Coastal and Ocean Management Law in a Nutshell
Authors:
Christie, Donna R. / Hildreth, Richard G.
Edition:
4th
Copyright Date:
2015
17 chapters
have results for Coastal and Ocean Management Law in a Nutshell
Introduction 10 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Coastal and ocean management law is perhaps unique, because it focuses on a rather than on a generally recognized field of law. Coastal and ocean law comprises aspects of property, land use regulation, water law, natural resources law, constitutional law, federal and state statutory law, and international law in the special context of the coastal and ocean environment. Natural interrelations of land, water, and natural resources are complex and have equally intricate legal consequences that have resulted in ongoing conflicts over public and private rights, boundaries, jurisdictions, and management priorities.
- … to ensure the protection, maintenance, and restoration of the health of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources, enhance the sustainability of ocean and coastal economies, preserve our maritime heritage, support sustainable uses and access, provide for adaptive management to enhance our understanding of and capacity to respond to climate change and ocean acidification, and coordinate with our national security and foreign policy interests.
- The recognition that the coasts are a national resource in need of more effective management led to enactment of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA). The CZMA provided federal funding for states to develop and administer coastal programs according to guidelines set out in the Act. Although state participation was voluntary, the incentives provided by the CZMA—federal funding and the promise that federal actions would be consistent with state plans—led to the participation of all U.S. coastal states and territories in the program. The CZMA allowed for a great deal of flexibility and a wide range of approaches for coastal management programs. These programs range from networks of existing state laws to special regulatory regimes created to manage development in the coastal zone. Most of the effort during the first decades, however, was focused on the land side of the coastal zone.
- Ocean and coastal law are now at a point where major changes are needed to assure that marine and coastal ecosystems will remain viable and sustainable in this new century. This book focuses on the special environmental and institutional concerns of the area where land and water meet. The user conflicts, the jurisdictional gaps and overlaps, and the clash of public and private, state and national, and national and international interests all contribute to a legal regime that continues to evolve to attempt to address the challenges of sustainability.
- More than thirty years later, domestic and international developments have brought more attention to the coastal zone’s “wet side.” Ocean fisheries have collapsed; dead zones have proliferated around the world; and global warming is leading to dangerous ocean acidification. Global warming has also led to melting of the Arctic icecap, exposing the potential for exploitation of Arctic’s continental shelf and leading to controversies over sovereignty over Arctic resources. The oil spill led to new questions about our management of ocean resources. The oceans are also seen as the sites and sources of renewable energy production, but as these uses intensify, more user conflicts and additional impacts on the ocean environment will develop.
- Open Chapter
Chapter IV. Offshore Resource Management 314 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Managers and planners today support theories of ecosystem management and comprehensive, integrated planning for ocean areas and resources. Unfortunately, our institutions, agencies, and laws have evolved in a manner that often frustrates attempts to approach management of coastal and ocean resources in a coherent and cooperative fashion. Rather than dealing directly with the issue of cooperative management of ocean and coastal resources that are of mutual importance, the state and federal governments have waged battles for sixty years over proprietary interests and preemption issues. Immeasurable funds and resources have been expended in endless controversies over ownership, jurisdiction, and boundaries.
- The current generation of sanctuaries differs from those designated earlier in two ways: (1) their size, and (2) their management approach. The newest marine sanctuaries encompass extensive ocean areas of both federal and state jurisdiction. Designation of large ocean areas allows management of more of the activities that affect sanctuary resources and provides the opportunity to develop an ecosystem-based approach to resource management. Management plans can be developed that deal with direct and indirect, as well as primary and secondary, effects on sanctuary resources. Federal and state cooperative programs are encouraged, and advisory councils have become an integral part of both the plan development process and subsequent plan implementation. Because designation of such large areas affects numerous user groups, conflict management is an important part of plan development and implementation. See, e.g., ...(D.C.Cir. 1995). This new kind of national marine sanctuary depends on a...
