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

Comment on <em>Rethinking the ESA to Reflect Human Dominion Over Nature</em>

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.

Above All, Try <i>Something</i>: Two Small Steps Forward for Endangered Species

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.

Wyman's <em>Rethinking the ESA</em>: Right Diagnosis, Wrong Remedies

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.

United States v. Apollo Energies, Inc.

The Tenth Circuit held that the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) applies a strict liability standard to the taking or killing of migratory birds but that it requires a defendant to proximately cause the statute's violation for the statute to pass constitutional muster. The case arose when two oil dr...

Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Fla. v. Corps of Eng'rs

The Eleventh Circuit upheld a lower court decision dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction two lawsuits filed by a Native American tribe challenging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' plans to replace a mile of the ground-level Tamiami Trail (U.S. Highway 41) with a bridge to increase the ...

Wilderness Soc'y, Inc. v. Rey

The Ninth Circuit dismissed environmental groups' claims against the U.S. Forest Service challenging revisions it made to regulations implementing the Forest Service Decisionmaking and Appeals Reform Act (ARA). The revisions limit the scope and availability of notice, comment, and appeals procedures...

Agee v. Monsanto Co.

A district court granted an individual's motion to remand to state court her personal injury lawsuit against a chemical company and its successors for damages stemming from the unlawful disposal of dioxin and furan waste at a chemical plant in Nitro, West Virginia. She alleges that her exposure to t...

State v. Carroll

The court holds that the doctrine of res judicata does not bar landowners' third-party state-law contribution and indemnification claim against a neighboring company for cleanup costs the state incurred in its efforts to remedy petroleum contamination on the landowners' property. The company previou...

Mancuso v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y.

The court dismisses an individual's Clean Water Act (CWA) citizen suit against an electricity company for lack of standing. The individual claimed that a company violated the CWA by discharging pollutants into Echo Bay, New York. The court first holds that although the individual's amended interroga...

Sierra Club v. Department of Energy

The court dismisses on ripeness grounds an environmental group's claim that the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers violated the National Environmental Policy Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Clean Water Act, and Executive Order No. 11990 with respect to the proposed e...