Natural Resource Law
Authors:
Laitos, Jan G. / Zellmer, Sandi B.
Edition:
1st
Copyright Date:
2015
29 chapters
have results for Oil and Gas
Chapter 11. Energy Resources 196 results (showing 5 best matches)
- While the MLA does not provide precise definitions of the terms “oil” and “gas,” the Interior Department has opted for an expansive construction. The word “oil” includes: oil shale, native asphalt, sold and semisolid bitumen, and bituminous rock characterized by oil-impregnated rock or sands from which oil is recoverable by special treatment. The Department of Interior has similarly defined “gas” broadly enough to include non-flammable gas, helium, carbon dioxide, coalbed gas, and other natural gases whose composition is not solely carbon and hydrogen.
- Oil and gas production, from both onshore and offshore federal leases, supply approximately ten percent of the petroleum needed to satisfy total domestic consumption. By the end of the 1990s, more than a quarter of domestic oil and gas came from federal lands offshore and onshore. Although the number of federal acres under lease for oil and gas development has dropped since the 1980s, it has remained relatively steady since the mid-1990s. In 1995, acres under lease totaled more than 36.5 million acres. By 2005, during the George W. Bush administration, close to one million more acres were under lease. By 2010, under the Obama administration, that number rose to almost 41.2 million acres. In fact, the United States has exceeded all other countries in increasing its oil and natural gas production from all domestic sources. According to the United States Energy Information Administrator, the U.S. has already overtaken Russia as the world’s leading gas producer, ...and regularly produces...
- In light of our stubborn dependence on oil as an energy source, federal oil and gas have become a potentially important domestic supply source. While domestic reserves of natural gas seem adequate for the foreseeable future—209 trillion cubic feet were still available in the 1990s, according to the United States Geological Survey—the same cannot be said for oil. Domestic oil production peaked in 1970, while reliance on foreign, imported oil rose towards a figure approaching fifty percent of demand in the 1990s.
- The extraordinary growth of hydraulic fracturing has transformed the face of the oil and gas industry. Developers characterize the exploitation of shale reservoirs through fracking as the fastest growing segment of the onshore natural gas market, as it enables oil and gas to be extracted from geological formations once considered impregnable. According to the Natural Petroleum Council, “sixty to eighty percent of all wells drilled in the next decade to meet natural gas demand will require fracturing.” As a result, U.S. oil and gas production is growing so rapidly—and demand dropping so quickly—that in the near future the U.S. may no longer need to import oil from any source but Canada.
- In addition to NEPA’s requirements, agencies are required to consider the impacts of all stages of oil and gas activity on federally listed species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). However, since the BLM is authorized by statute to take incremental steps toward oil and gas development, the Fish and Wildlife Service may issue a biological opinion regarding effects on the species being considered, and provide its views on the entire action. According to environmental activists, the MLA thus authorizes BLM “to take shortcuts when granting permits for oil and gas drilling and essentially cuts the public out of the process.” Industry, on the other hand, claims that the BLM imposes too many barriers and administrative obstacles.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 2. Economics and Natural Resources Law 126 results (showing 5 best matches)
- N. Natural Gas Co. v. Nash Oil & Gas, 526 F.3d 626, 631–32 (10th Cir. 2010) (a land owner will acquire title to oil and gas once it is produced from wells drilled on the owner’s land, even if the oil or gas migrated from adjoining lands).
- These simple, perhaps obvious, laws of supply and demand are significant for natural resources economics. As the price of a barrel of oil rises on the global oil market, there will be an increase in oil drilling in order to profit from the more lucrative market. Likewise, when the price of interstate natural gas drops below that of intrastate gas, then natural gas producers will try to put their product on the more profitable intrastate market.
- The laws of supply and demand determine which goods are produced and, in turn, which resources are used in production. When the price of oil is higher than the price of natural gas, then producers, following the supply curve, are encouraged to produce oil, just as consumers, following the demand curve, are encouraged to purchase natural gas. It would seem that producers’ desire for higher prices and consumers’ desire for lower prices produce an unresolvable conflict. Not so. Rather, the give and take of producers and consumers push the market toward equilibrium as consumers’ demand has an upward effect on prices and producers’ supply has a downward effect.
- The legal (and economic) incentive to drill is known as the rule of capture, which holds that whoever “captures” the resource keeps it. Thus, the reward goes not to the frugal interest holder who keeps the oil in the ground, but to the persons who drill and capture it. A landowner is encouraged by the rule of capture to bring the resource to the surface before a neighboring landowner or lessee does. The “tragedy” is that such common natural resources are consumed (wasted) rather than used in response to market demand. When there is overconsumption of a resource, the free market in that resource is in disequilibrium and government regulation is usually necessary to correct the defect. State oil and gas conservation laws are the regulatory response to the problem of waste created by the rule of capture. These laws attempt to limit waste by reducing production and conserving supply.
