119-S-446 Journalist Public Summary

Headline Summary

Stops Big Cypress from ever being labeled federal “wilderness,” keeping current uses and management tools in place. [1]Congress.gov — Text - S.446 (119th): Prohibit Big Cypress wilderness designation

What It Does

The bill is one sentence long: it prohibits Big Cypress National Preserve from being designated as wilderness or added to the National Wilderness Preservation System. In practice, that would take wilderness off the table permanently for this unit, preserving today’s mix of access (including motorized uses in portions of the preserve) and park-management flexibility. [1]Congress.gov — Text - S.446 (119th): Prohibit Big Cypress wilderness designation[5]National Parks Traveler — National Parks Traveler: NPS again declines to recomm…

Who’s For It

• Sponsor: Sen. Rick Scott (R‑FL). As of December 10, 2025, Congress.gov lists no Senate cosponsors. [6]Congress.gov — S.446 overview page (status, committee meeting listing)[7]Congress.gov — S.446 cosponsors (none listed)
• House companion: H.R. 1192 (Rep. Scott Franklin, R‑FL) with multiple Florida cosponsors; it’s in the House Natural Resources Committee. [8]Congress.gov — H.R. 1192 overview (House companion to prohibit Big Cypress wild…[9]Congress.gov — Text - H.R. 1192 (119th): House companion text and sponsor list
• Supporters’ argument: a ban avoids limits they say could restrict tribal access, invasive‑species control, prescribed fire, and other management needs. Sen. Scott frames the bill as aligning with a Miccosukee Tribe request; NPS communications have also cited tribal concerns about motorized access under a wilderness regime. [10]Web search · turn 1 #6[5]National Parks Traveler — National Parks Traveler: NPS again declines to recomm…

Who’s Against It

• U.S. Department of the Interior opposed the House companion as unnecessary, noting only Congress can create wilderness and that NPS has not recommended wilderness for Big Cypress. [3]U.S. Department of the Interior — Department of the Interior statement opposing…
• Conservation groups that favor designating select areas as wilderness argue a blanket ban would foreclose stronger habitat protections for sensitive wildlife. [4]National Parks Conservation Association — NPCA: Parks group calls for inclusive…

Why It Matters

For residents, tribes, and visitors, the bill would keep current access and land‑use patterns intact. For land managers, it preserves tools like prescribed fire and aggressive invasive‑species work that some say are harder in wilderness. For conservation advocates, it removes a future option to add the preserve—or parts of it—to the nation’s highest level of land protection. [5]National Parks Traveler — National Parks Traveler: NPS again declines to recomm…[4]National Parks Conservation Association — NPCA: Parks group calls for inclusive…

What’s Next

• Senate: Read twice and referred to the Energy & Natural Resources Committee; the National Parks Subcommittee held a hearing on December 9, 2025. Next typical steps would be a subcommittee and full‑committee markup before any floor vote. [6]Congress.gov — S.446 overview page (status, committee meeting listing)[2]U.S. Senate Committee on Energy & Natural Resources — Senate Energy & Natural R…
• House: The companion bill (H.R. 1192) is in the Natural Resources Committee. It would need committee approval, a House vote, and then to be reconciled with any Senate action. [8]Congress.gov — H.R. 1192 overview (House companion to prohibit Big Cypress wild…