Law Commons^™

What Can We Learn From Past Reform Efforts, R. Max Peterson

The National Forest Management Act in a Changing Society, 1976-1996: How Well Has It Worked in the Past 20 Years?: Will It Work in the 21st Century? (September 16-18)

7 pages.

Contains footnotes and references.

Agenda: The National Forest Management Act In A Changing Society, 1976-1996: How Well Has It Worked In The Past 20 Years?: Will It Work In The 21st Century?, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center, Colorado State University, Oregon State University, Pinchot Institute For Conservation, Syracuse University. Maxwell School Of Citizenship And Public Affairs

The National Forest Management Act in a Changing Society, 1976-1996: How Well Has It Worked in the Past 20 Years?: Will It Work in the 21st Century? (September 16-18)

Conference speakers include University of Colorado School of Law professors David H. Getches and Charles F. Wilkinson.

Jack Ward Thomas, Chief of the USDA Forest Service, will be a featured speaker at the Center's annual public lands conference, commemorating the 20th anniversary of the National Forest Management Act. This year's conference is sponsored by Colorado State University, Oregon State University, Pinchot Institute for Conservation, and the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University.

When Congress passed NFMA in 1976, few would have imagined the enormity of the changes in the world in technology, science and population we …

Where Do We Go From Here: The Federal Coal Leasing Amendments Act--Past, Present, And Future, Sam Kalen

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Problem Of Federal-Private Split Mineral Estates: Who Has Control?, David B. Shaver, Andrew C. Mergen, Scott W. Hardt, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

The Problem of Federal-Private Split Mineral Estates: Who Has Control? (April 23)

19 pages.

Includes footnotes.

Collection of 3 papers presented at the Hot Topics in Natural Resources Law program held on April 23, 1996.

Contents: National Park Service regulation of private mineral estates / David B. Shaver -- Recent litigation regarding federal split estates : who has control? what are the limits? / Andrew C. Mergen -- The problem of federal-private split mineral estates / Scott W. Hardt

Many federally owned lands overlie privately owned oil and gas and mineral rights. Increasingly, the competition between agency multiple use directives and private interests in resource development has resulted in legal battles between …

A Trust For Whom?: Managing Colorado's 3 Million Acres Of State Land, John M. Evans, Reeves Brown, Mark A. E. Burget, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

A Trust for Whom?: Managing Colorado's 3 Million Acres of State Land: A Critique of the Constitutional Amendment (February 5)

14 pages.

Includes biographical information for John M. Evans, Reeves Brown, and Mark A. E. Burget.

State Land Board Commissioner Maxine Stewart was also a speaker for this program, but did not submit any written materials.

Contents:

A trust for whom? managing Colorado's 3 million acres of state land : a critique of the constitutional amendment / prepared by John Evans -- A cattlemen's [sic] perspective of state land management / presented by Reeves Brown -- Remarks outline / Mark A. E. Burget

Program was presented on Monday, February 5, 1996 at the offices of Holland & Hart in Denver, …

The Public Lands And The National Heritage, Charles F. Wilkinson

Publications

No abstract provided.

Dual Regulation, Collaborative Management Or Layered Federalism: Can Cooperative Federalism Models From Other Laws Save Our Public Lands?, Hope M. Babcock

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Few would assert that the current governance model for managing the nation's public lands, which grants exclusive authority to the federal government, has protected the natural resource values of those lands or provided a framework for the harmonious resolution of conflicts over their use. Dissatisfaction is apparent from recurrent proposals to privatize public lands or to devolve their ownership to the states. The emergence of the "wise use" and "county supremacy" movements directly challenges the authority of the federal government to manage its land. While this new state and local assertiveness is not without historical basis nor completely without merit, …