- These six market operations—demand, supply, equilibrium, costs, marginal revenue, and price elasticity of demand—allow the perfectly competitive market to achieve the virtues earlier noted. The operative phrase here, of course, is “perfectly competitive.” When markets are not competing, however, government may have to intervene in order to move that market toward competition. In contrast, markets for ballpoint pens, video recorders, and hamburgers are examples of at least workably competitive markets. These markets have numerous buyers and sellers, and a great variety of alternatives. Consequently, prices are competitively set as buyers and sellers move into and out of these markets. Natural resources, particularly those used in the production of energy, often do not achieve a state of workable competition because of the existence of market failures. Some resources like oil and natural gas have property characteristics (notably their migratory nature) that prevent proper supplies...and
- Open Chapter
Chapter 10. Mineral Resources 170 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Some states have enacted statutes to address the issue of the mineral estate owner’s liability for surface damage resulting from mining activities. Although many of these statutes focus on oil and gas development, the provisions may be extended to damages caused by hard rock mining as well. that holds oil and gas companies strictly liable for the damages caused by the exercise of their right to enter and use the land to take oil and gas. For example, the act authorizes treble damages against operators who willfully and knowingly enter upon the premises to drill a well before giving notice of their entry or without the agreement of the surface owner. In Montana, the Surface Owner Damage and Disruption Compensation Act (SODCA) sets forth basic notice and compensation protections for surface owners of land overlying oil and gas reserves. In response to a surge in federal oil and gas leasing, the Wyoming legislature in 2005 passed a split estate act in an attempt to give surface owners...
- Although the Oil Placer Act (OPA) of 1897 treated oil, gas, and oil shale as locatable minerals, the 1920 Mineral Leasing Act (MLA) subsequently removed onshore oil, gas, coal, and oil shale discovered after 1920from location. removed from location designated commonly-occurring minerals, such as stone, sand, and gravel, discovered after 1955. Sulfur deposits in some states, potash, outer continental shelf deposits of oil and gas, geothermal resources, and hard rock minerals found on acquired lands have since been added to the list of leasable—not locatable—minerals. Fossils, meteorites, and crystalline deposits in caverns are also been excluded from location. Minerals removed from the location system are locatable if there was a valid discovery prior to the statutory removal date.
- Unlike the oil and gas leasing system in the United States and hard rock mining in other prominent industrialized countries, mining interest do not pay royalties to the government for the privilege to extract valuable mineral resources on public lands. Consequently, many complain that the United States is not capturing funds for an activity that presents environmentally problematic consequences. Other calls for reform emphasize the need for increased supervision of the location and patenting processes, decry the use of patents to obtain lands for non-mineral purposes, and point to inadequate environmental standards.
- Congress may also affect a withdrawal of a class of minerals from the location system. In 1920, onshore energy minerals were withdrawn from location. In 1953, offshore oil and gas deposits were withdrawn. In 1955, common variety materials were
- of a mineral exploration and mining program. Courts have decided that assessment of all “reasonably foreseeable” impacts must occur at the earliest practicable point, and must take place before an “irretrievable commitment of resources” is made. In oil and gas development, the earliest practicable point is often at the leasing stage, because environmental impacts are often foreseeable at that stage when exploration has already occurred on adjacent land and the mining company already has concrete mining and excavation plans.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 4. Nepa 176 results (showing 5 best matches)
- however, the plaintiffs challenged the Secretary of Interior’s EIS for offshore oil and gas development in the Pacific and Alaskan regions for failure to consider the cumulative impacts of simultaneous development on species, particularly whales and salmon, that migrated through the planning areas. They contended that the cumulative impacts of simultaneous development would be greater than the sum of development in each individual area because migratory species would experience synergistic effects. In its comments on the EIS, the EPA agreed with the plaintiffs, and admonished the Secretary to “identify the migratory species of endangered cetaceans, marine mammals, and marine and coastal birds and the full extent of each species’ distribution (the full range of their habitat)” and to “include all state and federal oil and gas leasing, oil and gas infrastructure, and … non-oil-and-gas activities that fall within their distribution.” ...the impact within each area and not the impact of...
- Although programmatic EISs can be quite generic in their assessments of on-the-ground effects, due to their broad overview of a multi-faceted proposal or a large geographic area, generalized assessments are acceptable so long as subsequent analyses of site-specific actions address environmental impacts and alternatives with specificity. In the court held that a comprehensive EIS was not required for the issuance of an oil and gas lease on national forest land where a lengthy EA had already been prepared for the agency’s leasing program and where appropriate restrictions could be required in subsequent permits to drill, which would entail more detailed analysis before surface disturbance commenced. Conversely, in the Tenth Circuit found that the BLM had failed to prepare an adequate pre-lease analysis on three oil and gas leases for coal bed methane (CBM) development in Wyoming, and that its attempt to rely on two previous EISs was erroneous. The first one, a programmatic EIS on...and
- Agencies may get by with an EA and FONSI if they “tier” their analysis to an existing EIS. the court found that the BLM acted unreasonably by refusing to prepare an EIS to consider the possibility of more extensive future development when it issued oil and gas leases on public lands in central California. The BLM relied on past data indicating that only one oil well had been drilled on the parcels in question, and it ignored information that the parcels had “high potential” for development, given that “fracking,” combined with horizontal drilling and other modern technologies, had made previously unattainable shale oil more accessible. The court required an EIS, rather than an EA, because the emergence of fracking methods for extracting shale oil raised potential environmental concerns that had not been considered by the previous EIS. Moreover, the BLM failed to acknowledge the controversy and the uncertainties regarding the nature and impacts of fracking. The court determined that...