- DOI must disapprove or require modification of a development plan if it is determined that the lessee has failed to demonstrate compliance with applicable laws, that the activities threaten national security or defense, or that the activities pose serious harm to life (including aquatic life), property, or to the marine, coastal, or human environment. Id. § 1351(h)(1). The plan also cannot be approved if it is inconsistent with the coastal management program of an affected state. Id. § 1351(d). If a plan is disapproved for failure to comply with statutory requirements of the OCSLA, including the consistency requirements of the CZMA, the lessee is entitled to no compensation. If a plan is disapproved for one of the other reasons specified in the section and an approvable, modified plan is not submitted within five years, the Secretary must cancel the lease and compensate the lessee. Id. § 1351(h)(2).
- Most coastal states had legislation establishing offshore marine boundaries prior to 1940, and many state constitutions and federal acts admitting states to the Union described state boundaries as extending a marine league or more offshore. See, Gordon Ireland, 2 La. L. Rev. 252 (1940) (reviewing the offshore claims and law of each coastal state as of 1940). Numerous state courts had early concluded that the original colonies succeeded to the King’s interest in the tidelands and adjacent seas and, therefore, title vested in the original colonies. Decisions of federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court, impliedly, if not expressly, supported the presumption of state ownership of the seabed and the territorial sea. See, e.g., ...56 L.Ed. 390 (1912). Even Roosevelt’s Secretary of the Interior, Harold L. Ickes, charged with administering United States public lands, stated that the federal government had no authority to lease the seabed for mineral exploration. In the now...
- By 1976, it had become clear that neither the twelve-mile fishing zone created around the United States in 1964 by the Bartlett Act nor international agreements for fisheries management were slowing the depletion of fish stocks by an increasing number of foreign high seas fishing fleets. The notion of the high seas as a global commons was quickly leading to the decimation of fish populations as technologies developed to more intensely harvest fishing grounds. By the mid-1970s, a number of countries were extending fisheries jurisdiction beyond territorial waters, and negotiations at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS III) had reached substantial consensus, at least in principal, that coastal states should have exclusive fishery jurisdiction to 200 miles offshore. Congress’ perception that the UNCLOS III negotiations were proceeding too slowly to protect offshore fisheries and the American fishing industry led to the passage in 1976 of the Fishery Conservation and
- Open Chapter
Chapter VII. The Future of United States Ocean and Coastal Policy 37 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The recommendations of the report created a focus on ocean issues and led to the creation in 1970 of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) within the Department of Commerce to provide federal leadership and management for many oceans uses and resources. In 1972, Congress enacted the Coastal Zone Management Act, recognizing the coasts as a national, not merely a state or local, resource. That year also saw enactment of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act—which included the Ocean Dumping Act—and the Marine Sanctuary Program. In the same decade, the Endangered Species Act and major amendments to the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act in 1978 provided further authority to create a framework of authorities for ocean and coastal management. Ocean management remained sector-based, however, and lacked any comprehensive or ecosystem-based approach.
- Over the following decades, the ocean and coastal management framework expanded to include at least 140 statutes administered by twenty federal agencies, highlighting a new problem for ocean management: the fragmented and often uncoordinated legal framework for ocean management. As the pressures on ocean and coastal resources increased, new environmental challenges arose, and the movement toward sustainable use of resources focusing on ecosystem-based management made the inadequacies of the ad hoc, fragmented approach even clearer. A 2000 report of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation summarized the issue as follows: “Today, people who work and live on the water … face a patchwork of confusing and sometimes contradictory federal and state authorities and regulations. No mechanism exists for establishing a common vision or set of objectives.” Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, 106th Cong., 2d sess. (May 23, 2000), S. Rept. 106–30. In...
- Although the two commissions varied greatly in their proposed approaches to implementing new national ocean policy, they were in fundamental agreement about the nature and direction of such a policy. First, both commissions envisioned a national ocean policy based on principles of stewardship arising from the public trust in which the government holds ocean and coastal resources. Second, the commissions found that management of the oceans requires an ecosystem-based approach. To achieve this, improved national leadership is necessary to move toward a national ocean policy, implemented through coordinated, regional mechanisms. Third, ocean scientific research and cutting edge data must be available for managers and decision makers. Finally, lifelong, ocean-related education is needed to create “ocean literacy” and a citizenry with a strong ocean stewardship ethic.
