Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
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. …
Adverse Modification Of The Endangered Species Act: Regulatory Impediment Or Tool?, Chuckie Sullivan
Adverse Modification Of The Endangered Species Act: Regulatory Impediment Or Tool?, Chuckie Sullivan
University of Massachusetts Law Review
In the past, the agencies charged with the implementation of the Endangered Species Act have shirked invoking the full range of regulatory tools at their disposal. They altered the structure of the Act in violation of Congressionally-granted authority to better accommodate both developmental and conservation interests. After a string of critical judicial decisions, the Services finally changed their implementation of the Act to parallel the protections envisioned by Congress. Though these changes will shift strength between provisions within the Act, they will not drastically alter the status quo by allowing the Services discretion in making judgments regarding the recovery of …
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.