- N. Alaska Envt’l Ctr. v. Kempthorne, 457 F.3d 969, 976–77 (9th Cir. 2006) (concluding that an EIS for future oil and gas leases did not need to include “a parcel by parcel examination of potential environmental effects” because “the parcels likely to be affected are not yet known”); Citizens for Smart Growth v. Dept. of Transportation, 669 F.3d 1203, 1214 (11th Cir. 2012) (upholding an EIS that discussed cumulative impacts on current and existing growth, wildlife habitat, water quality, and other proposed transportation projects); Minisink Residents for Envt’l Preservation v. U.S. Fed. Energy Regulatory Comm’n, 762 F.3d 97, 113 (D.C. Cir. 2014) (upholding FERC’s determination that there would be no cumulative impacts with respect to a proposal to build a natural gas compressor station despite the operator’s plan to develop a second compressor station, given the typical distance between stations and differences in construction timing).
- the court held that a change in a proposed Resource Management Plan, which placed different restrictions on surface disturbances by oil and gas developers, was not within the spectrum of alternatives discussed in a draft EIS. The court explained that the exact location of the development, not merely the total surface disturbance, affected habitat fragmentation; therefore, the modification was qualitatively different and outside of the spectrum of alternatives considered by the agency, and the agency must prepare a supplement to analyze the impacts of the modification.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 11. Energy Resources Part 2 118 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Adams v. Mississippi Oil & Gas Bd., Nos. 2012–CA–01070–SCT, 2012–CA–00598–COA, 2014 WL 657384 (Miss. 2014) (concluding that state oil and gas board’s proposed amendment to statewide rule governing the disposal of naturally occurring radioactive material associated with oil and gas exploration did not violate Mississippi state law).
- note 120. For further discussion of air pollution issues associated with oil and gas development,
- U.S. Oil and Gas Production on the Rise Thanks to Fracking
- Untested Waters: The Rise of Hydraulic Fracturing in Oil and Gas Production and the Need to Revisit Regulation
- An Overview of Unconventional Oil and Natural Gas: Resources and Federal Actions
- Open Chapter
Chapter 10. Mineral Resources Part 2 97 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Amoco Prod. Co. v. Guild Trust, 636 F.2d 261 (10th Cir. 1980) (reservation of “coal and other minerals” raises a rebuttable presumption that oil and gas are included); Marion Energy, Inc. v. KFJ Ranch P’ship, 267 P.3d 863 (Utah 2011) (explaining that the phrase “mineral deposits” within a statute authorizing condemnation of property for construction of roads to access mineral deposits does not include oil and gas).
- Moser v. U.S. Steel Corp., 676 S.W.2d 99, 103 (Tex. 1984) (explaining that doctrines applicable to relations between oil and gas estates and surface estates would be applied to any mining context involving conflicting uses, including disputes over uranium mining).
- “Entry to Conduct Oil and Gas Operations,” W
- Dunn-McCampbell Royalty Interest, Inc. v. Nat’l Park Serv., 630 F.3d 431 (5th Cir. 2011) (closing certain areas of the seashore to oil and gas activities pursuant to Park Service surface use regulations did not exceed Park Service’s authority).
- , Nat’l Food & Beverage Co., Inc. v. United States, 105 Fed. Cl. 679 (2012) (court applied Louisiana common law principles to hold that clay was not included in a reservation of “oil, gas, and other materials”); Thornsbury v. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., 749 S.E.2d 569 (W. Va. 2013) (provisions in a right-of-way agreement limited mineral estate owner’s rights under a prior severance deed). Faith United Methodist Church & Cemetery v. Morgan, 745 S.E.2d 461 (W. Va. 2013) (the word “surface,” when used in a conveyance, was unambiguous and did not include subsurface mineral estate); Reep v. State, 841 N.W.2d 664 (N.D. 2014) (since mineral interests in shore zone belonged to the state under the equal footing doctrine, mineral interests at issue belonged to the state unless claimants could establish conveyance by deed).
- Open Chapter
Introduction 3 results
- Natural resources include non-commodity resources, such as wildlife, wetlands, marine resources, parks and open spaces, wilderness areas, and wild and scenic rivers, as well as commodity resources, such as private land, timber, minerals, oil, gas, water, and public rangeland. These resources have played a significant role in the history and development of this country, and they continue to comprise the very fabric of the American landscape.
- Given the earth’s growing human populations and demands, and its dwindling resources—particularly nonrenewable resources like minerals, oil, and gas—it is a certainty that more lawyers will be called upon to recognize and to resolve issues related to natural resources ownership and management. Law students, practicing lawyers, teachers, and regulators, and anyone interested in natural resources law and policy, are the primary audience of this book. It is designed to be useful both as a stand-alone examination of natural resources law and as a supplement to any of the major casebooks on the subject, including but not limited to J
- Natural resources law is the study of how institutions have attempted to resolve and manage competing demands for natural resources. It provides a means of weighing the interests of ecology, economic growth, historical expectations, political expediency, and geographic reality. The law of natural resources referees conflicts between conservation and preservation values, on one hand, and consumption and extraction desires, on the other. This body of law is based in large part on statutes and administrative rules, with an underlay of common law doctrine (particularly property law) and constitutional mandates ( federalism and the takings clause). In this way, natural resources law is similar to environmental law, but natural resources law is different in that it is designed only in part to protect and preserve natural resources and the environments in which they are located. The relevant law of natural resources also facilitates the use, allocation, and management of resources. Readers...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 7. Preservation and Recreation 286 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The Wilderness Act required the Department of Interior to review both NPS and Fish and Wildlife Service lands for wilderness potential. Many of these Alaskan wilderness areas may hold large quantities of untapped oil and gas reserves. Pressure to open up these areas to oil and gas exploration is inevitable. Thus, the primary threats to preservation values of the national park system will likely come from sources external to the parks. This presents obvious conflicts with the NPS’s principal legal mandate, which requires management of the land for the preservation of wildlife and scenery, and for present and future
- The LWCF was passed by Congress to provide money for the acquisition of land in support of outdoor recreation. Over the years, the LWCF authority has been amended to increase authorized funding levels and to mandate that offshore oil and gas leasing revenues make up any shortfall from other authorized sources. However, the LWCF’s basic purpose remains intact.
