Bill Overview
Title: Red River National Wildlife Refuge Boundary Modification Act
Description: This bill modifies the boundary of the Red River National Wildlife Refuge in Louisiana.
Sponsors: Rep. Johnson, Mike [R-LA-4]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by the Red River National Wildlife Refuge Boundary Modification
Estimated Size: 150000
- The Red River National Wildlife Refuge is in Louisiana, which means the immediate impact is local to individuals in this geographic area.
- Modification of a wildlife refuge boundary can affect local land use, conservation efforts, and recreational opportunities.
- The wildlife refuge is administered by the federal government, so changes can have national interest, especially among conservationists, environmental organizations, and other stakeholders.
- Property owners and residents in the vicinity of the modified boundaries may be directly impacted, either through changes in land value, access to resources, or property rights.
- Regional wildlife habitats, protected species, and associated ecosystems may experience direct changes depending on how the boundary is modified.
- Visitors and tourists who come specifically to the refuge may also be impacted by changes to the landscape or available activities.
Reasoning
- The Red River National Wildlife Refuge's boundary modification is highly localized to Louisiana, thus predominantly affecting local stakeholders, property owners, and recreational visitors.
- The budget constraints suggest that the policy must focus on cost-effective boundary changes, possibly affecting a limited area or requiring significant prioritization of conservation effort.
- Impacts will vary widely, with some people seeing positive environmental effects or recreational enhancements, while others could face restrictions or changes in property values.
- Understanding the impact on self-reported wellbeing involves looking into how people’s recreational access, aesthetic enjoyment, or property rights are altered.
Simulated Interviews
Wildlife Conservationist (Shreveport, Louisiana)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could provide additional protection to critical habitats.
- I hope the boundary modification leads to more extensive conservation efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Retired (Bossier City, Louisiana)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I have concerns about how the change might impact my property value.
- If the refuge expands, I could lose access to some parts of my land.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Environmental Lawyer (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 32 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This modification is a win for environmental law and preservation.
- It sets a precedent for protecting ecosystems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
School Teacher (Monroe, Louisiana)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could enhance educational opportunities for my students.
- I hope the changes include better facilities and educational programs at the refuge.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Farmer (Alexandria, Louisiana)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm worried about losing some farming land if the boundaries expand.
- The policy is important, but it should be fair to local landowners.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 5 |
Tourism Guide (Lafayette, Louisiana)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Could provide more routes for eco-tours and boost local tourism.
- The increased conservation could attract more visitors.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
College Student (Baton Rouge, Louisiana)
Age: 24 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Modifying the boundaries might yield new areas for wildlife photography.
- It is crucial to balance conservation and access for enthusiasts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Retired Park Ranger (Natchitoches, Louisiana)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I see this change as an extension of my life's mission to conserve nature.
- Important to document changes for future generations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Environmental Activist (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Boundary expansions are beneficial to fulfilling national conservation goals.
- It could serve as a model for other areas in need of protection.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Oil Industry Executive (Houston, Texas)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Business interests could be affected if the refuge boundaries impact nearby land use.
- It's essential to consider economic impacts alongside environmental benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000 (Low: $1000000, High: $2000000)
Year 2: $300000 (Low: $200000, High: $400000)
Year 3: $300000 (Low: $200000, High: $400000)
Year 5: $300000 (Low: $200000, High: $400000)
Year 10: $300000 (Low: $200000, High: $400000)
Year 100: $300000 (Low: $200000, High: $400000)
Key Considerations
- Any additional land acquisition costs should be monitored for potential overruns.
- The environmental impacts, both positive and negative, will require careful evaluation.
- Public engagement and input may be necessary to handle concerns from local stakeholders.
- Compliance with federal environmental regulations must be maintained throughout the implementation.