Law Commons^™

Epa Shoots Down Lead Shot Regulation: Lead Ammo's Unreasonable Risk To Human Health And The Environment, And The Special Situation Of The California Condor, Rachel Hawkins

Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal

This Comment argues that the EPA has the authority to ban lead ammunition nationwide under The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), because lead ammunition poses an unreasonable risk to human health and the environment that is not adequately addressed by other laws. Further, the EPA retains the authority to ban lead ammunition nationwide under TSCA because a national ban would not be preempted by other federal laws. Part II of this Comment explores the problematic history of lead regulation as well as the devastating effects of lead poisoning on humans. Part III begins with an in-depth explanation of the harmful …

Farallon Poison Paradox: The U.S. Fish And Wildlife Service's Attempt At Saving One Species While Subjecting Others To Probable Death, Vadim Sidelnikov

Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal

This Comment examines the failure of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to adequately protect this country’s unique wildlife from highly toxic rodenticides like brodifacoum, and particularly the EPA’s broad exemption for the FWS’s use of brodifacoum in island conservation. Part II explains the problem of non-native mice at the Farallon National Wildlife Refuge and the FWS’s proposed plan to eradicate the mice. Additionally, this Part describes the federal legal framework that governs pesticide application and use within the United States.

Part III evaluates the EPA’s narrow scope in determining to reregister brodifacoum, focusing on the EPA’s decision to allow …

Climate Change Litigation In The Wake Of Aep V. Connecticut And Aes V. Steadfast: Out To Pasture, But Not Out Of Steam, Cecilia O'Connell Miller

Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal

On April 19, 2011, two courts heard oral arguments in cases that will define the future of climate change litigation for decades to come. In American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut (hereinafter AEP), the United States Supreme Court considered whether environmental advocates can use a federal common-law nuisance claim as a vehicle for seeking redress for climate change accruing from greenhouse gas (hereinafter GHG) emissions. Just a hundred miles south that same day, the Virginia Supreme Court heard oral arguments in AES Corporation v. Steadfast (hereinafter Steadfast), in which Virginia’s highest court considered whether a commercial general liability …

Montana V. Wyoming: An Opportunity To Right The Course For Coalbed Methane Development And Prior Appropriation, Michelle Bryan Mudd

Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal

Part I of this Article provides a brief background on the Yellowstone River Compact and the Montana v. Wyoming litigation. This part further explains the Special Master’s analysis of the CBM issue, as well as the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on improved irrigation efficiency. When viewed together, these decisions provide an important framework for determining how the parties’ regulation of CBM development should proceed. Part II then describes the magnitude of the CBM groundwater pumping issue and asserts that the posture of the Montana v. Wyoming case provides a unique opportunity not only to set Powder River Basin CBM development …

A Water Story With Original Jurisdiction And A Doctrine For Changing Uses, Melosa Granda

Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal

This is a story of how two rivers in the remote reaches of Wyoming and Montana, and the underlying water, became a federal case before the United States Supreme Court. It is an account of a local water dispute whose resolution will likely impact the course of water law, and more importantly, water throughout the entire country.