- The Task Force Recommendations for stewardship of the oceans anticipated that the national ocean policy would be implemented through comprehensive, integrated, coordinated ocean management, utilizing the best science and coastal and marine spatial planning (CMSP) on an eco-regional basis. CMSP is described as follows:
- … to ensure the protection, maintenance, and restoration of the health of ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems and resources, enhance the sustainability of ocean and coastal economies, preserve our maritime heritage, support sustainable uses and access, provide for adaptive management to enhance our understanding of and capacity to respond to climate change and ocean acidification, and coordinate with our national security and foreign policy interests.
- Open Chapter
Chapter III. Management of Coastal Resources 184 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The CZMA has been amended a number of times. The 1973 Arab oil embargo and energy crisis of the mid-1970s led to major amendments to the CZMA in 1976 to facilitate energy facility siting and other energy development. The 1980 amendments continued to focus attention on coastal states incorporating national interests in coastal planning. With the original development period ending, funding for the CZMA was substantially reduced and new program goals and policies were introduced to enhance coastal management. The Coastal Management Reauthorization Act of 1985 included new procedures for the review and amendment of state coastal programs. The Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 made major changes in the federal consistency provision to clarify its scope and application. A new Coastal Zone Enhancement Grant Program was created to encourage states to improve their plans in one or more of eight areas of coastal concern, including: (1) coastal wetlands protection, (2)
- The federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 (CZMA), 16 U.S.C.A. §§ 1451–1464, was passed “to preserve, protect, develop, and where possible, to restore or enhance, the resources of the Nation’s coastal zone for this and succeeding generations.” Enacted during the same period as other major federal environmental legislation, the CZMA differed substantially from legislation like the Clean Air Act or the Clean Water Act. First, state participation in coastal zone management planning was completely voluntary. Federal standards or management would not be imposed if the state did not develop a plan. Second, although there was a recognized national interest in effective coastal management, Congress also recognized that the type of land use planning and management required was traditionally within the domain of state and local governments. See generally, Alison Rieser, Donna Christie, Richard Hildreth & Joseph Kalo, Ocean and Coastal Law 249–311 (2013).
- The 1990 CZMA amendments changed the seaward boundary provisions to include all state ocean waters to correct the anomaly in Florida’s coastal zone program. Although Florida’s state waters in the Gulf of Mexico extend nine nautical miles, the CZMA had formerly limited its “coastal zone” to three miles. The definition of the landward boundary of the coastal zone allows major variation from one state to another. For example, North Carolina’s Coastal Area Management Act defines the inland portion of the coastal zone as the area encompassed by all the counties bounded by coastal waters; Hawaii’s coastal zone includes the entire state; California, on the other hand, defines the land portion of its coastal zone as a 1,000-yard strip extending inland from its coastal waters; Massachusetts’ coastal zone extends landward 100 feet beyond the first major land transportation route encountered (e.g., a road, highway, or rail line), and also includes all of Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket,
- The development stage for state coastal management programs turned out to be a long, arduous process in most states. In general, states lacked statutory bases to implement coastal management programs, and local governments often balked at what was perceived as state usurpation of local planning and zoning functions.
- The states are given great flexibility in their approaches to coastal management and even in determining the area to be covered by the program. The CZMA only generally defines the coastal zone to include the territorial sea and adjacent lands “to the extent necessary to control shorelands, the uses of which have a direct and significant impact on the coastal waters.” 16 U.S.C.A. § 1453(1). Each state defines the limits of its coastal zone for purposes of its management program.
- Open Chapter
Chapter V. Pollution and the Marine Environment 148 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Traditional state common law torts of negligence, nuisance, and strict liability may be available sources of liability for spills of oil or hazardous substances in some circumstances. However, in the ocean and coastal context, if a cause of action is based on a maritime tort, maritime law must be applied as the substantive law.
