scholarly journals Nearly Extinct in the Wild: The Vulnerable Transparency of the Endangered Species List

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-28
Author(s):  
Benjamin W. Cramer
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Species List ◽  
The Public ◽  
Government Transparency ◽  
In The Wild ◽  
Agency Action

This article reconstructs the Endangered Species Act as a government information statute. That Act makes use of an official list of vulnerable creatures that is used for agency action to save them from extinction. This article argues that the official list of species is not sufficiently accurate or transparent to citizens, so the compilation of that list does not satisfy the public interest goals of American environmental law or government transparency policy.

The public interest environmental law group: from USA to Europe

2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (6) ◽  
pp. 1014-1032 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Goodman ◽  
James Connelly
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
The Public

Eisenhower’s executive privilege and the public interest

2019 ◽  
pp. 54-84
Author(s):  
Kevin M. Baron
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Attorney General ◽  
Executive Branch ◽  
Executive Power ◽  
Freedom Of Information ◽  
Government Information ◽  
Executive Orders ◽  
White House ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Creation

This chapter delves into the depths of one of the most important developments within modern American politics, the creation and institutionalization of executive privilege. In facing a fervent Congress in the grips of McCarthyism, Eisenhower issued a letter denying testimony to the Senate for the Army-McCarthy hearings. His letter included a memo from Attorney General Brownell that claimed the president had an inherent constitutional privilege to deny information to Congress or the public if it was in the public interest and for national security. This action institutionalized the Cold War Paradigm in the executive branch and created an extra-constitutional power for the president. Eisenhower issued several executive orders concerning classification and public dissemination of government information, along with the creation of the Office of Strategic Information (OSI) within the Commerce Department to oversee these policies. Eisenhower claimed historic precedent to justify his inherent constitutional power, regardless, it showed a learned response that changed executive power. Congress would respond in 1955 by creating the Special Subcommittee on Government Information chaired by Rep. John Moss, given jurisdiction for oversight on all executive branch information policies and practices. With the issue of freedom of information institutionalized in Congress, a 12-year legislative power struggle would unfold between Congress and the White House ending with the passage of the Freedom of Information Act in 1966.

scholarly journals Takings, Compensation and Endangered Species Protection on Private Lands

1998 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Innes ◽  
Stephen Polasky ◽  
John Tschirhart
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Interest Group ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Economic Incentives ◽  
Private Land ◽  
Private Lands ◽  
The Public ◽  
Species Preservation ◽  
Endangered Species Protection

Preserving endangered species on private land benefits the public, but may confer cost on landowners if property is 'taken.' Government compensation to landowners can offset costs, although the Endangered Species Act does not require compensation. The authors survey private economic incentives for species preservation created by alternative property rights and compensation regimes. Compensation will effect investments in land and the willingness of landowners to collect and impart information about their land's preservation value. The authors also address government incentives and how deadweight costs of compensation will influence design of property rights, and how government's susceptibility to interest group pressure may cause inefficient preservation.

scholarly journals Marine mammals and sea turtles listed under the U.S. Endangered Species Act are recovering

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abel Valdivia ◽  
Shaye Wolf ◽  
Kieran Suckling
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Marine Mammals ◽  
Population Change ◽  
Extinction Risk ◽  
Sea Turtles ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Marine Species ◽  
Effective Manner ◽  
The U.S

AbstractThe U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) is the world’s strongest environmental law protecting imperiled plants and animals, and a growing number of marine species have been protected under this law as extinction risk in the oceans has increased. Marine mammals and sea turtles comprise 36% of the 161 ESA-listed marine species, yet analyses of recovery trends after listing are lacking. Here we gather the best available annual population estimates for all marine mammals (n=33) and sea turtles (n=29) listed under the ESA as species. Of these, we quantitatively analyze population trends, magnitude of population change, and recovery status for representative populations of 23 marine mammals and 9 sea turtles, which were listed for more than five years, occur in U.S. waters, and have data of sufficient quality and span of time for trend analyses. Using generalized linear and non-linear models, we found that 78% of marine mammals (n=18) and 78% of sea turtles (n=7) significantly increased after listing; 13% of marine mammals (n=3) and 22% of sea turtles (n=2) showed non-significant changes; while 9% of marine mammals (n=2), but no sea turtles declined after ESA protection. Overall, species with populations that increased in abundance were listed for 20 years or more (e.g., large whales, manatees, and sea turtles). Conservation measures triggered by ESA listing such as ending exploitation, tailored species management, and fishery regulations, among others, appear to have been largely successful in promoting species recovery, leading to the delisting of some species and to increases in most. These findings underscore the capacity of marine mammals and sea turtles to recover from substantial population declines when conservation actions under the ESA are implemented in a timely and effective manner.

Private Enforcement of the Public Interest and the Europeanisation of Administrative Law – The Trianel Judgment of the ECJ

2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 607-615
Author(s):  
Carola Glinski ◽  
Peter Rott
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Public Information ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Private Enforcement ◽  
Access To Justice ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
The Public ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
Private Participation

The EU has taken influence on the administrative laws of the Member States by introducing elements of public information, participation of stakeholders and private enforcement, and environmental law was the frontrunner of this development. The same tendency can be observed at the international level, culminating in the adoption of the Århus Convention in 1998. This has created tensions with traditional administrative law systems that have strongly relied on public authorities to produce the correct outcome whilst severely restricting private participation and private access to justice. The Trianel case, dealing with the protection of habitats against a coal power plant, demonstrates the need for fundamental adjustment of German administrative law, and it may lead to subsequent changes of the modalities of administrative procedural law in order to really allow the private enforcement of the public interest (authors’ headnote).