- note 175, at 7–9 (describing the BLM’s awkward configuration of land holdings, rights-of-way, ORV usage, and oil and gas development as “flash points in the contemporary discussion of BLM wilderness designation.”).
- Rocky Mountain Oil & Gas Ass’n v. Watt, 696 F.2d 734, 738 (10th Cir. 1983) (citing 43 U.S.C. § 1702(c) (2012));
- Restoration of degraded federal lands often compliments preservation objectives. The Clinton administration undertook two large restoration projects to restore biodiversity values in areas of mixed ownership. In what has been referred to as the most ambitious restoration project ever attempted, the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan called for $7.8 billion USD to acquire and protect critical lands, improve water quality, restore endangered species, advance scientific research, and increase fresh water flows to Everglades National Park. A multi-jurisdictional restoration and preservation program was also implemented in Alaska in response to the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill. This program allocated a significant amount of financial support for habitat protection and ongoing research and monitoring of environmental conditions.
- Open Chapter
Table of Cases 54 results (showing 5 best matches)
Table of Contents 117 results (showing 5 best matches)
Index 139 results (showing 5 best matches)
Part 4. Resource Use and Development 4 results
- Chapter 8 considers rangeland law, especially federal rules for grazing on lands under the control of the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and Forest Service. Chapter 9 is devoted to the timber resource, where the applicable law is a combination of common law (relevant on private lands), state timber practices acts, and federal statutes and regulations controlling lands under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service. Chapter 10 takes up mineral resources, which on federal lands are largely subject to the 1872 Mining Law and the 1955 Common Varieties Act. Chapter 11 addresses energy resources, oil, gas, and coal, as well as hydro-electricity, nuclear power, and renewables. The topic of “energy law” also encompasses hydraulic fracturing (fracking) to release gas and oil from shale deposits, as well as coalbed methane and tar sands development. Finally, Chapter 12, Water Law, considers this critically important natural resource. Water as an exploitable resource is subject primarily to...
- As a matter of historic and economic reality, many natural resources have not been viewed as environmental goods to preserve, but as commodities to exploit, so that they fuel the thriving American marketplace. The chapters in Part 4 organize and analyze how laws have permitted the extraction and development and human use of various marketable natural resources that have economic value. These chapters also show how laws seek to regulate and manage the use of these valuable resources in order to conserve their potential for future generations. Both federal and state laws play a role in determining how we use and develop these economic resources.
- The five central commodity natural resources are: (1) rangeland (forage for cattle and sheep grazing); (2) timber; (3) hard rock minerals; (4) energy resources; and (5) water. These are the natural resources that we have used and developed.
- RESOURCE USE AND DEVELOPMENT
- Open Chapter
Preface 4 results
- Although there are casebooks, study guides, and nutshells that address “natural resources law,” and although there are Hornbooks that recount the law of some of the special subjects within natural resources law (e.g., Oil and Gas Law), and although there are multi-volume treatises that concentrate on some of the topics that comprise Natural Resources Law (e.g., Public Land and Resources Law), there has been no standard West Hornbook that sets forth a comprehensive analysis of all of Natural Resources Law. This Hornbook is that book.
- In this book we set forth a comprehensive accounting of the burgeoning and exciting subject of natural resources law in the United States. The academic discipline, and legal practice, of “natural resources law” is really a composite of multiple subjects, each of which is discussed and analyzed here. Because so many of these specific resources law subjects, such as Energy Law and Public Land Law, and Wildlife and Biodiversity, are interrelated, it has become customary for law schools, academic publishers, law firms, and businesses, to organize these various fields under one heading—the “law” of
- This book’s purpose is to identify and analyze basic doctrines relevant to the various subjects and ancillary fields of natural resources law, that have emerged from Congress, Executive Branch policy, state legislatures, and federal and state courts. As such, the book should serve legal practitioners, judges, administrative officials, regulators, resources-related businesses, scholars, and students. It is our further aim to provide a useful, workable organization of the broader topic of natural resources law, which may serve as a guide for professionals, teachers, and students interested in natural resources issues. The book is designed to aid those wishing to learn more about natural resources and the law surrounding the use, management, and preservation of these resources.