- In permitting discharges under the CWA, both the CWA’s requirement for state certification that a project does not violate state water quality standards and the federal consistency requirements of the Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) are applicable to activities with effects within three miles of the coast. In its ODA regulations, the Corps rejected comments by states that federal consistency requirements should apply to dumping beyond coastal waters and asserted that the ODA may preempt both the CWA certification provisions and the CZMA. For dumping material from federal projects in state ocean waters, the ODA does limit the authority of states to adopt or enforce any rule or regulation more stringent than the requirements of the ODA. Id. § 1416(d)(2). Otherwise, state authority over dumping in the state ocean waters is preserved. Id. § 1416(d)(1). But the Corps regulations state that it will continue to seek state water quality certification and consistency determinations for...
- Provisions of UNCLOS were drafted with the expectation of a separate international regime, such as MARPOL, applying to vessel design and construction standards and operational rules. But UNCLOS offers increased opportunities for coastal state enforcement of international requirements. Port states are authorized to investigate and institute legal proceedings for discharges in violation of international standards against vessels voluntarily in port. UNCLOS, art. 218(1), 220(1). A coastal state may physically inspect and institute proceedings against a vessel navigating its territorial seas when there are “clear grounds for believing” that the vessel has violated international standards or the pollution control laws of the coastal state. UNCLOS, art. 220(2). A coastal state may only detain and institute proceedings against a vessel in the EEZ if there is “clear objective evidence” that a violation of international oil pollution control standards actually resulted in a “discharge...coastal
- The fact that the oceans are natural “carbon sinks” has led to proposals to enhance that capability by “ocean fertilization” and to use the oceans and seabed for sequestration of carbon. Ocean fertilization does not technically involve “disposal” in the ocean, but the parties to the London Convention have agreed that a precautionary approach is called for in dealing with such projects and that “ocean fertilization activities other than legitimate scientific research should not be allowed.” See Resolution LC–LP.1 (2008) on the Regulation of Ocean Fertilization and Statement of concern regarding the iron fertilization project in ocean waters west of Canada (adopted 2 November 2012, reaffirming the position of the London Convention adopted in 2008). Carbon sequestration is more clearly within the scope of the London Convention. In 2006, Annex I was amended to allow CO of in sub-seabed geological formations. The interpretation of the London Convention as prohibiting the export of CO ...an...
- The prohibition on ocean dumping of industrial wastes had an interesting impact on a form of waste disposal that many thought was a promising concept for disposing of a number of highly toxic and hazardous substances. EPA had for a long time considered ocean incineration to be “dumping” both in the sense that smokestack emissions are deposited in ocean waters and in the sense that incinerator residue is also disposed of at sea. When EPA suspended development of ocean incineration regulations and barred consideration of new permit applications because of the ban on new entrants and the complete prohibition on dumping industrial wastes after 1991, Seaburn, a commercial waste disposal company, challenged EPA’s characterization of ocean incineration as dumping. , 712 F.Supp. 218 (D.D.C. 1989). Seaburn argued that smokestack emissions could not rationally be equated with dumping and that ...found that this time Congress had unequivocally intended a moratorium on dumping of industrial...
- Open Chapter
Title Page 4 results
Chapter IV. Offshore Resource Management Part 2 68 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The 2006 MSA Reauthorization also called on the U.S. to “improve the effectiveness of international fishery management organizations in conserving and managing fish stocks under their jurisdiction.” 16 U.S.C.A. § 1826i. The United States is a member of numerous international regional fishery management organizations (RFMOs) to manage high seas fisheries in world’s oceans—7 in the Pacific Ocean; 4 in the Atlantic Ocean, 2 in the Southern Ocean, and 2 in the Indian Ocean. See NOAA Fisheries, Regional Agreements at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/agreements/regional_agreements/intlagree.html. An RFMO may manage all fisheries in a region of the oceans or may be directed to the management of particular species in a region or throughout the range of the species. The United States is a party to the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement that empowers RFMOs to adopt appropriate fisheries management programs and take effective measures against IUU fishing. Several of the RFMOs now use catch documentation...
