To ensure that Big Cypress National Preserve may not be designated as wilderness or as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes.
- Bill Number
- H.R. 1192
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Public Lands and Natural Resources
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-11: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2026-02-26T16:58:28Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This bill (H.R. 1192) aims to prevent the Big Cypress National Preserve in Florida from being classified as "wilderness" under federal law. Wilderness designation imposes strict protections that limit human activities to preserve natural conditions, and this legislation blocks such a change to maintain the preserve's current management flexibility.
Key Provisions
- Prohibition on Designation: Section 1 explicitly states that Big Cypress National Preserve "may not be designated as wilderness or as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System."
- The bill is short and focused solely on this restriction, with no additional sections or requirements.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Big Cypress National Preserve was established in 1974 as a unit of the National Park System, allowing compatible activities like hunting, fishing, and limited off-road vehicle use—activities often restricted in wilderness areas.
- This bill introduces a permanent prohibition, overriding any future attempts by Congress, the President, or agencies to reclassify the preserve under the Wilderness Act of 1964 (which created the National Wilderness Preservation System to protect untouched lands).
- It does not alter the preserve's current status but ensures it cannot be elevated to stricter wilderness protections.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The National Park Service (NPS), which manages the preserve, would retain authority for less restrictive land uses, avoiding the need to enforce wilderness rules like banning motorized access or permanent structures. This could simplify operations but limit opportunities for enhanced environmental conservation.
- On Citizens: Florida residents, particularly hunters, anglers, and off-road vehicle users in the area, would continue accessing the preserve without new restrictions. Conversely, it may disappoint those seeking stronger protections against development or overuse.
- On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill concerns domestic federal lands.
- Broader effects could include sustained local tourism and recreation economies in South Florida, while potentially slowing biodiversity efforts in the Everglades ecosystem.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Local Communities and Users: Residents of Florida (especially in Collier and Miami-Dade counties), hunters, fishers, and outdoor recreation groups who benefit from the preserve's current allowances.
- Environmental and Conservation Groups: Organizations like the Sierra Club or Audubon Society, which might advocate for wilderness status to protect wildlife habitats from human encroachment.
- Federal Agencies: Primarily the NPS and the Department of the Interior, responsible for land management decisions.
- Florida Congressional Delegation: The bill's sponsors (all Florida representatives) represent interests prioritizing local economic and recreational uses over federal wilderness expansions.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: The bill uses clear, prohibitive language to amend federal land management laws, potentially preempting administrative actions (e.g., by the NPS or Fish and Wildlife Service). It could face challenges if seen as conflicting with broader environmental statutes like the Endangered Species Act, but it aligns with Congress's plenary authority over public lands.
- Constitutional: No major issues; Article IV of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress power to regulate federal territories, making this a straightforward exercise of legislative authority without infringing on states' rights or individual liberties.
- Political: Introduced by a bipartisan group of Florida lawmakers, it reflects regional tensions between conservation and development in sensitive ecosystems like the Everglades. If passed, it could set a precedent for blocking wilderness designations in other preserves, influencing future debates on balancing recreation with environmental protection. The bill's referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources suggests it may advance along party lines in resource policy discussions.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Franklin, Scott [R-FL-18]
Cosponsors (18)
Rep. Bilirakis, Gus M. [R-FL-12], Rep. Diaz-Balart, Mario [R-FL-26], Rep. Steube, W. Gregory [R-FL-17], Rep. Webster, Daniel [R-FL-11], Rep. Donalds, Byron [R-FL-19], Rep. Gimenez, Carlos A. [R-FL-28], Rep. Luna, Anna Paulina [R-FL-13], Rep. Salazar, Maria Elvira [R-FL-27], Rep. Moskowitz, Jared [D-FL-23], Rep. Mast, Brian J. [R-FL-21], Rep. Cammack, Kat [R-FL-3], Rep. Lee, Laurel M. [R-FL-15], Rep. Rutherford, John H. [R-FL-5], Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1], Rep. Haridopolos, Mike [R-FL-8], Rep. Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D-FL-25], Rep. Buchanan, Vern [R-FL-16], Rep. Barr, Andy [R-KY-6]
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-11: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-02-11: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-11: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- To ensure that Big Cypress National Preserve may not be designated as wilderness or as a component of the National Wilderness Preservation System, and for other purposes. — issued 2025-02-11 — PDF (2 pages)