Wildlife Refuges

House Roll Call Vote 131

1996 Scorecard Vote

Pro-environment vote

No

Votes For

287

Votes Against

138

Not Voting

7

Wildlife conservation has been the primary purpose of the National Wildlife Refuge System since its creation in 1903, but, unlike other agencies, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service operates under a variety of laws and executive orders rather than a unified organic act. While touted as that organic act by its sponsor House Resources Committee Chairman Don Young (R-AK), H.R. 1675 would actually weaken conservation-oriented management of refuges and increase risks to wildlife and habitat. H.R. 1675 would establish hunting and other wildlife recreation uses as purposes of the Refuge System, equal in importance to wildlife conservation.

Hunters, through the purchase of duck stamps, and other wildlife enthusiasts have long supported acquisition of land for the system, even when hunting was limited to a few refuges. Currently, 90 percent of the Refuge System acreage is open to hunting and fishing, but managers, most familiar with the needs of each refuge, determine which uses are compatible with wildlife conservation on a case-by-case basis. H.R. 1675 would instead create a presumption that hunting and other wildlife recreation are always compatible. The bill would facilitate expanded military operations on refuges by waiving compatibility requirements for such activities. H.R. 1675 would also make it difficult to add new land to refuges, requiring a special act of Congress for most new refuges, and would allow the transfer of federal refuges to the states.

On April 24, 1996, the House passed H.R. 1675, 287 – 138. NO is the pro-environment vote.

Votes

Show
Show
Export data (CSV)
  • Pro-environment vote
  • Anti-environment Vote
  • Missed Vote
  • Excused
  • Not Applicable

Vote Key

Sort by
Alabama
2025 State Scorecard Average

26%

Alaska
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Arizona
2025 State Scorecard Average

33%

Arkansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

California
2025 State Scorecard Average

78%

Colorado
2025 State Scorecard Average

51%

Connecticut
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Delaware
2025 State Scorecard Average

100%

Florida
2025 State Scorecard Average

28%

Georgia
2025 State Scorecard Average

34%

Hawaii
2025 State Scorecard Average

98%

Idaho
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Illinois
2025 State Scorecard Average

81%

Indiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

22%

Iowa
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Kansas
2025 State Scorecard Average

23%

Kentucky
2025 State Scorecard Average

19%

Louisiana
2025 State Scorecard Average

38%

Maine
2025 State Scorecard Average

76%

Maryland
2025 State Scorecard Average

85%

Massachusetts
2025 State Scorecard Average

99%

Michigan
2025 State Scorecard Average

44%

Minnesota
2025 State Scorecard Average

50%

Mississippi
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Missouri
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Montana
2025 State Scorecard Average

2%

Nebraska
2025 State Scorecard Average

3%

Nevada
2025 State Scorecard Average

69%

New Hampshire
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

New Jersey
2025 State Scorecard Average

73%

New Mexico
2025 State Scorecard Average

93%

New York
2025 State Scorecard Average

72%

North Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

26%

North Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Ohio
2025 State Scorecard Average

33%

Oklahoma
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Oregon
2025 State Scorecard Average

82%

Pennsylvania
2025 State Scorecard Average

47%

Rhode Island
2025 State Scorecard Average

97%

South Carolina
2025 State Scorecard Average

14%

South Dakota
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Tennessee
2025 State Scorecard Average

10%

Texas
2025 State Scorecard Average

31%

Utah
2025 State Scorecard Average

1%

Vermont
2025 State Scorecard Average

100%

Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

58%

Washington
2025 State Scorecard Average

75%

West Virginia
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%

Wisconsin
2025 State Scorecard Average

25%

Wyoming
2025 State Scorecard Average

0%