Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Environmental Law (214)
- Natural Resources Law (213)
- Administrative Law (203)
- Water Law (190)
- Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law (188)
-
- Energy and Utilities Law (186)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (176)
- Agriculture Law (171)
- Science and Technology Law (170)
- Cultural Heritage Law (169)
- Animal Law (162)
- Law and Race (126)
- Constitutional Law (80)
- Property Law and Real Estate (11)
- Agency (10)
- Civil Procedure (7)
- Supreme Court of the United States (6)
- Courts (5)
- Legislation (5)
- Litigation (5)
- Law and Society (4)
- State and Local Government Law (4)
- Civil Law (3)
- Government Contracts (3)
- Jurisdiction (3)
- Law and Economics (3)
- Legal Remedies (3)
- Architecture (2)
- Keyword
-
- Montana (11)
- EPA (10)
- Environmental law (10)
- Climate change (9)
- NEPA (9)
-
- BLM (8)
- Clean Water Act (7)
- Environment (7)
- Indian law (7)
- Bureau of Land Management (6)
- CERCLA (6)
- Climate Change (6)
- Mining (6)
- Ninth Circuit (6)
- APA (5)
- Administrative law (5)
- Alexander Blewett III School of Law (5)
- Endangered Species Act (5)
- Environmental (5)
- Environmentalism (5)
- Natural resources law (5)
- Public Land & Resources Law Review (5)
- Public lands (5)
- Renewable energy (5)
- Water (5)
- Water law (5)
- EIS (4)
- ESA (4)
- Environmental Protection Agency (4)
- Fish and Wildlife Service (4)
Articles 211 - 221 of 221
Full-Text Articles in Land Use Law
United States V. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., Jonah P. Brown
United States V. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., Jonah P. Brown
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Application of water to a beneficial use is the decisive element of a perfected water right in Montana. The BLM claimed rights to five reservoirs and one natural pothole under Montana law. The agency did not own livestock, but instead made the water available to grazing permittees. In United States v. Barthelmess Ranch Corp., the Montana Supreme Court affirmed the Montana Water Court’s holding that the BLM’s practice of making water available to others constituted a beneficial use and a perfected water right.
The Clark Fork Coalition V. Tubbs, Jonah P. Brown
The Clark Fork Coalition V. Tubbs, Jonah P. Brown
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Before landowners may appropriate groundwater in Montana, they must first apply for a DNRC permit pursuant to the Montana Water Use Act. Landowners may qualify for an exemption from the arduous permitting process if their appropriation meets certain criteria. However, the Act provides an exception to the exemption when a “combined appropriation” from the same source is in excess of ten acre-feet per year. The Clark Fork Coalition v. Tubbs affirmed the district court’s invalidation of the DNRC rule defining “combined appropriation” to only include physically connected groundwater wells.
Murray Energy Corporation V. Mccarthy, Sarah M. Danno
Murray Energy Corporation V. Mccarthy, Sarah M. Danno
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Holding that the widespread effects of environmental regulation on the coal industry constituted sufficient importance, the Northern District of West Virginia ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to conduct analysis on employment loss and plant reduction resulting from regulatory effects. In admonishing the EPA’s inaction, the court ruled that the Agency had a non-discretionary duty to evaluate employment and plant reduction. Furthermore, the court held that the EPA’s attempt to put forth general reports in place of required evaluations was an invalid attempt to circumvent its statutory duty.
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Kirsa Shelkey
Center For Biological Diversity V. Jewell, Kirsa Shelkey
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Following years of pressure to list the upper Missouri River population of Arctic grayling as an endangered or threatened species, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service issued a 2014 Finding that listing the fish was “not warranted at this time.” The Service relied on voluntary Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances in the Big Hole River Basin to determine that listing criteria under the Endangered Species Act was not met and therefore listing was not necessary. Ultimately, the court deferred to agency expertise and found that the Service’s decision not to list the Arctic grayling was reasonable.
