and recreational users.

  • The omission of details on how public participation will be facilitated in Section 2(i) might affect the transparency and effectiveness of engaging local communities and other stakeholders in the planning process, potentially leading to disputes or lack of community support.

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 first section of the document states that the official short title for this law is the "San Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge Expansion Act of 2024."

2. Boundary modification, acquisition, and administration Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The bill modifies the boundaries of the National Wildlife Refuge to include new areas, allowing the Secretary of the Interior to acquire land from willing sellers without using eminent domain, and encourages public involvement in planning. It ensures activities like hunting and fishing are prioritized, and provides for cooperation with California for land management, with a focus on using funds from the Land and Water Conservation Fund for acquisitions.

3. Technical amendments Read Opens in new tab

Summary AI

The section makes changes to an existing law by replacing the word "he" with "the Secretary," correcting a spelling mistake in the word "Secretary" in one part, and changing "him" to "the Secretary" in a different part to ensure the language reflects that the Secretary is the responsible person.