- In spite of concerns for potential conflicts, the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) encourages nations to assure its trade practices do not undermine the effectiveness of fisheries conservation measures and to adopt trade-related measures, developed through international consultation and consistent with the WTO, that promote the sustainability of fisheries and address illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing (IUU). Because developed countries account for around 80% of the value of fisheries imports (the U.S. imports 90% of its seafood), trade measures are a potent tool for addressing IUU fishing, protecting endangered marine species, and encouraging sustainable fisheries practices. See , No. 11 (FAO 2009). The FAO has developed a voluntary international plan of action (IPOA) to deter IUU fishing that is not controlled by flag or coastal state action. Nations are encouraged to develop national plans of action that use “all available jurisdiction in accordance with...
- When the case was affirmed in 494 F.3d 757 (9th Cir. 2007) and no further Congressional action on the issue seemed imminent, Mexico (with the EU and 11 other countries waiting in the wings) requested that the World Trade Organization (WTO) set up a dispute settlement panel. The dispute panel’s decision was ultimately appealed to the WTO Appellate Body, which found that the U.S. dolphin-safe labeling scheme accords “less favorable treatment” to Mexican tuna products in violation of its obligations under GATT and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade, because the U.S. measures did not set conditions for using the label in a way that reflects the risks faced by dolphins in different oceans. In 2013, NOAA issued new final rules that attempt to conform to the WTO holding, U.S. legislation, and concerns of environmental organizations. See 78 Fed. Reg. 40997 (July 9, 2013). The discrimination against Mexico is addressed primarily by broadening the scope of the rule to cover oceans...
- (3) Fishing activity that has a significant adverse impact on seamounts, hydrothermal vents, cold water corals and other vulnerable marine ecosystems located beyond any national jurisdiction, for which there are no applicable conservation or management measures, including those in areas with no applicable international fishery management organization or agreement.
- The broader ramifications of the GATT provisions on international environmental law and marine species protection are still not clear. GATT and WTO panels as well as the WTO Appellate Body repeatedly have stressed that international agreements are the best method for protecting the environment. Clearly, contracting parties can agree to terms among themselves that may contradict GATT principles. But a number of major multilateral, international treaties also use trade restrictions against nonparty nations to enforce the treaty provisions. Treaties such as the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), done Mar. 3, 1973, 27 U.S.T. 1087, 993 U.N.T.S. 243, the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, done Sept. 16, 1987, S. Treaty Doc. No. 10, 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 1 (1987), 26 I.L.M. 1541, and the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, opened for signature Mar...
- Open Chapter
Chapter II. Public Access to Beaches and Shores 35 results (showing 5 best matches)
- As commercial, industrial, residential, and recreational uses of the coasts create a wall of development along the ocean’s edge, the public not only loses the view of the beach and ocean, but also often loses the ability to access navigable waters and the publicly owned beach seaward of the mean high tide line. Developers seek to maximize the value of coastal properties by creating “private” beaches, but this happens at the expense of the public, who may have rights in the dry sand as well as the wet sand area of certain beaches. The access problem is exacerbated by loss of beaches due to erosion and sea level rise. Preserving the rights of the public as coastal populations continue to grow and beaches disappear is one on the most formidable problems faced by coastal managers.
- To protect public access to beaches in furtherance of California’s constitutional provisions and the state’s coastal management program, the California Coastal Commission routinely includes public access as a condition for approval of coastal development permits. For example, on a segment of Faria Beach, forty-three of fifty-seven permits for development on beachfront properties included easements for lateral public access across the properties above the mean high water mark, facilitating the public’s use of the public beaches at each end of Faria Beach. In
- In , 254 Or. 584, 462 P.2d 671 (1969), the Oregon Supreme Court found that evidence supported a finding of a public prescriptive easement to use the beach property that the owners had fenced, but declined to decide the case on that basis. In order to avoid tract-by-tract litigation, the court resurrected the English doctrine of custom to apply uniformly to “ocean-front lands from the northern to the southern border of the state.” The Oregon court ignored an early Connecticut case rejecting application of the custom doctrine on the basis that it is unadapted to United States’ society. , 78 Conn. 130, 61 A. 98 (1905). Referring to Blackstone’s Commentaries, the court defined the requirements of custom to be public use that is ancient, exercised without interruption, reasonable, peaceable, obligatory, and not repugnant to other custom or law. The use of the dry-sand area of the Pacific shore by the public was found to be “an unbroken custom running back in time as long as the land has...