The Wild Has No Words: Environmental NGOs Empowered to Speak for Protected Species as Swedish Courts Apply EU and International Environmental Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 250-261 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaffa Epstein ◽  
Yaffa Epstein ◽  
Jan Darpö
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Brown Bear ◽  
Habitats Directive ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Ngos ◽  
Procedural Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Government

The Stockholm Administrative Court recently ruled that Sweden’s wolf management policies are incompatible with the Habitats Directive. These policies are also the subject of an on-going infringement proceeding by the European Commission. The administrative court’s decision has been appealed. This case is significant for two reasons. First, it interprets controversial provisions of the Habitats Directive. But perhaps more importantly, it demonstrates the growing impact of EU law in a member state. This was the first major case in which the national courts were able to review a hunting decision pertaining to a species protected under EU law because standing to bring public interest lawsuits for the protection of species has been recognized only very recently. Under traditional Swedish procedural law, only the government can represent the public interest in administrative decision making and in court. Here, Swedish courts finally applied to hunting decisions the CJEU’s holding in Slovak Brown Bear, which says that national procedural law must be interpreted so as to allow environmental NGOs to challenge administrative decisions that might contravene EU environmental law. The court did not request a preliminary ruling despite that fact that controversial questions of EU law were implicated however. While the court applied EU law, it preferred to maintain control over its interpretation.

scholarly journals Transforming (perceived) rigidity in environmental law through adaptive governance: a case of Endangered Species Act implementation

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hannah Gosnell ◽  
Brian C. Chaffin ◽  
J. B. Ruhl ◽  
Craig Anthony (Tony) Arnold ◽  
Robin K. Craig ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Adaptive Governance

Analyze Environmental NGOs’ Plight and Countermeasures in the Public Interest Litigation

2014 ◽  
Vol 644-650 ◽  
pp. 5901-5903
Author(s):  
Zhen Chen
Keyword(s):  
Public Interest ◽  
Yunnan Province ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Public Interest Litigation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Government Organizations ◽  
Environmental Ngos

Chromium residue pollution incident occurred in August 2011 in Luliang, Yunnan province, shortened as Luliang case, which is China's first public interest litigation case filed by environmental non-government organizations (NGOs). The case is innovative and groundbreaking. This paper firstly introduces the case briefly, combining with the provisions of the new environmental law to analyze environmental NGOs’ plight in the public interest litigation, and then proposes some countermeasures to improve environmental NGOs’ work in public interest litigation.

scholarly journals Data indicate the importance of expert agencies in conservation policy

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Evans ◽  
Jacob W. Malcom ◽  
Ya-Wei Li
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Marine Fisheries ◽  
Threatened And Endangered Species ◽  
Using Data ◽  
National Marine Fisheries Service ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Imperiled Species

ABSTRACTData on the implementation of laws and policies are essential to the evaluation and improvement of governance. For conservation laws like the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), such data can inform actions that may determine the persistence or extinction of species. A central but controversial part of the ESA is section 7, which requires federal agencies to conserve threatened and endangered species. One way they do this is by consulting with expert agencies for the ESA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), on actions they may undertake that impact listed species. Using data from all 24,893 consultations recorded by NMFS from 2000 through 2017, we show that federal agencies misestimated the effects of their actions on listed species in 21% of consultations, relative to the conclusions reached by NMFS. In 71% of these cases the federal agency underestimated the effects of their action. Those discrepancies were particularly important for the conservation of 14 species in 22 consultations, where the agency concluded that its action would not harm a species, while NMFS determined the action would jeopardize the species’ existence. Patterns of misestimation varied among federal agencies, and some of the agencies most frequently involved in consultation also frequently misestimated their effects. Jeopardy conclusions were very rare—about 0.3% of consultations—with a few project types more likely to lead to jeopardy. These data highlight the importance of consultation with the expert agencies and reveal opportunities to make the consultation process more effective.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTThe US Endangered Species Act is the strongest environmental law any nation has enacted to conserve imperiled species. However, policy debates over how the Act should be implemented continue to this day. This study provides the first comprehensive evaluation of how the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) implements one of the Act’s most important conservation programs – consultations under section 7. Our results reveal novel insights into the importance of NMFS role in ensuring federal actions do not jeopardize the existence of listed species. By using data to inform policy debate, we identify approaches to implementing section 7 that would undermine the conservation of imperiled species, and those that could improve the efficiency of the program without sacrificing these protections.

scholarly journals Status of the recovery mandate under section 7(a)(1) of the U.S. Endangered Species Act

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meg Evansen ◽  
Heather Harl ◽  
Andrew Carter ◽  
Jacob Malcom
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Endangered Species Act ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Current Status ◽  
The Public ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Internet Searches ◽  
Policy Guidance ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Imperiled Species

The U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) is widely considered to be one of the strongest laws for protecting imperiled wildlife, with nearly all species protected under the law still existing today. Among the ESA’s strongest provisions, at least as written, is the requirement under section 7(a)(1) that federal agencies use their authorities to help recover imperiled species. New initiatives like 30x30, the campaign to conserve at least thirty percent of U.S. lands and waters by 2030, offer opportunities to reinvigorate and expand 7(a)(1) programs to play a significant role in biodiversity conservation. To gauge the current status of 7(a)(1) plans and assess their effectiveness, we collected all section 7(a)(1) materials available to the public through internet searches and direct requests to agencies. We evaluated the scope of existing 7(a)(1) programs and found that despite the clear potential benefits of a strong 7(a)(1) program, the section has been significantly underused by federal agencies. Further, we show that existing plans are highly inconsistent in content and style, and we trace that inconsistency to the lack of policy guidance for their creation and implementation. Based on these findings, we recommend four strategies for improving 7(a)(1) implementation: establishment of formal guidance from federal wildlife agencies, tailored guidance from other federal agencies to help them meet their 7(a)(1) obligation, and dedicated funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document