- The basic structure of the book is organized around four central themes that define natural resources law. Part One considers the history of natural resources use and regulation, and the basic economic principles that drive both (1) human use of resources as well as (2) government regulation of natural resources use. Part Two lays out the principles that guide litigation involving natural resources, and also the primary statutory requirements that influence decision making about resources use. Part Three collects in one place the laws that usually control the management and protection of critical natural resources, such as public lands, wildlife, and wilderness. And Part Four sets forth the law of natural resources that serve as the basic commodities for resources use and development—rangeland, timber, minerals, energy resources, and water.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 5. Public Lands 189 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Federal agencies face a formidable task in crafting appropriate strategies to minimize greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from their activities and to protect the public lands and resources from climate disruption. As Professor Glicksman explains, “[M]ost activities that contribute to climate change are beyond the control of the federal land management agencies … [because] the location of a source that emits GHG emissions is irrelevant to its capacity to contribute to rising surface temperatures and the attendant consequences.” Minimizing GHG emissions from mining, oil and gas development, and other activities that take place on the federal public lands is an important step, but even the elimination of all GHG emissions from the public lands may make a relatively insignificant contribution in slowing climate change. Mitigation is not the only possible strategy, however; adaptation will be necessary as well. The U.S. Climate Change Science Program views climate change as an “environmental
- In addition, the Omnibus Act set aside two million acres of wilderness—the most substantial amount of acreage in years—and codified the National Landscape Conservation System, which protects national monuments and other conservation areas managed by the BLM. The Act has the potential to impact a broad array of interests, including recreation interests, irrigators, oil and gas developers, livestock producers, wildlife managers, and regulators charged with protecting coastal areas and watersheds. The designation of wilderness areas and other land preserves can be an effective tool for carbon sequestration, emission reduction, and other climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies.
- Today, the federal public lands are peppered with mining claims, either unpatented or patented, which have effectively created islands of private ownership within the public domain. The Mining Act of 1872 remains the principal statutory provision governing hardrock mining on the public lands, and it is still possible for a prospector to enter open areas within National Forest and BLM lands and stake a claim for gold, silver, and other minerals, other than oil, gas, and certain other substances that have been removed from the Mining Act’s purview by subsequent statutory revisions.
- Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529, 96 S.Ct. 2285, 49 L.Ed.2d 34 (1976) (upholding the Property Clause power to enact and implement the Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act); United States v. Midwest Oil Co., 236 U.S. 459, 35 S.Ct. 309, 59 L.Ed. 673 (1915) (upholding president’s decision to withdraw federal land to preserve oil reserves).
- CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9607(f)(1); Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA), 33 U.S.C. § 2706(a); Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1319; Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1375.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 3. Natural Resources Decisionmaking and Litigation 99 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, 563 F.3d 466, 478–79 (D.C. Cir. 2009) (dismissing plaintiffs’ challenge to an oil and gas leasing program that would generate greenhouse gas emissions due to the lengthy six-link causal chain between leasing and the adverse effects of climate change); Center for Biological Diversity v. Lueckel, 417 F.3d 532, 539–40 (6th Cir. 2005) (dismissing Wild and Scenic Rivers Act claims where plaintiffs did not show that the desired establishment of river corridor boundaries or of a comprehensive management plan would have provided greater protection from the adverse effects of logging); Wilderness Soc’y v. Norton, 434 F.3d 584, 589–93 (D.C. Cir. 2006) (finding that plaintiffs lacked standing because they failed to show that orders requiring an agency to complete wilderness suitability assessments and to provide recommendations to the President would likely redress alleged injuries to plaintiffs’ use of wilderness areas).
- [A] suit to compel the FWS to rule on all petitions submitted by any persons for listing of endangered species, which the court regarded as an improper programmatic challenge; a suit to compel the BLM under FLPMA to prevent undue degradation to tribal lands from mining operations; … a suit to compel the Forest Service to protect the values of wild and scenic rivers and manage such rivers to enhance those values; a suit to compel the BLM to take enforcement action against oil and gas operators who violate BLM regulations in such a way as to threaten a grazing allotment; … a suit to compel the Forest Service to reject a plan to reintroduce goats into a national forest on the ground that the plan was inconsistent with a land use plan provision requiring the agency to protect sensitive plants; … and a suit to compel the Forest Service under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act to take rivers that qualify for inclusion … into account while planning for the use and development of federal land.
- The APA also allows interested persons to petition agencies for rulemaking, and requires that agencies give “prompt notice” and a brief explanation of the reasons for a denial of such petitions. , for example, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded the EPA’s decision to deny Massachusetts’ petition to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles under the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Court found that the EPA’s statutory duty to regulate “any air pollutant” was “unambiguous” and included greenhouse gases. Further, the Court held that the EPA could not justify regulatory inaction unless the EPA definitively determined that greenhouse gases were not contributing to climate change, or the EPA could provide a “reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion” to determine if greenhouse gases were contributing to climate change.
