Louisiana House Bill HB461

Louisiana 2020 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/27/20
• Refer: 2/27/20
• Refer: 3/9/20
• Report Pass: 5/7/20
• Engrossed: 5/18/20
• Report Pass: 5/21/20
• Enrolled: 5/27/20
• Chaptered: 6/5/20
• Passed: 6/5/20

Caption

Provides relative to a property exchange between the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service

Impact

The impact of this bill is significant as it facilitates a strategic property exchange that can enhance conservation efforts and biodiversity management within Louisiana. By transferring state property to a federal agency, it may lead to improved wildlife management and habitat protection measures. Moreover, the transaction aims to optimize the use of land resources and promote better coordination between state and federal agencies in managing ecological assets.

Summary

House Bill 461 proposes the exchange of certain state properties between the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. Specifically, this bill allows for the transfer of state-owned lands located in St. Mary Parish and West Feliciana Parish in exchange for a tract of land located in Terrebonne Parish. The bill provides legal authorization for the involved state officials to convey and accept these properties while delineating the terms and conditions of the exchange, including the reservation of mineral rights.

Sentiment

General sentiment regarding HB 461 appears to be favorable among lawmakers, as evidenced by the unanimous vote in favor of the bill during its final passage. The cooperative effort between state and federal agencies in environmental management is viewed positively, suggesting a shared recognition of the importance of wildlife conservation and land management. However, there may be underlying concerns among certain stakeholders regarding the implications of such exchanges on state autonomy and oversight of local resources.

Contention

Although there is broad support for HB 461, concerns could arise from how property exchanges like this might influence local governance and land use decisions. Critics may argue that transferring state land to federal agencies could limit state control over local resources and reduce responsiveness to community needs. Therefore, discussions surrounding the bill could reflect a tension between ecological management objectives and local governance interests.