Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Is habitat modification that kills or injures endangered wildlife a prohibited taking under the Endangered Species Act?

Article Abstract:

The District of Columbia Circuit Court decision in Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon v. Babbitt (Sweet Home III) should be reversed and the Fish and Wildlife regulation that was at issue should be affirmed. The regulation concerned whether habitat modification should be considered 'harm' under the Endangered Species Act. The court was concerned that the regulation would make any habitat modification per se a violation, but the regulation specifies that the modification must significantly impair an endangered species' essential behavioral patterns. Deference should be granted to the agency's interpretation according to the Chevron standard.

Author: Greif, Nancy
Publisher: Natural Resources Journal
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 1995
Habitat (Ecology), Habitat modification, Spotted owl, Spotted owls

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Federal agency management plans are 'ongoing' actions under Endangered Species Act's section 7

Article Abstract:

The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled in Pacific Rivers Council v. Thomas that federal land and resource management plans (LRMPs) started before endangered species are listed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are subject to Endangered Species Act section 7 consultation. This is consistent with the Supreme Court's ruling in Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill. EPA consultation on LRMPs and not just amendments or individual parts is necessary to avoid irreversible damage to habitats.

Author: Bada, Cheryl
Publisher: Natural Resources Journal
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 1995
Administrative procedure, Case Note, Public lands

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


The WTO Panel decision on the U.S. shrimp embargo: another ruling against U.S. enforcement of species protection in trade

Article Abstract:

The author discusses the impact of a WTO Panel ruling that the US shrimp embargo violated the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade, on the survival of the sea turtle. Topics include the conflict between US sovereign environmental law and GATT, and suggested means of resolving the conflict.

Author: Bisong, Susan
Publisher: Natural Resources Journal
Publication Name: Natural Resources Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0028-0739
Year: 2000
United States, International, Interpretation and construction, World Trade Organization, Protection and preservation, Powers and duties, Environmental law, Sea turtles, Shrimping

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Cases, Endangered species
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: If Harley-Davidson has its way, the resounding roar that its motorcycles make could become a registered, protected sound under the U.S. Trademark Act
  • Abstracts: Civil rights cases point to more litigation: race-conscious measures have been limited this term, but these decisions only raise more issues
  • Abstracts: Assignability of letter of credit proceeds: adapting the code to new commercial practices. Litigating the letter of credit case - liability of banks under the current and revised Uniform Commercial Code
  • Abstracts: Minding the gap: determining interest rates under the U.N. convention for the international sale of goods. Uncommon preservation: common law recognition of admiralty jurisdiction in seamen's wage and hypothecation cases
  • Abstracts: The cross-border insolvency paradigm: a defense of the modified universal approach considering the Japanese experience
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.