- Western Wood Preservers Institute v. McHugh, 925 F. Supp. 2d 63 (D.D.C. 2013) (dismissing plaintiffs’ claims because plaintiffs were not themselves located near the affected areas in Oregon or Alaska, but were instead located in the District of Columbia and elsewhere), reconsideration denied in part, 292 F.R.D. 145 (D.D.C. 2013); Amigos Bravos v. U.S. Bureau of Land Management, 816 F. Supp. 2d 1118 (D.N.M. 2011) (finding that plaintiffs had no injury in fact due to the absence of a geographic nexus between the BLM’s approval of oil and gas leases and alleged climate-change related injuries to plaintiffs’ use of public lands); Nuclear Info. & Res. Serv. v. Nuclear Regulatory Comm’n., 457 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2006) (explaining that plaintiffs must allege a geographic nexus,
- Montana Envtl. Info. Ctr. v. Stone-Manning, 766 F. 3d 1184 (9th Cir. 2014) (applying similar test to find unripe an environmental organization’s challenge to a “pending” mine application that had not yet been granted); Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance v. Palma, 707 F.3d 1143, 1159–60 (10th Cir. 2013) (applying the three factors to find that a challenge to the suspensions of federal oil and gas leases was not ripe); Colorado Wild Horse and Burro Coal., Inc. v. Salazar, 890 F. Supp. 2d 99 (D.D.C. 2012) (applying the three factors in finding that a challenge to a federal decision to remove a herd of wild horses was not ripe). ...that a Commerce Clause challenge to the application of the ESA to federal water projects was ripe because further factual development would not “significantly advance [the] ability to deal with the legal issues presented,” and because the plaintiffs would suffer hardship if the court withheld consideration because the government’s power to enforce the...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 1. The Strange Career of Natural Resources Law 162 results (showing 5 best matches)
- The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920, for example, withdrew gas, coal, oil, and oil shale from the giveaway provisions of the General Mining Act of 1872 that otherwise offered individuals ownership rights to these valuable energy resources. But use was still permitted, despite the withdrawal, since the Leasing Act simply placed energy developers within a leasing system instead of an ownership regime (
- When stock energy resources like oil, gas, and coal began to be depleted, lawmakers initiated reform efforts to ensure that if these valuable minerals were owned by the government, then that government would control their rate of depletion ( And when cattle and sheep grazing threatened to denude the nation’s grasslands, conservation legislation restricted and managed rangeland use by ranchers (
- In Era I, our policies completely ignored planetary boundaries and systematically rejected the idea that once used and exhausted, the resources that were so highly coveted would be gone forever. As John Locke explained, the natural environment was seemingly placed on this planet by a higher force for the “industrious and rational” —in other words, for human use. This belief, which permeated America legal and political thought in Era I, is most easily seen in the rise of property law. Laws that granted rights in land and resources to individual owners created private property interests that allowed the owners to exploit their natural resources essentially without any limits. Reckless exploitation of renewable and stock resources in the twentieth century led to the unsustainable use and near exhaustion of some natural resources, such as timber, rangeland, minerals, oil, and gas. ...were extracted, developed, and used without appreciation for the reality of the natural limits of the...
- Despite this growing recognition that nature and natural objects have intrinsic value, not derivative of human welfare, Era IV protection law continue to be dominated by anthropocentric ideals. For instance, the focus of the Clean Air Act is to prevent atmospheric pollution for human health and welfare, not because of the greenhouse gases which may result in climate change that disable the natural systems necessary for Earth’s biosphere. And the parent statute of Era IV—the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969—requires an environmental impact assessment only when actions might affect the quality of “the
- Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014) (the Clean Air Act does not compel a definition of “air pollutant” that includes greenhouse gases).
- Open Chapter
Chapter 6. Wildlife Law 257 results (showing 5 best matches)
- United States v. Brigham Oil & Gas, 840 F.Supp.2d 1202 (D.N.D. 2012) (oil companies’ use of pits to contain drill cuttings and fluids did not violate the MBTA even though several birds had died in the pits because the pits constituted commercial activity that only incidentally injured birds).
- For example, the FWS withdrew its proposal to list the dunes sagebrush lizard after determining that voluntary conservation efforts by New Mexico and Texas significantly reduced the threats to the species by mitigating the impacts of oil and gas development on important habitat. Both States adopted conservation plans involving commitment and participation by federal, state, and private development interests. Future or uncertain regulatory actions and purely voluntary actions, however, are not sufficient to prevent listing.
- These uses receive priority over other general public uses that occur in the refuges, and they include “hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, or environmental education and interpretation.” “All other uses,” including grazing, oil drilling, non-wildlife related recreation, and timber harvesting, receive a low priority ranking, and are prohibited when they conflict with the NWRS mission, contradict the purposes for which the individual refuge was created, or materially interfere with hunting, fishing, photography, and other wildlife-dependent uses.
- United States v. Apollo Energies, 611 F.3d 679, 690 (10th Cir. 2010); United States v. CITGO Petroleum Corp., 893 F. Supp. 841 (S.D. Tx.2012) (corporation held liable for MTBA violation because it was reasonably foreseeable that protected migratory birds might become trapped in layers of oil on top of uncovered tanks; corporation was aware that this was happening for years and did nothing to stop it).
- Strategizing and prioritizing biodiversity conservation efforts is often of paramount importance, because preservation can be costly. In prioritizing preservation, it is also important to understand the reasons that drive conservation efforts. Biodiversity is economically valuable—it plays an integral role in agriculture, food security, and the development of drugs and medicines. International wildlife trade and recreational activities generate billions of dollars a year. The loss of biodiversity can result in loss of ecosystem services such as air and water purification, climate control, and pest control. Beyond economics, biodiversity has aesthetic, cultural, spiritual, and intrinsic value for many people. Species extinction is irreversible, and the present and potential future benefits of extinct species may never be fully understood.
- Open Chapter
Chapter 8. Rangeland Law 250 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Global issues surrounding climate change have led to a growing consensus that human activities are contributing to the problem. As the understanding of the link between human behavior and climate strengthens, the focus can develop from explaining observation to predicting patterns. Although the topic of climate change has not affected federal grazing policy, it is an important consideration for the future. In fact, grazing livestock produce methane gas, mostly through the digestive process. According to the EPA, enteric fermentation in agriculture accounts for twenty three percent of the total methane gas released from all anthropogenic sources in the United States. Although only a small amount of this is attributable to grazing on federal lands, the BLM should develop a systematic approach to consider and mitigate the impacts of climate change. Restrictions on grazing can prevent desertification and enhance the sequestration potential of grasslands, which provide sinks for both...
- Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks
- The Homestead Act (HA), and other land-grant statutes, conveyed fee-title to more than 160 acres to pioneer farmers moving west. Many pioneers relocated to open lands to take advantage of land-grant statutes, such as the HA, and began making a living as ranchers before the federal government established a regulatory presence. Early pioneer families settled along creeks and streams, because they required a constant water supply to satisfy their domestic and agricultural needs. Pioneer ranchers established and retained early water rights through their consistent use of creeks and streams adjacent to fee property.
- Two other agencies, also housed within the Department of Interior, also participate in rangeland management: the National Park Service (NPS) and the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Although grazing within these agencies’ jurisdiction occurs to a far more limited extent than on BLM and Forest Service lands. The NPS prioritizes preservation and recreation over commodity production, while the FWS prioritize wildlife conservation and requires all uses to be compatible with that priority.
- Three federal statutes control the provision of federal rangeland for domestic livestock forage. The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (TGA), originally signed by President Roosevelt, was intended “to provide for [the] orderly use, improvement, and development, [of rangelands and] to stabilize the livestock industry dependent upon the public range.” The TGA was followed by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA). The FLPMA was passed to establish policy for managing BLM-administered public lands. To ensure long-term stability and use of BLM-administered public lands by the livestock industry, FLPMA imposed restrictions on management of federal rangelands and the permits issued by the BLM. More recently, the Public Rangelands Improvement Act (PRIA) regulates BLM rangeland management by establishing and reaffirming the national commitment to inventory and identify current public rangeland conditions and trends. The BLM’s principle focus is to manage, maintain, and improve...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 12. Water 283 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Groundwater is not as susceptible to contamination as surface water. Groundwater, however, does become contaminated when man-made products such as gasoline, oil, road salts, and chemicals seep beneath the earth’s surface. Corroded, leaky storage tanks, improperly designed septic systems, hazardous waste sites, unlined or improperly lined landfills, and the widespread use of salt and lawn chemicals all contribute to groundwater contamination. In short, whatever contaminates other parts of the hydrological cycle, such as the air, soil, or surface waters, can eventually get into the groundwater.
- (1996) (describing Anderson v. W.R. Grace & Co., 628 F. Supp. 1219 (D. Mass. 1986), where Massachusetts residents exposed to solvents in their drinking water developed deadly illnesses but failed to establish legal causation); In re: Methyl Butyl Ether (“MTBE”) Products Liability Litigation, 591 F.Supp.2d 259 (2008) (concluding that evidence that a gasoline manufacturer or a gas station released gasoline within a well’s capture zone, and that the release was of a volume and depth making it likely that MTBE from the gasoline reached the groundwater, raised a genuine issue of material fact regarding causation).
- Hathorn v. Natural Carbonic Gas Co., 194 N.Y. 326, 351, 87 N.E. 504, 513 (1909) (Haight, J., dissenting).
- Wilson v. McLeod Oil Co., 327 N.C. 491, 398 S.E.2d 586 (1990).
- The ownership of streambeds is still fiercely disputed at times, as can be seen by a recent dispute between Montana and a power company. In the state of Montana claimed the ownership of the beds and banks of three major rivers: the Missouri, Madison, and Clark Fork Rivers. The State sought over forty million dollars from the company for its use of the riverbeds for hydroelectric facilities from 2000 through 2007. The Supreme Court of Montana held that the river courses belonged to the state of Montana under the Equal Footing Doctrine. It invoked a long line of precedent holding that navigability turns on whether waterways are “used, or are susceptible of being used, in their natural and ordinary condition, as highways for commerce, over which trade and travel are or may be conducted in the customary modes of trade and travel on water….” ...Court reversed, and held that the state did not hold title to riverbeds under segments of river that were non-navigable at time of... ...and even...
- Open Chapter
Chapter 9. Timber 213 results (showing 5 best matches)
- , a Missouri court held that payment of taxes, cutting timber, and driving off trespassers did not constitute actual possession of land.
- Deforestation accounts for approximately one-sixth of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, largely due to the loss of rainforests in the tropics. The Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change created a program for Reduced Emissions for Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) to reduce emissions from forest losses and to incentivize carbon sequestration.
- This chapter details the laws governing forest resources and forestland management. It begins with the National Forests, and then turns to state and private forestry provisions. It concludes by looking at an array of international, federal, state, and private incentives for conservation and reforestation.
- Lumber and other wood products became a leading export from the American colonies in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Logging mills dotted the shorelines of the lakes and rivers of North America. From 1801 to 1906, the amount of timber harvested rose from 0.5 billion board feet (BBF) to 46 BBF. By the 1920’s, the nation’s forests had been reduced by nearly half. The rate of logging began to decline, however, as production and use of alternative products such as concrete, steel, plastic, and petroleum grew.
