Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Law
Friends Of Animals V. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, Bradley E. Tinker
Friends Of Animals V. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, Bradley E. Tinker
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Friends of Animals v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service, the Ninth Circuit held that the plain language of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act allows for the removal of one species of bird to benefit another species. Friends of Animals argued that the Service’s experiment permitting the taking of one species––the barred owl––to advance the conservation of a different species––the northern spotted owl––violated the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. The court, however, found that the Act delegates broad implementing discretion to the Secretary of the Interior, and neither the Act nor the underlying international conventions limit the taking of …
Buffalo Field Campaign V. Zinke, Hallee C. Kansman
Buffalo Field Campaign V. Zinke, Hallee C. Kansman
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Despite years of litigation and legislation, the protection status of bison in and around Yellowstone National Park remains unsettled. Buffalo Field Campaign, a non-profit group, has spent decades spearheading the fight to list the species as either endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Buffalo Field Campaign v. Zinke tests the scope of agency directives and the strictness of the statutory language which guides agency actions.
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Lowell J. Chandler
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The ESA protects threatened or endangered species, and species likely to become threatened or endangered within the foreseeable future, throughout all or a significant portion of their range. In Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, the United States District Court for the District of Arizona overturned a Fish and Wildlife Service policy defining the significant portion of range language in the ESA. The policy interpretation limited ESA protections to apply only when a species faced risk of extinction throughout its entire range. The court deemed this policy impermissible because it effectively rendered the significant portion of range language meaningless. …
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Save Our Cabinets V. U. S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Jaclyn Van Natta
Public Land & Resources Law Review
No abstract provided.
Alaska Oil & Gas Association V. Pritzker, Benjamin W. Almy
Alaska Oil & Gas Association V. Pritzker, Benjamin W. Almy
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Alaska Oil & Gas Association v. Pritzker, the Ninth Circuit reversed the United States District Court for the District of Alaska’s decision to strike down the National Marine Fisheries Service’s (“NMFS”) listing of distinct population segments of the Pacific bearded seal. The court determined that the NMFS was in full compliance with the requirements of the Endangered Species Act and squarely rejected the district court’s demand for highly specific data pertaining to the projected effects of climate change on the bearded seal.