Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

Agricultural Biotechnology: Environmental Benefits for Identifiable Environmental Problems

Agricultural biotechnology has generated much debate about the environmental consequences of field trials and commercialization of transgenic crops. Thus far, the debate has focused on opponents' claims of alleged risks presented by transgenic crops and the proponents' responses to those asserted risks. To date, three issues have dominated the debate:

. the risk of gene flow;

. the risk of weediness; and

. the risk of insect-resistance.

The Minimal Effects Exemption and the Regulation of Headwater Wetlands Under Swampbuster, With a Coda on the Theme of SWANCC

Under the Wetland Conservation subtitle of the Food Security Act of 1985, as amended, commonly known as "Swampbuster," wetlands may be used to grow crops provided they are not degraded by this practice. In the legislation, Congress has made an effort, by use of the "minimal effects" concept, to make precise just what farming practices are acceptable. If a farming practice has only a minimal effect on the wetland's function, then the farmer is not ineligible for participation in federal loan, commodity price and income support, and conservation programs.

SWANCC: Constitutional Swan Song for Environmental Laws or No More Than a Swipe at Their Sweep?

The U.S. Supreme Court decision last term in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (SWANCC), striking down the migratory bird rule for wetlands regulation, warrants some reading of the Court's environmental tea leaves. Some fine commentary in these pages still leaves murky whether the opinion seriously imperils other environmental laws and regulations. Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist's SWANCC opinion for a five-Justice majority had worrisome implications that the new restrictive view of the U.S.

Environmental Defense Fund v. Alexander

The court refuses to enjoin continued construction of the Tennessee-Tombigbee Waterway and rules that plaintiffs are barred by res judicata and collateral estoppel from challenging defendants for alleged violations of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination A...

Fund for Animals v. Espy

The court holds that a nonprofit organization has standing to seek a preliminary injunction to prevent the implementation of a research study by the Department of Agriculture (DOA) on the transmission of brucellosis from wild bison in Yellowstone National Park to cattle outside the park without DOA ...

New York, City of v. Mineta

The court holds that the Secretary of Transportation did not violate the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century (AIR21) in granting take-off and landing slots to airlines servicing New York's Kennedy and LaGuardia Airpo...

Greater Yellowstone Coalition v. Bosworth

The court holds that the U.S. Forest Service (Forest Service) violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Rescissions Act by reissuing a permit for livestock grazing in the Gallatin National Forest without first conducting a NEPA review. In 1994, the Forest Service implemented a po...

Hodges v. Abraham

The court holds that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) complied with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in connection with its transfer of surplus plutonium from Colorado to South Carolina. DOE argued that the governor of South Carolina, who filed suit against DOE, lacked standing becaus...

West Virginia Highlands Conservancy, Inc. v. Norton

The court affirms in part and vacates in part a district court's award of attorney fees to environmental groups that sought to rescind new mining permits issued to a company that owned a mine in violation of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA). The U.S. Department of the Interior'...