Displaying 6141 - 6150 of 6153
Title Authorsort descending Citation Summary Type
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. Article
A Survey of Agreements and Federal Legislation Protecting Polar Bears in the United States Jamie M. Woolsey 1 Journal of Animal Law 73 (2005)

Throughout the past few decades, international concern for polar bear welfare has increased dramatically. The multinational agreements forged for their conservation require significant policing, cooperation, and understanding of the complex ecological and economic considerations surrounding these predators. Woolsey’s article explores the international agreements and measures designed to save both the bears and their critical habitat.

Brief Summary of Dolphins Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act Jamie M. Woolsey Animal Legal & Historical Center

This overview examines the historical underpinnings behind the passage of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the application of the Act today. Of primary importance is the high mortality rate of dolphins in the tuna fishery and the continued pressures on dolphins due to harassment of dolphins in the wild.

Detailed Discussion of Dolphins Under the MMPA Jamie M. Woolsey Animal Legal & Historical Center

This discussion analyzes the historical significance and legislative history of the Marine Mammal Protection Act and the Act's effectiveness in protecting dolphins. Included in the topics are international efforts in dolphin conservation and more recent concerns of human interaction with dolphins.

Dolphins Jamie M. Woolsey

Brief Summary of Dolphin Protection under the MMPA
Jamie M. Woolsey (2002)


Topical Introduction
Overview of Dolphins Under the Marine Mammal Protection Act Jamie M. Woolsey Animal Legal & Historical Center

This summary provides a brief history behind the adoption of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. It also examines the goals of the Act and current controversies that have arisen due to modern pressures on dolphin populations.

An Analysis of Favre’s Theory on the Legal Status of Animals: Towards a Reconsideration of the “Person-Property Dichotomy” Akimune Yoshida AA1161370X In modern legal systems, only persons (including natural persons and legal persons) can have legal rights; property cannot. This perspective is known as the “Person-Property Dichotomy". Although animals are categorized as personal property, their legal treatment has changed from that of other forms of property, and in many jurisdictions, anti-cruelty laws have been enacted to punish owners of animals who abuse animals in their care. This unique legal status of animals leads us towards a reconsideration of the “Person-Property Dichotomy”. The Japanese Government is currently in the process of amending the Act on Welfare and Management of Animals. In Japan, there has been a dearth of academic debate to date about the legal status of animals, and it is helpful to see how other jurisdictions have discussed this topic. This paper focuses on David S. Favre’s theory as it has not been studied as deeply in Japan as its importance and societal needs merit. In order to keep animals within the concept of property and recognize their legal rights, Favre proposed an innovative concept, “living property”. His theory is based on the principle of trusts, which divide title into equitable and legal title, and acknowledges equitable self-ownership by animals. Whereas domestic animals possess equitable title and some legal rights, owners have only legal title. Such animals with equitable title thus become living property. When owners infringe domestic animals’ legal rights, such animals can sue their owners with the help of other humans as guardians. This paper introduces Favre’s theory on the legal status of animals from his own highly original perspective and analyzes it critically with a view to clarifying its implications for Japanese law. Article
US - Audit- APHIS Animal Care Program Inspection and Enforcement Activities Robert W. Young USDA/OIG-A/33002-3-SF; Report No. 33002-3-SF This report presents the results the Office of Inspector General's audit of the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) Animal Care (AC) unit, which has the responsibility of inspecting all facilities covered under the AWA and following up on complaints of abuse and noncompliance. The office also reviewed AC’s coordination with the Investigative and Enforcement Services (IES) staff, which provides support to AC in cases where serious violations have been found. In addition, the office also evaluated the effectiveness of the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUCs)—the self-monitoring committees at the research facilities responsible for ensuring compliance with the AWA. Article

Twenty volumes is no small feat for an independently funded, entirely student-run journal. With a total staff of twenty students, including a small Board comprised of Editor in Chief, James Goldstein, Jr.; Managing Editor, William Fig; Articles Editor, Kelly Jeffries; and Form and Style Editor, Benjamin Allen, Animal Law published the inaugural volume of the world’s first animal law journal in 1995. This landmark event was the result of the hard work of Lewis & Clark students, with some key support. In this first volume, Animal Law gave “special thanks to Benjamin Allen for his hard work and dedication in founding [the] journal, to Matthew Howard and Nancy Perry for their inspiration, and to Richard Katz for his invaluable support throughout the process.” Animal Law also gave “thanks to Michael Blumm for his advice and encouragement, and to the Board of [Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF)] for their support.”