Endangered Species

Displaying 341 - 350 of 452
Titlesort descending Summary
Stout v. U.S. Forest Service


Plaintiff ranch owners grazed cattle within the Murderer's Creek Wild Horse Territory (WHT), an area in which the threatened Middle Columbia River steelhead was present. The Forest Service approved a wild horse management plan in the area, but failed to prepare a Biological Assessment (BA) to determine whether the plan was likely to affect the threatened species, and whether formal consultation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) was necessary. The Forest Service’s failure to comply with section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) was arbitrary and capricious, and was ordered to consult with NMFS on its plan.
Strength in Numbers: Setting Quantitative Criteria for Listing Species Under the Endangered Species Act


This article provides necessary background information on the ESA listing process. It discusses the numerous problems with the listing status quo, which combine to prevent us from meaningfully realizing the expectations Congress had for the listing process. It also provides the support for the primary thesis--that we can and should devise quantitative listing criteria--and suggests a superior model from which to work.
Supreme Decree 004, 2014 - Peru This law approves an updated list of categorization and classification of legally protected endangered wild life species into the following categories; critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable, near threatened, and data deficient. It describes the regulations and prohibitions regarding activities related to endangered species, as well as regulations relating to the export of such animals for cultural or scientific purposes.

Take It to the Limit: The Illegal Regulation Prohibiting the Take of Any Threatened Species Under the Endangered Species Act 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.
The Alaskan Wolf War: The Public Trust Doctrine Missing In Action


This article argues that the courts should have invoked Alaska’s public trust doctrine, which prevents the granting of preferences over state natural resources. The courts should have also rigorously examined the BOG’s wolf killing policies and protected the wolf as a valuable public trust resource. The BOG’s wolf killing policies have not been supported by the public, leading to ballot initiatives to protect the wolf. Congress is currently considering the Protect America’s Wildlife Act, which will prevent the same day airborne hunting of Alaska’s wolves.
The Commerce Clause Meets the Delhi Sands Flower-Loving Fly


The Delhi Sands Flower Loving Fly obtained endangered species status on the day a county planned to construct a hospital on the fly's dwindling habitat. Since the Endangered Species Act (ESA) prohibits the taking of any endangered species and courts have interpreted "taking" to include “significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures” a member of the species, the county made concessions to comply with the ESA. However, when the county learned that the fly stood in the way of its plans to redesign an intersection, the county filed suit challenging the application of the ESA to the fly's habitat; many others who also wished to build on the fly's habitat joined in the suit as well. Using United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), these groups hoped the district court would find that the ESA, under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution, could not constitutionally protect the fly's habitat. The district court, however, upheld the act's application. In the appeal of the district case, known as the National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Babbitt, 130 F.3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 1997), the appellate court upheld the lower court's decision, but offered three different explanations why the ESA could or could not constitutionally require protection of the fly. In this article, John Copeland Nagle investigates these three strikingly diverse explanations. In doing so, Nagle also investigates whether Congress has the power to protect something that is very rare, very valuable, and seemingly entirely uninvolved with commerce between the states.
THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT V. THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE: HOW THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DERAILED CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE ENDANGERED SPECIES
The Future of the African Rhinoceros: It’s Anything But Black & White


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.
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
The Public and Wildlife Trust Doctrones and the Untold Story of the Lucas Remand


This article seeks to address more thoroughly how the historical “old maxims” of the public and wildlife trust doctrines can be used as Lucas background principles of property law to overcome takings challenges brought against state and federal environmental regulations. First, the historical underpinnings of the public trust doctrine and the wildlife trust doctrine prior to the founding of the nation are described. The Illinois Central Railroad v. Illinois and Geer v. Connecticut, which are the key Supreme Court cases establishing the validity of these doctrines in the United States are summarized. The author asserts that the doctrines may be interchangeably applied as a means of protecting important environmental resources. The author illustrates how the use of these doctrines might have changed the ultimate outcome of the Lucas case.

Pages