Law Commons^™

Opinion Denying Defendants' Motion To Dismiss, Harold H. Greene

Sandia Pueblo Mountain Claim

No abstract provided.

Brief For The United States, Appellee/Cross-Appellant

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Opening Brief Of Plaintiff- Appellee/Cross-Appellant Indian Tribes

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Jicarilla Apache Water Rights Settlement Act Amendment Of 1996, United States 104th Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal legislation: Act of October 9, 1996 - Sec. 2, Amendment to the Jicarilla Apache Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992, PL 104-261 §2, 110 Stat. 3176. Parties: Jicarilla Apache Nation and US. An amendment to the Settlement Act of 1992 to move the adjudication decree deadline from December 31, 1996 to December 31, 1998. Related to rights in the Rio Chama drainage. [Source: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=GPO&browsePath=United+States+Statutes+at+Large+%28Digitized%29%2F1992&searchPath=United+States+Statutes+at+Large+%28Digitized%29%2F1992&leafLevelBrowse=false&isCollapsed=false&isOpen=true&ancestors=root&packageid=STATUTE-106&ycord=1248]

1996 Amendment To The San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement, United States 104th Congress

Native American Water Rights Settlement Project

Federal Legislation: 1996 Amendment to the San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992, PL 104-261, § 3,100 Stat. 3176 (Oct. 9, 1996). Parties San Carlos Apache Tribe & US. Section 3711(b)(1) of Title XXXVII of the San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement of 1992 (106 Stat. 4752) is amended by striking `December 31, 1996' and inserting `June 30, 1997'. [Source: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collection.action?collectionCode=GPO&browsePath=United+States+Statutes+at+Large+%28Digitized%29%2F1992&searchPath=United+States+Statutes+at+Large+%28Digitized%29%2F1992&leafLevelBrowse=false&isCollapsed=false&isOpen=true&ancestors=root&packageid=STATUTE-106&ycord=1248]

Implementing The Public Welfare Requirement In New Mexico's Water Code, Consuelo Bokum

Publications

Despite the fact that the New Mexico legislature added a public welfare criterion to the water code over 10 years ago, the State Engineer Office has not addressed the application of the criterion by regulation and has only addressed the public welfare briefly in a few decisions. There is almost no case law in New Mexico addressing this issue. More and more participants, however, are raising public welfare in water rights protests. This paper addresses how the public welfare criterion has developed in western water law and proposes an approach for use of the criterion in New Mexico.

Resource Law Notes Newsletter, No. 38, Fall Issue, Aug. 1996, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

Resource Law Notes: The Newsletter of the Natural Resources Law Center (1984-2002)

No abstract provided.

Reflections From The Seventh American Forest Congress: Some Thoughts For National Forest Management, William R. Bentley

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)

21 pages.

Contains endnotes and references.

Nfma In Relation To Stewardship, Science, Community And Culture: Some Points Of View From The Alaska Region, Phil Janik, Neil Hagadorn, Rai Behnert

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)

10 pages.

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 …

Whigs And Hunters: Indian Tribal Rights In The National Forests, Robert A. Williams, Jr.

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 1 page of references.

Bruce Lien Co. V. Three Affiliated Tribes, District Court Of North Dakota, Andrew W. Bogue

US Government Documents related to Indigenous Nations

This court case, decided on August 28, 1996, presented the problem of tribal council authority to enter the tribe into binding contracts. The disputing parties in this case entered a contract for co-operation of casino activities at Four Bears Motor Lodge while Wilbur Wilkinson was part of the Tribal Council. When the council changed leadership, the validity of the contract between Bruce Lien Co. and the Three Affiliated Tribes was challenged by the new leadership who alleged that Wilkinson did not have the authority to bind the Three Affiliated Tribes to the contract. Bruce Lien Co. felt they were entitled …

Brief Of Amicus Curiae State Of Oregon In Support Of Appellant

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Brief Amici Curiae Of Inner Sound Crab Association, Edward Knudson, And Washington Dungeness Crab Fishermen's Association, Ernest Summers

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Intervenor-Defendants/Appellants Adkins, Et. Al.

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Opening Brief Of Intervenor-Defendants/Appellants Puget Sound Shellfish Growers

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Intervenor-Defendant/Appellant 26 Tideland And Upland Private Property Owners ("Upow")

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

Brief Of Intervenors-Defendants/Appellants "Private Owners"

United States v. Washington, Docket Nos. 96-35014, 96-35082, 96-35142, 96-35196, 96-35200, 96-35223 (135 F.3d 618 (9th Cir. 1998))

No abstract provided.

People's Rights Or Victim's Rights: Reexamining The Conceptualization Of Indigenous Rights In International Law, Feisal Hussain Naqvi

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Errata--Motion For A Status Conference, Thomas R. Bartman

Sandia Pueblo Mountain Claim

No abstract provided.

Affidavit Of L. Lamar Parrish, L. Lamar Parrish

Sandia Pueblo Mountain Claim

No abstract provided.

Essential Elements Of Amendments To The Endangered Species Act, John Harja

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

14 pages.

A Tribal Perspective On Esa Reform, Ted Strong

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

4 pages.

Reform Of The Endangered Species Act: Overview Of Administrative Reforms [Congressional Hearing Material Submitted By Bruce E. Babbitt, Secretary, Department Of Interior], Dinah Bear

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

31 pages.

Columbia River Salmon: Are Any Of The Esa Tools Adequate For The Job?, John M. Volkman

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

32 pages.

Contains footnotes.

The Esa, Water Rights, And Regulatory Takings, Barton H. Thompson, Jr.

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

28 pages.

Contains 2 pages of references.

A Comparison: Lessons From The Columbia Basin And The Upper Colorado Basin Fish Recovery Efforts, Mary Christina Wood

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

47 pages.

Contains 5 pages of references.

Water Rights, Contract Rights, And The Endangered Species Act, Brian E. Gray

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

12 pages.

Contains references.

The Endangered Species Act: Tramping On Tribal Rights?, Robert S. Pelcyger

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

32 pages.

Contains footnotes.

Agenda: Biodiversity Protection: Implementation And Reform Of The Endangered Species Act, University Of Colorado Boulder. Natural Resources Law Center

Biodiversity Protection: Implementation and Reform of the Endangered Species Act (Summer Conference, June 9-12)

Conference organizers and/or faculty included University of Colorado School of Law professors Betsy Rieke, David H. Getches, Michael A. Gheleta and Charles F. Wilkinson.

All across the country--in Congress, in state legislatures and in urban and rural communities--people are discussing why we should or should not protect biodiversity and how best to do so. Since the Endangered Species Act is up for reauthorization, a variety of reform proposals are being debated. Speakers--including natural resource scholars, experts from the private and nonprofit sectors, and government officials--will examine the rationale for biodiversity protection, the legal framework of the Endangered Species Act, and …