|
Abstract:
|
Part I of this Article is a history of the O&C lands, and Part II
describes the Act’s legislative history, provisions, regulations,
and amendments. Part III summarizes the various official interpretations
of the O&C Act, including DOI Opinions, federal
case law, and administrative appeals board decisions. Part IV argues
that the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Headwaters v. Bureau of
Land Management, Medford District was wrongly decided, and
that a fair reading of the case law and legislative history prompts
a different conclusion than that drawn by the appellate court. Finally,
Part V highlights a prescient opportunity for the public and
the courts to reexamine the conventional wisdom that the O&C
Act is a “dominant use” statute. |
