How People Voted
35% For, 65% Against
14 votes cast
Take Action
 |
Alert Your Friends and Colleagues |
 |
Write Your Representative in Congress |
| Organize | |
|
Start A Petition |
| Save & Share | |
 |
del.icio.us |
 |
Digg |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Yahoo! |
Discussion: H.R. 4089, The Sportsmen's Heritage Act of 2012
- This item is from the 112th Congress (2011-2012) and is no longer current. Comments, voting, and wiki editing have been disabled, and the cost/savings estimate has been frozen.
Revision History 
Below is the revision history of this article's discussion.
No revisions found.
Costs: $ per
and increases their $ share of the national debt by $.
(source: Congressional Budget Office)
Learn More
Visitor Comments
Ken Parsons
April 16, 2012, 10:54am (report abuse)On first reading of this legislation one may say “good deal for hunters and fisherman” BUT wait a minute. I already have the right to hunt, fish and shoot on public land. What this legislation does in my opinion is allow “local authority” federal land managers to close off, not expand what I already can do. Too many “managers” BLM, Forest Service, Fish and Game (both state and federal) already use “their local authority” to close off public lands. Many places I went as a young man to view wildlife are now padlocked to prevent entry. If you want to allow Polar bear importations then use another route other than disguise a method of more restriction of land use.
RSS Feeds for This Bill
Keep yourself updated on user contributions and debates about this bill! (Learn more about RSS.)
From the Blog
WashingtonWatch.com Digest – April 16, 2012
This is the WashingtonWatch.com email newsletter for the week of April 16, 2012. Subscribe (free!) here. email newsletter | tell a friend | wiki | about | home | log in On the Blog: Tax Bills on Parade With taxes due this week, the Senate and House are...