Ryan Zinke (R-MT)
A River Runs Through It Act
A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill, titled the A River Runs Through It Act, aims to provide restoration, economic development, recreation, and conservation on federal lands in the State of Montana. It designates various specific areas across the state as restoration areas, backcountry areas, recreation areas, winter recreation areas, wilderness areas, and conservation management areas. The legislation outlines management guidelines for these designated lands, including rules for vegetation management, wildfire prevention, motorized and non-motorized vehicle use, and livestock grazing. Additionally, the bill addresses the establishment of new trails, assesses shooting range accessibility, and includes provisions protecting private property rights, state fish and wildlife jurisdiction, and Tribal treaty rights.
Yes· 3 of 16
- Scored +7
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
The legislation establishes new wilderness areas, conservation management areas, and restoration areas to protect ecosystems and wildlife habitats.
- Scored +7
Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests?
The bill establishes clear frameworks for managing restoration areas, backcountry areas, and wilderness areas to reduce wildfire risks and enhance forest health.
- Scored +6
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
The legislation directly impacts rural Montana communities by balancing forest restoration, wildfire risk reduction, and recreational opportunities.
The opposite
- Scored -4
Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced?
The bill withdraws specified federal lands from mineral leasing and mining laws, restricting future fossil fuel and mineral extraction.
- Scored -2
Would business owners be better off under this?
Withdrawing certain federal lands from mineral leasing and mining laws places limitations on commercial resource extraction industries.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Section 102 and Section 104: These sections prioritize forest restoration, reducing the threat of uncharacteristic wildfires, and protecting wildlife habitats and watersheds in restoration and backcountry areas. This benefits people by lowering wildfire risks near communities and improving overall ecosystem health.
-
Section 201, Section 202, and Section 204: These sections designate specific recreation and winter recreation areas, allow for over-snow and motorized vehicle use where appropriate, and authorize the construction of new motorized and non-motorized trails. These provisions provide positive outcomes for outdoor enthusiasts by enhancing recreational opportunities such as mountain biking, off-highway vehicle riding, and snowmobiling.
-
Section 402, Section 403, and Section 404: These miscellaneous provisions explicitly protect private property rights from being altered, preserve the State's jurisdiction over fish and wildlife, and ensure that Tribal treaty rights and tribally managed lands are not diminished or abrogated. These measures protect the legal and traditional rights of private landowners, state agencies, and Native American Tribes.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Section 104 and Section 201: These sections withdraw federal land within backcountry areas and recreation areas from all forms of entry, appropriation, disposal, and mining laws. This could negatively impact individuals or industries reliant on public land development, mineral leasing, or mining operations within those specific zones.
-
Section 102 and Section 203: These sections place restrictions on road construction and public use, specifically stating that temporary roads in restoration areas shall not be open for public use and prohibiting commercial timber harvests and most motorized vehicles within the over-snow vehicle trail corridor. These restrictions could burden individuals who might desire unrestricted access or commercial use of these specific forest areas.
-
Section 301 and Section 303: These sections designate new wilderness areas and conservation management areas where motorized vehicles are strictly limited to existing designated roads and trails, and new system or temporary roads are generally prohibited. Such limitations could cause negative consequences for visitors or local users who prefer motorized access to these newly protected acres.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — The legislation directly impacts rural Montana communities by balancing forest restoration, wildfire risk reduction, and recreational opportunities. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Section 404 explicitly protects existing Tribal treaty rights and tribally managed lands, and conservation areas incorporate Native American history. Would gun owners be better off under this? — The bill mandates an assessment of shooting ranges near Lincoln, Montana, and supports traditional hunting access in backcountry and wilderness areas. Would children be better off under this? — The expansion of recreational areas and trails provides more outdoor and family-friendly activities. Would farmers be better off under this? — Existing livestock grazing permitted prior to enactment is allowed to continue under the bill's provisions. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Families and individuals enjoy enhanced access to backcountry recreation and improved local forest health. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Access to public lands for recreation and the protection of private property rights benefit middle-class residents and landowners. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Outdoor enthusiasts and young adults benefit from new mountain biking, hiking, and motorized recreation trails. Would retired people be better off under this? — Retirees benefit from enhanced conservation, scenic preservation, and outdoor recreational access in the state. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors benefit from general improvements in recreation infrastructure and protected scenic natural areas. Would business owners be better off under this? — Withdrawing certain federal lands from mineral leasing and mining laws places limitations on commercial resource extraction industries.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — The legislation establishes new wilderness areas, conservation management areas, and restoration areas to protect ecosystems and wildlife habitats. Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — The bill establishes clear frameworks for managing restoration areas, backcountry areas, and wilderness areas to reduce wildfire risks and enhance forest health. Does this invest in rural communities? — The legislation supports recreation, restoration, and economic development initiatives specifically tailored for rural federal lands in Montana. Does this cut the pollution that drives climate change? — The bill designates wilderness and conservation areas, which preserves carbon-sequestering forests and natural landscapes. Does this reduce how much oil, gas and coal is produced? — The bill withdraws specified federal lands from mineral leasing and mining laws, restricting future fossil fuel and mineral extraction.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill explicitly preserves the jurisdiction and responsibilities of the State of Montana with respect to fish and wildlife.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — The bill provides for recreational and economic development in Montana, supporting tourism and local economic activity.
- 10/5/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/21/2026
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Introduced in House
Troy DowningRepublican · Montana