- Clearly, laws that do no more than protect existing public beach easements do not effect a taking of private property. In
- Florida, for example, has a provision prohibiting development or construction that interferes with accessways created through public use, dedication, or other means unless a comparable alternative accessway is provided. See Fla. Stat. § 161.55(6). Coastal development regulatory programs, such as in California, and more general land use statutes regulating subdivision or planned unit development of land have routinely required, as a condition for development or subdivision approval, that the impacts of development on established public rights to the shoreline be mitigated. These types of regulations can be inherently ineffective for protecting public accessways established by common law principles: If the regulation is enforced at the state level, regulators may not be fully aware of local, customary uses that create public rights and easements; if regulation is at the local level, municipalities may lack the incentive or resources to identify and enforce common law easements.
- Open Chapter
Chapter VI. Domestic Ocean Policy and the Law of the Sea 208 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Cornelius van Bynkershoek, an 18th century Dutch jurist, is often attributed with originating the “cannon-shot rule” for determining the extent of coastal nation control and jurisdiction over adjacent ocean waters. Under international law, territorial claims can only be made to areas that can be occupied and controlled by a country. Areas within the range of shore armaments arguably could be effectively controlled by the coastal nation. The Italian publicist, Galiani, later equated “cannon-shot range” with a distance of three miles or a marine league.
- Surprisingly, the Fish Stocks Agreement, which applies to high seas fisheries, seems to incorporate incentives necessary for the most immediate changes in EEZ management. In order to require the adoption of compatible measures for management of adjacent high seas fisheries, coastal nations must adopt EEZ management strategies for straddling stocks and migratory species that integrate the precautionary approach, protection of biodiversity, principles of sustainability, and ecosystem management. Not only is it unlikely that coastal States would adopt different management regimes for other fish stocks within the EEZ, it is virtually impossible to conceive how such an integrated management approach could not incorporate and positively affect management of all fisheries within the EEZ.
- … the United States is prepared to accept and act in accordance with the balance of interests relating to traditional uses of the oceans—such as navigation and overflight. In this respect, the United States will recognize the rights of other states in the waters off their coasts, as reflected in the Convention, so long as the rights and freedoms of the United States and others under international law are recognized by such coastal states.
- The grant of exclusive fishery management authority to coastal nations by Part V of UNCLOS was based on a number of premises, none of which turned out to be entirely valid. The first was the notion that coastal state jurisdiction could provide a more functional fisheries management regime, because most fisheries are located within 200 miles of a coast. Current problems with highly migratory and straddling stocks seem to belie that premise. The second premise was that by placing these areas under exclusive jurisdiction, entry into fisheries would be controlled, thereby reducing both the potential for overfishing and for overcapitalization of fishing fleets. Rather than control entry, however, coastal states have subsidized domestic fishing fleets and directly contributed to the overcapitalization of the fishing industry and overexploitation of many stocks. Finally, prevailing theories of fisheries management were presumed to be adequate to protect and maintain fisheries if... ...and...In
- This situation has not escaped the attention of the international community and a number of efforts have been directed at dealing with the inadequacy of the present EEZ management regime. The FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries was also developed in response to Agenda 21. This voluntary agreement is comprehensive in covering all aspects of fishery conservation, management and development, including fishing activities and operations, aquaculture, trade, research, legal and administrative institutions, and integration of fisheries into coastal area management. The Code is to be “interpreted and applied in conformity with relevant rules of international law, as reflected in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.” The provisions of the Code of Conduct provide a detailed elaboration of fishery management principles and practices. For example, the Code of Conduct recognizes sustainable use as “the overriding objective” of fisheries management and adopts the...
