Results
| Title |
Author |
Citation | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Future of the African Rhinoceros: Its Anything But Black & White | Robert Saxton | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
This paper will briefly review the biology and ecology of the various African rhino species and subspecies before presenting a description of the major current threats to African rhinos. The international legal response to rhino population declines will be outlined, followed by a discussion of concurrent rhino population trends. Suggestions for the future legal protection of rhinos will follow. |
| Chinese Endangered Species at the Brink of Extinction: A Critical Look at the Current Law and Policy in China | Charu Sharma | 11 Animal L. 215 (2005) |
The People's Republic of China harbors a vast number of plant and animal species, but those species have long been threatened by a thriving illegal trade. China became a signatory to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species in 1981 and has since passed a number of wildlife protection laws and regulations in an effort to curb the illegal trade and begin revitalizing some of its nearly-extinct animal populations. This article critically examines China's legislation and judicial decisions, concluding that much work remains to be done to protect endangered species in China. |
| THE LIZARD, THE SCIENTIST, & THE LAWMAKER: AN ANALYSIS OF THE TRENDING FIGHT OVER THE USE OF SCIENCE UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT AND HOW TO ADDRESS IT | Brie D. Sherwin | 20 Animal L. 357 (2014) | Recently in Texas, the dunes sagebrush lizard—a tiny, little-known reptile living in the sparse brush and dunes of the oil and gas fields—sparked a heated discussion and criticism over the listing process under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). This six-year battle ended with the withdrawal of a proposed rule to list the lizard and resulted in numerous criticisms about the role and use of scientific data throughout the process. Under the ESA, the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) is required to consider the best available scientific data when deciding whether to list a species. However, there is no direct legislative history explaining this standard. Because existing scientific data on “stressors” in the environment is typically limited and inadequate, this data gap leads to uncertainty, which unquestionably leads to difficult decision making by the regulatory agencies. Although a review of past listing designations confirms that FWS is not only utilizing sound science, but more often than not, is making sound decisions based on that science, many policy makers are still criticizing the use of science in decision-making processes and are pitting science against economics. This Article advocates for a more systematic, transparent application of science in the decision-making process: a well-defined “weight of evidence” approach that will foster structured deliberations, hypothesis testing, and the necessary clarity and transparency that will benefit all parties involved. |
| BULLHOOKS AND THE LAW: IS PAIN AND SUFFERING THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM? | Trevor J. Smith | 19 Animal L. 423 (2013) | In the United States, violent use of “bullhooks”—sharpened, steel-tipped rods—on captive elephants at carnivals, circuses, and zoos is all too routine. Yet animal-welfare advocates struggle to protect elephants from the (mis)use of bullhooks under the current regulatory regime. At the federal level, advocates cannot consistently rely on either the Animal Welfare Act or the Endangered Species Act, due to these statutes’ narrow provisions, standing limitations, and inconsistent enforcement. State animal-protection laws are equally deficient, as only two states have defined suffering and abuse clearly enough in their statutes to enable effective prosecution of elephant mistreatment, and plaintiffs in even these states frequently fail for lack of standing. Ultimately, the most effective solution to the problem of bullhooks may lie with local lawmaking authorities. Many counties and municipalities have begun to protect captive elephants by enacting ordinances that expressly ban these devices within their jurisdictions. These local laws, which are growing increasingly popular, could offer the most effective protections against elephant abuse to date. |
| GETTING SPECIES ON BOARD THE ARK ONE LAWSUIT AT A TIME: HOW THE FAILURE TO LIST DESERVING SPECIES HAS UNDERCUT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT | James Jay Tutchton | 20 Animal L. 401 (2014) | This Article, presented by a former general counsel for WildEarth Guardians, discusses the organization’s attempts to protect imperiled species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). By comparing extinction patterns from the past, we can see that the human impact on the Earth’s biodiversity is similar to that caused by past geological catastrophes. The ESA is the Noah’s Ark of our time, providing the best opportunity to help stem the tide of extinction. In analyzing the ESA, it is clear that the Act serves important human interests and is effective when utilized as intended. However, the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS)—citing budgetary restrictions—has failed to list thousands of species likely warranting protection. WildEarth Guardians, in an effort to prevent humans from driving a large percentage of other species to extinction, developed a strategy in which they filed two “mega-petitions” and conducted a “BioBlitz.” The mega-petitions, which sought the listing of hundreds of species, and the roughly six week BioBlitz finally got the attention of FWS and led to a Multidistrict Litigation settlement. The Article concludes by analyzing the effectiveness of the settlement and its resulting success for the future of the ESA. |
| AGENDA: Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act | University of Colorado Boulder Natural Resources Law Center | University of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, "AGENDA: Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act" (1996). Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (June 9-12). | In 1996, the Endangered Species Act was up for reauthorization, and with it, a variety of reform proposals were debated in the Biodiversity Protection Conference at the University of Colorado—Boulder. The following conference proceeding -- which included natural resource scholars, experts from the private and nonprofit sectors, and government officials--examined the rationale for biodiversity protection, the legal framework of the Endangered Species Act, and examples of implementation of the Act from across the West. Special attention was given to major issues raised by the Act that cut across all regions, including: consultations and recovery planning; habitat conservation plans; the ESA and water rights; the ESA and state programs; the ESA and tribal rights; economic impacts of the ESA; and ESA reform proposals. |
| FAQ: Can I sell an old fur made from an endangered animal? | Rebecca F. Wisch | Animal Legal & Historical Center |
Dear Animal Legal & Historical Center, |
| Protecting the Wildlife Trust: A Reinterpretation of Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act | Mary C. Wood | 34 Envtl. L. 605 (Spring, 2004) |
This Article attributes the failure of the ESA after thirty years to a basic flaw in interpreting one of the ESA's core provisions, section 7. Section 7 imposes a dual mandate on federal agencies to develop programs for the conservation of listed species, and to insure that federal actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any listed species. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service and NOAA Fisheries Service have failed to develop any regulation implementing the affirmative conservation program requirement, and they have interpreted the no jeopardy prohibition in a manner that allows imperiled species to drift closer and closer to extinction. This Article suggests a reinterpretation of section 7 in accordance with wildlife trust principles. |
| Take It to the Limit: The Illegal Regulation Prohibiting the Take of Any Threatened Species Under the Endangered Species Act | Jonathan Wood | 33 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 23, 23-52 (2015) | Part II of this article will provide a brief background on the adoption of the Endangered Species Act. Part III will explain that the statute does not authorize the agencies to extend the take prohibition to all threatened species. Part IV will argue that returning to the statutory scheme would result in a fairer distribution of the costs of species protection by imposing the costs of prophylactic protection on agencies and the public generally. Burdening individuals would be a last resort, as Congress intended. Finally, Part V will identify how Congress' policy is a reasonable way to align private incentives with species protection. The statute's approach would encourage property owners to stop a threatened species' further slide, to avoid imposition of the take prohibition, and to recover endangered species to the point where they can be downlisted and the take prohibition lifted. This would make the statute more effective at accomplishing its primary goal - recovering species to the point that they no longer require protection. |
| HABITAT-BASED CONSERVATION LEGISLATION: A NEW DIRECTION FOR SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION | Tara Zuardo | 16 Animal L. 317 (2010) |
This Comment explores various agreements designed to protect sea turtles at international and local levels as migratory species. Traditional approaches have been unsuccessful at addressing the myriad threats that face sea turtles. |