H.R. 2345 redesignates the existing Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park as the Ocmulgee Mounds National Park and creates an adjacent Ocmulgee Mounds National Preserve in Georgia. The bill authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to add lands into each unit — by purchase from willing sellers, donation, or exchange — and directs that the park and preserve be administered together under National Park Service law.
Beyond land acquisition and administration, the bill builds formal roles for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation through consultation, a statutory hiring preference, and protections for sacred and burial sites; it also establishes an advisory council and directs a general management plan to guide cultural and natural resource stewardship. The measure leaves acquisition to voluntary transactions, prohibits the use of eminent domain, and authorizes appropriations to implement the statute.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill converts the current National Historical Park into a National Park and creates a separate Preserve whose boundaries are defined by a map. The Secretary may acquire lands or interests in lands within the mapped National Park Area and National Preserve Area by purchase from willing sellers, donation, or exchange, but the bill forbids using eminent domain. The Preserve comes into existence once the Secretary publishes a Federal Register notice that sufficient land has been acquired to form a manageable unit.
Who It Affects
Directly affected parties include the National Park Service (as the administering agency), the Muscogee (Creek) Nation (named in the statute for consultation and hiring preference), private landowners inside the mapped area, the State of Georgia (for fish and wildlife coordination), and nearby local governments and tourism interests.
Why It Matters
The statute creates a new federal land-management footprint while formalizing a government-to-government relationship with the Tribe and transferring specified tribal fee land into federal trust. For landowners and local officials it changes land-management prospects without granting eminent-domain authority; for agencies it creates new planning, consultation, and resource-protection obligations.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
H.R. 2345 starts by changing the name of the existing unit from Ocmulgee Mounds National Historical Park to Ocmulgee Mounds National Park and then authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to add additional holdings to that park area. It also defines a separate National Preserve area on a referenced map; the preserve does not automatically come into existence but is triggered when the Secretary files a Federal Register notice that enough land has been acquired to form a manageable unit.
The bill strictly limits acquisition methods to voluntary transactions — purchase from a willing seller, donation, or exchange — and disclaims any authority to use eminent domain.
Administration is structured so the park and preserve operate as one unit of the National Park System under the applicable provisions of title 54, U.S. Code. The Secretary must prepare a general management plan within three years of enactment (in consultation with the advisory council) and the plan must explicitly address cultural resources and cultural landscapes, with attention to burial grounds, sacred sites, and culturally significant flora.
The statute instructs the Park Service to allow hunting and fishing on preserve and park waters in accordance with federal and state law, while reserving the right to designate no-hunt/no-fish zones or seasons for safety or resource management — and requiring consultation with the State before imposing such restrictions.The bill elevates Tribal involvement in several ways. It mandates consultation consistent with established executive orders, requires the Park Service to protect sacred and cultural sites and to provide access for members of Tribes with ancestral connections to the corridor, and directs the Secretary to establish hiring preference policies consistent with the Indian Reorganization Act’s Indian preference rule.
It also takes all United States interest in approximately 126 acres of land owned in fee by the Tribe and places that acreage into federal trust for the Tribe, declaring that land to be part of Indian country and subject to trust-property rules. The statute sets up a seven-member advisory council under the Federal Advisory Committee Act to advise on the management plan and to develop recommendations for accommodating Tribal interests, with membership slots reserved for Tribal representatives, Park Service and Fish and Wildlife officials, a State DNR representative, and a regional commission designee.Finally, the bill clarifies a few operational points: it permits coordination of cultural programs concerning neighboring Bond Swamp National Wildlife Refuge (with Fish and Wildlife Service concurrence), assures that normal military overflight activities are not precluded, makes the underlying map available for inspection, allows technical corrections to the map, subjects the advisory council to FACA rules, and authorizes such sums as necessary to carry out the Act without specifying an appropriation level.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The preserve is not effective automatically: the Secretary must publish a Federal Register notice that 'sufficient land' within the mapped Preserve Area has been acquired to form a manageable unit before the Ocmulgee Mounds National Preserve is established.
All land acquisitions for either unit are limited to voluntary means — purchase from willing sellers, donations, or exchanges — and the bill explicitly forbids the use of eminent domain.
The Secretary must complete a general management plan within 3 years of enactment and that plan must inventory and provide for preservation and interpretation of burial grounds, sacred sites, cultural landscapes, and culturally significant flora.
The statute takes roughly 126 acres of tribal fee land into federal trust for the Muscogee (Creek) Nation and designates that acreage as part of Indian country, to be administered under trust-property laws.
An advisory council of seven members (including three Tribal representatives and slots for NPS and USFWS officials) must advise the Secretary and submit recommendations on accommodating Tribal interests within 3 years.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
States the Act’s short title: 'Ocmulgee Mounds National Park and Preserve Establishment Act.' This is administrative but signals the bill’s dual-objective: rename the park and create a preserve unit.
Definitions
Defines terms used throughout the bill, including 'Map' (the controlling boundary map), 'Secretary' (Interior), 'State' (Georgia), and 'Tribe' (the Muscogee (Creek) Nation). The statutory definition of the Map establishes that boundaries will be map-driven and that the Map is a formal reference document for later administration and acquisitions.
Redesignation and land acquisition
Redesignates the existing National Historical Park as the Ocmulgee Mounds National Park and clarifies that all prior references now point to the new name. It authorizes the Secretary to add land depicted as 'National Park Area' and 'National Preserve Area' on the Map to each unit by purchase, donation, or exchange and requires incorporation and administration of acquired parcels into the relevant unit. The section also contains two operational constraints: it allows only voluntary acquisitions and provides that the Preserve's legal existence depends on a Federal Register notice that sufficient land has been assembled to form a manageable unit.