Mauna Kea Anaina Hou V. Board Of Land And Natural Resources, Wesley J. Furlong
Mauna Kea Anaina Hou V. Board Of Land And Natural Resources, Wesley J. Furlong
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Native Hawaiians and the scientific community have been pitted against each other in a decades-long culture war over the construction of observatories and telescopes on sacred landscapes. In Mauna Kea Anaina Hou, the Hawai’i Supreme Court handed a victory to Native Hawaiian culture and rights by halting the construction of a new telescope on Mauna Kea. The decision must be read cautiously, however, as it is firmly rooted in the strict application of procedural due process.
Coastal Conservation Association V. United States Department Of Commerce, Taylor R. Thompson
Coastal Conservation Association V. United States Department Of Commerce, Taylor R. Thompson
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Eastern Louisiana District Court upheld Amendment 40 to the Gulf of Mexico Fishery Management Council’s Reef Management Plan. The court held that the Gulf Council and the National Marine Fisheries Service’s proposed rule establishing fishing quotas for the red snapper met all of the statutory guidelines imposed under the Magnusson-Stevens Act.
Agdaagux Tribe Of King Cove V. Jewell, Taylor R. Thompson
Agdaagux Tribe Of King Cove V. Jewell, Taylor R. Thompson
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In a lengthy opinion by the Alaska District Court, the battle for a proposed medical emergency road through the Izembek National Refuge stalled. The court held that the Department of the Interior’s No Action Alternative blocked the construction of the road was decided in accordance within the Department’s authority. It is not the end of the battle over the road, as the court alluded that Congress may be able to change this decision.
Pit River Tribe V. Bureau Of Land Management, 793 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2015), Kathryn S. Ore
Pit River Tribe V. Bureau Of Land Management, 793 F.3d 1147 (9th Cir. 2015), Kathryn S. Ore
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Pit River Tribe v. Bureau of Land Management, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit explained the correct application of the zone of interests test and further solidified the importance of proper NEPA and NHPA analysis in geothermal leasing. The court reaffirmed that the BLM and the Forest Service must conduct additional cultural and environmental analysis when granting lease extensions under the Geothermal Steam Act. Furthermore, it rejected the BLM’s decision to grant forty-year lease continuations to unproven geothermal leases by treating them as a unit rather than individually.
High Country Conservation Advocates V. United States Forest Service, 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014), Kathryn S. Ore
High Country Conservation Advocates V. United States Forest Service, 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014), Kathryn S. Ore
Public Land & Resources Law Review
High Country Conservation Advocates v. United States Forest Service concerns the United States Forest Service’s and the Bureau of Land Management’s authorizations of on-the-ground mining exploration activities in the Sunset Roadless Area of western Colorado. The United States District Court for the District of Colorado’s holding has far-reaching consequences for federal agencies’ analysis and disclosure of impacts on the climate under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). In addition to bolstering the Plaintiffs’ recent successes at establishing legal standing to challenge federal agencies’ disclosures and analyses of impacts on the climate under NEPA, High Country is the first case to …
Wildearth Guardians V. Jewell, 738 F.3d 298 (D.C. Cir. 2013), Ross Keogh
Wildearth Guardians V. Jewell, 738 F.3d 298 (D.C. Cir. 2013), Ross Keogh
Public Land & Resources Law Review
As part of a comprehensive strategy to keep coal “in the ground,” environmental plaintiffs challenged the BLM’s leasing of federally owned coal tracts in the Powder River Basin in 2010 on climate change grounds. WildEarth Guardians was the first suit to reach a federal circuit court, where the District of Columbia Circuit Court affirmed that the BLM’s environmental analysis of the climate change impacts of the leased coal was adequate under NEPA. Notably, in reversing the district court, the circuit court found that the plaintiffs had procedural standing.
Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh
Koontz V. St. Johns River Water Management District, Ross Keogh
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Koontz extends the application of Nollan and Dolan, which require exactions of real property for land-use permits to share a “nexus” and be “roughly proportional” to the regulation to be constitutional. A divided United States Supreme Court held that “monetary exactions,” potentially including building permit fees or impact fees, must satisfy the Nollan and Dolan requirements even if the government denies the permit.[1] The Court did not reach the merits of the petitioner’s appeal.
[1](Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., dissenting).