Bill · H.R. 2893· House(119-HR-2893)
Buffalo Tract Protection Act
- Introduced
- 4/10/2025
- Last activity
- 4/10/2025 — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Sponsored by
- Melanie Stansbury
- Cosponsors
- - 2 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Buffalo Tract Protection Act," aims to withdraw specific Bureau of Land Management land from mineral development. The land consists of approximately 4,288 acres described as "Tract A," "Tract B," "Tract C," and "Tract D" in the Placitas, New Mexico Area Map. The withdrawal applies to location, entry, and patent under mining laws, as well as disposition under mineral and geothermal leasing laws. While mineral development is restricted, the Secretary of the Interior may still convey the surface estate under specific acts. However, any such conveyance must include a reservation of the mineral estate to the United States.
Yes· 3 of 5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?+5
The bill protects specific land tracts from the environmental impacts of mining and geothermal development.
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?+3
The bill provides a clear mandate for land use by withdrawing specific tracts from mineral development.
Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced?+2
The withdrawal specifically restricts mineral and geothermal leasing which can include fossil fuel sources.
The opposite
Would business owners be better off under this?-3
Mining and geothermal business owners will be unable to develop these specific tracts.
Would union members be better off under this?-2
The restriction on mineral development may impact jobs for those in the mining and geothermal sectors.
Is this likely to grow the economy?-1
The restriction on mineral development may limit potential economic output from extracted resources.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection from Mineral Development: The bill withdraws land from all forms of location, entry, patent under mining laws, and disposition under mineral and geothermal leasing laws (Section 2(a)). This prevents certain types of mineral resource extraction on the specified 4,288 acres.
-
Flexibility for Surface Use: The Secretary of the Interior is not prohibited from conveying the surface estate of the land under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 or the Recreation and Public Purposes Act (Section 2(c)(1)). This allows for potential land uses beyond mining.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Restriction of Mineral Rights: The bill withdraws approximately 4,288 acres from forms of location, entry, and patent under mining laws, as well as disposition under mineral, mineral materials, and geothermal leasing laws (Section 2(a)). This limits the ability to develop minerals on these specific tracts.
-
Requirement to Reserve Mineral Estate: Any conveyance of the surface estate must include a reservation of the mineral estate to the United States (Section 2(c)(2)). This means the surface estate cannot be transferred without the government retaining control over the minerals.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Improves Environmental Protections+5Improves Public Land Management+3Reduces Fossil Fuel Production+2Reduces Carbon Emissions+1
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners-3Good For Union Workers-2
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+2
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Economic Growth-1
- 4/10/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Jared HuffmanDemocrat · California
Teresa Leger FernandezDemocrat · New Mexico