The court holds that the U.S. Department of the Navy's decision to transfer a large fleet of aircraft to a Virginia naval air station located near environmental group members' homes did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act. The court first holds that the Navy's consideration of the Virg...
The court holds that the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) when it approved revised plans for the construction of an airport highway without conducting a supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS). A citizen group claimed that ...
The court affirms a district court dismissal of an environmental group's claim that the U.S. Forest Service violated regulations governing off-road vehicle (ORV) use in the Siskiyou National Forest in Oregon. The court first holds that the Forest Service's ORV monitoring did not violate 36 C.F.R. §...
The court holds that a state land use board erred when it failed to affirm a county's preliminary approval of a residential subdivision in an area containing wetlands and designated as a wildlife habitat. The board rejected the county's argument that the wetlands at issue were not subject to the cou...
The court affirms a district court grant of summary judgment to the National Park Service on the grounds that the Park Service's deer management program in Gettysburg National Military Park and Eisenhower National Historic Site does not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Nat...
The court holds that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers properly granted a riverboat casino operator a Clean Water Act (CWA) and Rivers and Harbors Appropriations Act permit to construct and operate a riverboat gambling facility on the Ohio River in Indiana. The court first holds that the Corps proper...
The court reverses and remands a lower court decision holding that a portion of the National Park Service's (NPS') backcountry management plan (BMP) for the Canyonlands National Park in Utah that allows motor vehicle access on a 10-mile segment of road violates the National Park Service Organic Act ...
Above my desk at work, I keep a button that reads "Save the Ugly Animals Too." It is a reminder that more than just the charismatic megafauna, such as wolves and bald eagles and grizzly bears and whales, are worth conserving. From the standpoint of protecting the web of life, including the ecosystems that benefit us all by providing services such as water purification, flood control, nurseries for our fish and shellfish, and opportunities for outdoor recreation, it is often as important to conserve the lesser known species, the cogs and wheels that drive those ecosystems.
In a recent essay, Katrina Wyman suggests four substantial reforms aimed at improving implementation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and furthering species recovery: (1) decoupling listing decisions from permanent species protection;3 (2) requiring the Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) to implement cost-effective species protection measures;5 (3) prioritizing funding for biological hotspots;6 and (4) establishing additional protected areas.
Katrina Wyman has penned a bold, provocative, and innovative critique of the capability of the Endangered Species Act (ESA or Act) to meet the challenges of an increasingly human-dominated world. Bold because the ESA, perhaps more than any other environmental law, has impassioned champions who disfavor dissent. It is no easy task to critique a law with the truly noble mission to preserve life other than our own, particularly when the law's basic premise is that the mission's success is critically dependent on abundant and altruistic actions by us.