Bill · S. 1349· Senate(119-S-1349)
Ruby Mountains Protection Act
- Introduced
- 4/8/2025
- Last activity
- 2/12/2026 — Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held.
- Sponsored by
- Catherine Cortez Masto
- Cosponsors
- - 1 - 0
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, known as the "Ruby Mountains Protection Act," aims to withdraw specific Federal lands from mineral leasing laws. It targets approximately 309,272 acres in the Ruby Mountains subdistrict of the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Additionally, it covers approximately 39,926.10 acres located in the Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge. These areas are located in Elko and White Pine Counties, Nevada. The withdrawal applies to land acquired after the Act's enactment as well.
Yes· 3 of 5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?+8
The bill provides strong environmental protections by withdrawing lands from mineral leasing.
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?+7
The bill clarifies land use by withdrawing specific areas from mineral leasing activities.
Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced?+5
The withdrawal specifically prohibits mineral leasing which includes various fossil fuel resources.
The opposite· 3 of 6
Would business owners be better off under this?-5
The bill negatively impacts business owners in the mineral and mining sectors.
Would union members be better off under this?-3
Mining and extraction unions may see a reduction in job opportunities.
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?-2
Local rural economies dependent on mining may face economic constraints.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection of Federal Lands: The bill withdraws approximately 309,272 acres in the Ruby Mountains subdistrict and approximately 39,926.10 acres in the Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge from all forms of operation under the mineral leasing laws (Section 2(a) and Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Management Continuity: The withdrawal does not prevent noncommercial refuge management activities by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (Section 3(a)(2)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Restriction of Mineral Leasing: The bill withdraws specific Federal land and interests in the land from all forms of operation under the mineral leasing laws (Section 2(a) and Section 3(a)(1)).
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+8Improves Public Land Management+7Reduces Fossil Fuel Production+5Reduces Carbon Emissions+1Improves Rural Development-1
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Business Owners-5Good For Union Workers-3Good For Rural Residents-2
- Economy And Finance
- Increases Job Creation-2Improves Economic Growth-1
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power+3
- 2/12/2026
- Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held.
- 4/8/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
Jacky RosenDemocrat · Nevada