- Open Chapter
Chapter I. Public and Private Rights in the Coastal Zone 81 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Id. at 57. Modern jurisprudence has not limited the purposes of the trust to the traditional public uses of commerce, navigation, and fishing. The doctrine has evolved to reflect the public’s contemporary interests in navigable waters and tidelands. See generally, Joseph L. Sax,
- The simplicity of the principle that the state owns lands beneath navigable waters while the upland is subject to private ownership begins to break down immediately when one considers that the line between the water and coastal uplands is in constant flux. With some exceptions, there are two high tides and two low tides daily. The daily high and low tides do not have the same reach. The reach of the tides also varies with the time of the month and the time of the year. The major force affecting tides is the moon, and during the monthly phases of full moon and new moon, higher tides, called spring tides, occur. During the first and third quarter phases of the moon, lower tides, or neap tides, occur. The moon goes through other long-term periodic changes, such as variation in its cycle, declination, and distance from earth. The moon completes a cycle of all its variations in approximately 18.6 years. Tides are also affected by weather with many areas experiencing higher tides in...
- An analysis of public and private rights in the coastal zone must begin with a discussion of basic property interests and boundaries between public and private ownership. This discussion necessarily involves a look at the historical evolution of these property interests in the United States.
- The supreme court of the State of Washington interpreted the 1889 state constitution as fixing coastal boundaries as of the date of statehood. In , 389 U.S. 290, 88 S.Ct. 438, 19 L.Ed.2d 530 (1967), the Hughes’ oceanfront land had been transferred to a private owner by the federal government prior to statehood. Hughes’ ownership of accretions to the land depended upon whether state or federal law governed. The U.S. Supreme Court held that federal law must govern a federal grant of lands bordering tidelands. The Court reasoned that coastal boundaries are too closely related to the vital interest of the United States in its international boundaries to be governed by state law.
- depended on the terms of cession or treaty. In general, the United States was obligated to recognize earlier French, Spanish, and Mexican land grants, and courts apply the law of the grantor nation in interpreting a grant. The result is that the determination of choice of law in interpreting grants of coastal property may be extremely complex. , 49 S.W.2d 404, 408 (Tex. 1932) (explaining that “the validity and legal effect of contracts and of grants of land made before the adoption of the common law must be determined according to the civil law in effect at the time of the grants”). French and Spanish civil law of the period, however, also recognized that the sovereign owned the lands under navigable waters.
- Open Chapter
Index of Topics 261 results (showing 5 best matches)
- See also Coastal Boundaries; Fisheries Management; Ocean Jurisdictional Zones; Territorial Sea
- See Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972; Coastal Development Regulation
- See also Exclusive Economic Zone; Fisheries Management; Ocean Jurisdictional Zones; Ocean Pollution; Marine Scientific Research; Maritime Boundary Delimitation; Seabed Mining; Territorial Sea
- See Coastal Boundaries; Ocean Jurisdictional Zones
- See also Coastal Boundaries; Ocean Jurisdictional Zones; Submerged Lands Act
- Open Chapter
Outline 71 results (showing 5 best matches)
Copyright Page 5 results
- Nutshell Series, In a Nutshell
- The publisher is not engaged in rendering legal or other professional advice, and this publication is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney. If you require legal or other expert advice, you should seek the services of a competent attorney or other professional.
- © West, a Thomson business, 1999 © 2015 LEG, Inc. d/b/a West Academic
- West, West Academic Publishing, and West Academic are trademarks of West Publishing Corporation, used under license.
- Printed in the United States of America
- Open Chapter
Table of Cases 59 results (showing 5 best matches)
Advisory Board 12 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Professor of Law, Chancellor and Dean Emeritus, Hastings College of the Law
- Professor of Law and Dean Emeritus,
- Professor of Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law,
- Professor of Law Emeritus, University of San Diego Professor of Law Emeritus, University of Michigan
- Professor of Law, Yale Law School
- Open Chapter
- Publication Date: November 18th, 2014
- ISBN: 9781628101058
- Subject: Ocean and Coastal Law
- Series: Nutshells
- Type: Overviews
- Description: The 4th Edition updates all major developments in the field since the publication of the 3rd Edition, including new cases, perspectives, legislation, and policy and highlighting new offshore renewable energy legislation, ramifications of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and issues surrounding coastline adaptation to sea-level rise.