|
Brief Summary of Elephants and the Ivory Trade |
This paper will examine the global ivory trade and its effect of elephant populations. It begins with a historical discussion of ivory demand as well as the relationship between elephants and ivory. The paper then looks at poaching rates over time and the poaching industry generally. Next, the paper considers two competing approaches to elephant conservation and catalogues how they have informed CITES decisions regarding elephants beginning in 1975. In addition, it discusses relevant laws in ivory-producing nations and consuming nations. Finally, the paper examines U.S. laws regarding elephants and ivory, as well as legal challenges to those policies. |
|
Brief Summary of Feral Cat Population Control |
This is a brief overview of feral cat population issues. Opposing viewpoints on cat control are presented. Issues of legal liability for cat predation are explored.
|
|
Brief Summary of Gray Wolf Legal Challenges from 2005 to the Present |
This brief summary discusses the ongoing legal battle between environmental groups and the federal government concerning the gray wolf's status on the Endangered Species List since 2005.
|
|
Brief Summary of the Endangered Species Act |
The Endangered Species Act ("ESA") prohibits importing, exporting, taking, possessing, selling, and transporting endangered and threatened species (with certain exceptions). ESA also provides for the designation of critical habitat and prohibits the destruction of that habitat. ESA provisions are enforced through the use of citizen suits, imprisonment, fines, and forfeiture.
|
|
Brief Summary of the Laws Pertaining to Zoos |
This summary briefly examines the laws pertaining to zoo animals on the state, federal, and international level. Until the laws are improved, and there is stricter control and more enforcement, zoo animals will continue to suffer.
|
|
Brief Summary of the Recovery of the Gray Wolf Under the Endangered Species Act |
The gray wolf was almost extinct in the lower 48 states of the United States in the middle of the 1900s. Thanks to the help of the Endangered Species Act the gray wolf is well on its way to recovery. This summary discusses the
|
|
Buffalo Field Campaign v. Zinke |
Plaintiffs Buffalo Field Campaign and other environmental groups petitioned the Fish and Wildlife Service ("Service") to add the Yellowstone bison population to the federal endangered species list. After the Service made a threshold “90–day” determination that Buffalo Field's petition failed to present sufficient scientific evidence that listing the bison may be warranted, Buffalo Field brought suit under the Administrative Procedure Act, alleging that the Service's determination was arbitrary and capricious. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia ruled that the Service applied an improper standard when evaluating Buffalo Field's petition, granted Buffalo Field's motion for summary judgment, denied the Service's cross-motion, and remanded the case for the agency to conduct a new 90–day finding using the proper standard. In particular, the court observed that the Service "simply picked a side in an ongoing debate in the scientific community," thereby in inappropriately heightening the standard of evaluation for a 90-day petition. Because of that, the court agreed with the Service that remand is the appropriate remedy as opposed to to directing the Service to begin a 12-month review. |
|
BULLHOOKS AND THE LAW: IS PAIN AND SUFFERING THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM? |
|
|
Bundorf v. Jewell |
Plaintiffs, individuals and environmental organizations, challenged a decision by the Bureau of Land Management's (BLM) to authorize two rights-of-way for the Searchlight Wind Energy Project (“Project”) in southern Nevada (on BLM land) under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). After the District Court remanded to the BLM for further explanation, the plaintiffs moved for a permanent injunction. Plaintiffs raised claims that the activity violated the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”), and the Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), among other federal statutes. In effect, the plaintiffs argue that when the Court remanded for further explanation, it essentially reached the merits of their NEPA and ESA claims "by identifying explanatory gaps in the Remand Order." This then necessitated vacatur of the Record of Decision (“ROD”), Final Environmental Impact Statement (“FEIS”), and the Biological Opinion (“BiOp”). On appeal, the Court agreed with plaintiffs that clarification of the Remand Order is appropriate to include the ROD, the FEIS, and the BiOp with vacatur. Otherwise, the court notes, the Federal Defendants would get "two bites at the same apple . . . to fill the analytical gaps the Court identified in the Remand Order." The Federal Defendants must address the gaps related to: "(1) the density of desert tortoises, the adverse effects on desert tortoise habitat due to noise, and the remuneration fees and blasting mitigation measures for desert tortoises; (2) the status of FWS's recommendations regarding eagle take permitting and an Eagle Conservation Plan; and (3) BLM's conclusions about risks to bald eagles, protocols for golden eagle surveys, and risks to and mitigation measures for bat species." |
|
CA - Endangered Species - CHAPTER 1.5. ENDANGERED SPECIES |
The California Fish and Game Code considers that endangered and threatened species are of ecological, educational, historical, recreational, esthetic, economic, and scientific value to the people of the State of California. The State of California has legislation that allows the state to protect endangered and threatened species by acquiring land for these species to protect, restore and enhance the habitat of these species. Section 2080 prohibits the importing, taking, exporting, possessing, purchasing, or selling, any species, or any part or product thereof that is endangered or threatened. |
