Journal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 24, no. 2 (Fall 2009)https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/105992024-03-28T16:57:00Z2024-03-28T16:57:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 455-494 : The Great Lakes Compact and the Public Trust Doctrine: Beyond Michigan and Wisconsin Common LawDonegan, Bridgethttps://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/106322015-06-17T23:34:59Z2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 455-494 : The Great Lakes Compact and the Public Trust Doctrine: Beyond Michigan and Wisconsin Common Law
Donegan, Bridget
Part I of this Comment examines the Great Lakes Compact and its effect in
Michigan and Wisconsin. Part II provides background on the public
trust doctrine and its evolution in Michigan and Wisconsin, including
its scope, the obligations of the states as trustees, and the availability
of citizen standing to enforce the trust. Part III explains how the
Compact’s public trust is distinct from the states’ traditional public
trust doctrines. The Comment concludes that judicial recognition of a
distinct Compact trust, defined by the scope and purpose of the
Compact itself, will best reconcile the Compact’s purposes with
traditional state public trust doctrines.
40 p.
2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 423-454 : Reauthorizing the Endangered Species Act in Favor of Wildlife and Wild Lands: An Inevitable Result of Narrative Changes in Twenty-First Century America?Hickey, Valeriehttps://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/106312015-06-17T23:35:43Z2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 423-454 : Reauthorizing the Endangered Species Act in Favor of Wildlife and Wild Lands: An Inevitable Result of Narrative Changes in Twenty-First Century America?
Hickey, Valerie
This Article explores how the shifting mosaic of interests, reacting
to how the Endangered Species Act was implemented, crystallized into stark and
opposing narratives in the public imagination during the debates over
its reauthorization. This Article suggests that these narratives
polarized in reaction to provisions in the ESA that appeared either to
endanger nature or to abrogate property rights. This opposition of
interests between groups loosely aligned in favor of nature,
hereinafter the Environmentalists, and groups loosely associated to protect property rights, hereinafter the Rugged Individualists, led to
intense policy debate but little movement in decision making.
Focusing on appeals to different expertise, disparate case studies, and
divergent narratives, this Article examines the availability cascades,13
mechanisms by which a singular perspective repeated often enough
can become a widely held belief, that consolidated these opposing
groups and resulted in a stalemate over reauthorization. This
stalemate froze the ESA and has prevented its long overdue
reauthorization. While the stalemate keeps the legislation on a short
leash since it requires annual appropriations, something that suits each
side to a certain extent, the legislation fails to insulate private property
proponents or conservationists from longer-term decisions that would
undermine current investments. As a result, both sides have
attempted to bridge the divide. These stopgap measures succeeded in
undoing the stalemate in some place-based problem sets.
Nonetheless, the national debate remains in a deep freeze. Or does it?
32 p.
2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p.367-422 : When Chemical Releases Occur at a Federal Facility: Navigating the Recovery LabyrinthHenkels, Dianehttps://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/106302015-06-17T23:35:14Z2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p.367-422 : When Chemical Releases Occur at a Federal Facility: Navigating the Recovery Labyrinth
Henkels, Diane
The purpose of this Article is to describe the legal options a local
government, private individual, or business might pursue to recover
from a chemical release at a federal facility caused by an emergency
or disaster, as defined by law, or by the negligence of federal
personnel, government contractors, or third parties.
56 p.
2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 285-366 : Grizzly Bears, Gray Wolves, and Federalism, Oh My! The Role of the Endangered Species Act in De Facto Ecosystem-Based Management in the Greater Glacier Region of Northwest MontanaGuercio, Lara D.Duane, Timothy P.https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/106292015-06-17T23:35:13Z2009-01-01T00:00:00ZJournal of Environmental Law & Litigation : Vol. 25, No. 1, p. 285-366 : Grizzly Bears, Gray Wolves, and Federalism, Oh My! The Role of the Endangered Species Act in De Facto Ecosystem-Based Management in the Greater Glacier Region of Northwest Montana
Guercio, Lara D.; Duane, Timothy P.
In this Article, we explore how (1) differences in the role of the
ESA for the management of grizzly bear and gray wolf populations,
and (2) changes in the legal regime associated with delisting of the
gray wolf, both affect species conservation and transjurisdictional,
ecosystem-based management efforts in the complex institutional
landscape of the GGR of northwest Montana. We believe the ESA
has played the central role in efforts to implement ecosystem-based
management over the past two decades in a wide range of settings, so
these differences and likely changes in the legal regime are likely to
affect the success of such efforts. The experience of grizzly and wolf
management in the GGR is therefore relevant for the conservation of
wide-ranging predators and ecosystem-based management in other
locations across the United States and within the West.
82 p.
2009-01-01T00:00:00Z