Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Conservation And Hunting: Till Death Do They Part? A Legal Ethnography Of Deer Management, Irus Braverman
Conservation And Hunting: Till Death Do They Part? A Legal Ethnography Of Deer Management, Irus Braverman
Journal Articles
Claims that hunters are exemplar conservationists would likely come as a surprise to many. Hunters, after all, kill animals. Isn’t there a better way to appreciate wildlife than to kill and consume it? Yet there is no mistake: wildlife managers frequently make the claim that hunters, in the United States at least, are in fact some of the greatest conservationists. This article explores the complex historical and contemporary entanglements between hunting and wildlife conservation in the United States from a regulatory perspective. Such entanglements are multifaceted: hunting provides substantial financial support for conservation and hunters are the state’s primary tools …
How National Park Law Really Works, John Copeland Nagle
How National Park Law Really Works, John Copeland Nagle
Journal Articles
This article provides the first explanation of the relationship between the three overlapping sources of national park law. It first explains how the Organic Act affords the National Park Service substantial discretion to manage the national parks, including deciding the proper balance between enjoyment and conservation in particular instances. It next shows how federal environmental statutes push national park management toward preservation rather than enjoyment. Third, Congress often intervenes to mandate particular management outcomes at individual parks, typically but not always toward enjoyment rather than preservation. The result is that the NPS has substantial discretion to manage national parks in …
Qualitative, Quantitative, And Integrative Conservation, Jamison E. Colburn
Qualitative, Quantitative, And Integrative Conservation, Jamison E. Colburn
Journal Articles
In this essay for a symposium on new directions in environmental law, I reflect back on the last 35 years of Endangered Species Act (ESA) practice and offer several modest reforms. My claim is that conservation has been growing increasingly quantitative and risk-based, much like other fields of regulation, but that big problems lie ahead if this trend continues with the ESA as currently structured. In my view, the quantitative demands of listing species, designing recovery objectives, and designating so-called 'critical habitat' are depleting the resources we have put into the ESA because it is an expression of fundamentally qualitative …