Administration, management plan, and resource use
Directs that the park and preserve be managed together under National Park Service law and requires a general management plan within three years. The plan must address cultural resources, burial grounds, and cultural landscapes, including flora. The section permits hunting and fishing consistent with applicable federal and state laws, authorizes the Secretary to designate closures or no-hunting/fishing zones for safety and resource reasons (after consulting the State for rulemaking), requires a Tribal hiring preference consistent with the Indian Reorganization Act, and preserves existing administrative arrangements for nearby Bond Swamp Refuge while encouraging cultural program coordination.
Advisory Council
Creates a seven-member advisory council subject to FACA (with specified exemptions), charged to advise on development and implementation of the management plan and to submit recommendations on accommodating Tribal interests within three years. Membership is specified (park and Fish and Wildlife Service representatives, three Tribal representatives, a State DNR representative, and a Middle Georgia Regional Commission designee), sets meeting frequency (at least twice yearly), and makes appointment and quorum rules explicit.
Land held in trust
Takes 'all right, title, and interest' of the United States in approximately 126 acres of land owned in fee by the Tribe into federal trust for the Tribe, declares that land part of Indian country under 18 U.S.C. § 1151, and instructs that it be administered under laws and regulations applicable to trust property. This provision establishes immediate federal trust status for that acreage and creates overlapping federal park/trust and Tribal jurisdictional interests that will require careful coordination.
Authorization of appropriations
Authorizes 'such sums as are necessary' to implement the Act but does not specify a funding level or create a multi-year appropriation schedule. This leaves implementation dependent on future appropriations actions by Congress.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Environment across all five countries.
Explore Environment in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Muscogee (Creek) Nation — Gains formal consultation rights, statutory hiring preference for Park/Preserve jobs, protections and access to sacred and burial sites, and has approximately 126 acres of tribal fee land taken into federal trust, strengthening sovereign land-holding and access.
- National Park Service — Receives a clear statutory mandate and boundary map to expand stewardship responsibilities and to develop a general management plan directing cultural- and landscape-scale preservation.
- Local tourism and heritage economy — Stands to benefit from enhanced park branding, potential new visitation, and park-driven cultural-interpretation programming that can stimulate local economic activity.
- State and regional natural resource partners — Gain a formal partner role in fish and wildlife matters inside the park/preserve and a state seat on the advisory council to influence management decisions.
- Researchers and cultural-resource professionals — Benefit from an explicit statutory requirement to inventory and preserve cultural landscapes, burial sites, and culturally significant flora, which can expand research and preservation opportunities.
Who Bears the Cost
- Private landowners within the mapped areas — Face potential loss of development options and changes in land-management context, and may experience pressure to sell to the federal government without a right of compelled sale (no eminent domain).
- National Park Service budget and staff — Will carry new planning and operational costs (management plan, cultural protection measures, staffing), with implementation contingent on uncertain appropriations.
- Local governments and infrastructure providers — Could face increased demand for services (roads, emergency response, visitor facilities) without an automatic funding mechanism attached to the bill.
- United States Fish and Wildlife Service — May need to coordinate culturally focused programs at Bond Swamp NWR and accommodate new joint activities, which could require staff time and resources.
- Tribe and advisory council members — While beneficiaries, Tribal representatives and local appointees will need to invest time and resources to participate in planning and oversight without compensation for council service.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing protection of Tribal cultural resources, sacred sites, and coherent cultural landscapes with the public-access, multiple-use, and operational realities of a National Park and Preserve — especially when land will be added only voluntarily, funding is unspecified, and some public uses (hunting, fishing, military overflights) are explicitly preserved. That trade-off forces choices between strict protection and broad public access, as well as between Tribal control and federal management structures that have different legal and operational logics.
The bill resolves several immediate questions about name, acquisition methods, and administrative structure, but it leaves important implementation choices unresolved. It authorizes indefinite appropriations ('such sums as are necessary') rather than a defined funding stream, which makes the management plan, staffing, cultural-protection measures, and land-acquisition program dependent on future budgeting decisions.
The requirement that the Preserve be declared only after 'sufficient land' is acquired creates a flexible threshold but also invites ambiguity about what constitutes a 'manageable unit' and how long the Secretary may take to reach that determination.
Placing approximately 126 acres of tribal fee land into federal trust creates simultaneous federal trust status and Tribal interests in property that is also within park boundaries; that intersection raises governance questions (jurisdiction, law enforcement, taxation, and land-use authority) that the statute does not fully resolve. Likewise, the statute mandates protection and access for sacred sites while authorizing general public uses (including hunting, fishing, and visitor access) and explicitly permits military overflights — all of which will require careful on-the-ground zoning, potentially contentious closures, and sustained Tribal–federal coordination.
The advisory council is subject to FACA, which increases transparency but can constrain informal government-to-government consultation practices and slow deliberations.
Operationally, because acquisitions are limited to voluntary transactions and eminent-domain powers are disclaimed, the NPS may end up with a checkerboard ownership pattern that complicates landscape-scale conservation and cultural-landscape management. That fragmentation could force compromises between cultural-protection goals (which favor contiguous control and restricted access) and the bill’s explicit provisions to allow hunting and fishing and maintain other multi-use patterns in parts of the Preserve.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.