- In addition to providing a broad array of recreational opportunities, forestlands provide vital ecosystem services, such as water filtration and wildlife habitat for a diverse array of species. Trees help prevent soil erosion by providing windbreaks and by stabilizing the soil with their roots and fallen leaves. Trees also clear the air and combat global climate change by acting as carbon “sinks.” One mature tree absorbs about thirteen pounds of carbon dioxide annually. For every ton of wood grown in a forest, 1.47 tons of carbon dioxide are removed and replaced with 1.07 tons of oxygen.
- Open Chapter
- Chapter 2 sets out the principles of resource economics that have guided human desires to use natural resources, as well as subsequent human wishes to restrict and protect natural resources. Chapter 2 introduces concepts that permeate both human behavior and the laws that humans adopt to regulate that behavior—e.g., supply and demand, and price and cost, and market failures and negative externalities, information costs, and congestion points, and the “tragedy of the commons” and the reality of open access resources, and efficiency, cost-benefit analysis, risk assessment and risk management, social norms and common property regimes.
- The subject of natural resources law is understood in part by its history, and in part by the underlying economic principles that are the forces influencing its development. Part 1 explores how history and economics both play a role in the evolution and ultimate outcome of laws that seek to impose order on how we simultaneously use and protect our natural resources. Chapter 1 lays out the legal history of the American response to resources use, while Chapter 2 discusses the economic theories which explain how and why we used, and then regulated, our insatiable need for resource exploitation. These two chapters set out the fundamental underpinnings of natural resources law.
- Chapter 1 advances the notion that natural resources laws emerged during four “eras,” over the past 200 plus years. In Era One, the “Use” Era, natural resources were seen as commodities to extract and develop, and laws were in place to assist this goal. In Era Two, the “Conservation” Era, laws sought to slow and regulate the otherwise unrestricted exploitation of resources, not to preserve them, but to ensure that they could be used in the future. In Era Three, resources were seen to have value when they were not actively “used” by humans, but when they remained in place, so that we could anthropomorphically enjoy natural resources in their wild and undeveloped state. In Era Four, the “Protection” Era, laws were enacted that were designed to protect environmental goods like air, land, and water from being used as environmental sinks or garbage dumps when we used, developed, or extracted natural resources.
- Open Chapter
Acknowledgments 1 result
- We wish to acknowledge and thank the various individuals and institutions that helped the authors to produce this book. Chapter 1 is a shortened version of a law review article, co-authored by Prof. Laitos and Lauren Wolongevicz, which was originally published in 2015 in 39 William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review 1. An earlier, shorter version of Chapter 2 appeared in “Natural Resources Law 2d ed. (West Academic 2012),” co-authored by Jan Laitos, Sandi Zellmer, and Mary Wood, where much of the contents of that chapter were originally written by Prof. Daniel Cole of the Indiana University Maurer Law School. The Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Foundation’s Grants Committee provided a generous grant to Professors Laitos and Zellmer to complete this book. Juliana Okulski, a law student from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, helped to update the book. Emily Dowd, another law student from the University of Denver Sturm College of Law, updated, copy-edited, formatted, and
- Open Chapter
- One of the major signature developments in natural resources law was the imposition of management and protection regimes upon traditional natural resources use. For centuries, natural resources were perceived as virtually inexhaustible, causing humans to extract, remove, and over-use resources to the point where they were becoming unsustainable. Two kinds of laws were then invented and deployed—those that managed resource use and those that protected and preserved resource use. The three chapters in Part 3 set out the various ways that natural resources laws have controlled and regulated and overseen natural resources, and for some resources imposed a protection and preservation system, limiting or even prohibiting human use of the resource.
- Chapter 5 is a comprehensive overview of the many ways that federal law has managed the publicly owned lands and resources of the United States. Chapter 5 also recounts the history of federal public land law, from disposition to withdrawals to multiple use to dominant use to adaptive management. Chapter 6 reveals how the wildlife resource has been protected over time, in part because of the critical role that wildlife play in maintaining biodiversity. Chapter 7 introduces the reader to the many ways that federal and state law seek (1) to preserve certain natural resources and objects for their wild, “natural,” or historic qualities, and (2) to set aside certain lands for their recreational potential.
- RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND PROTECTION
- Open Chapter
- An understanding of natural resources law requires a parallel understanding of how courts and government institutions make legal decisions involving resources. Part 2 summarizes and analyzes how the judiciary resolves disputes and controversies about natural resources, and how administrative agencies and government entities make decisions that affect the natural environment.
- Chapter 3 is a review of all the various preconditions that must be met before a court can ever get to the point where it is able to decide the merits of the substantive conflict that is being litigated. These preconditions arise from the United States Constitution and from statutes, such as the Administrative Procedure Act, and various federal enabling statutes. Much of the “practice” of natural resources law involves mastering these procedural, administrative, constitutional preconditions to litigation, and Chapter 3 sorts out these barriers and sets out the issues that tend to be most prominent when one is in court.
- LAWS, LITIGATION, AND DECISION-MAKING
- Chapter 4 addresses a federal statute that has become in so many ways the Prime Directive for all federal decision-making that might possibly affect the natural environment—the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Many states also have their own equivalent “state environmental policy acts.” NEPA is probably the most litigated natural resources law, because virtually every federal action impacting nature risks a presumptive violation of NEPA, and an ensuing lawsuit, and because a NEPA challenge is often an effective way to delay or even halt that federal action. Chapter 4 offers an analysis of the central legal issues that tend to arise whenever NEPA is triggered or litigated.
- Open Chapter
Title Page 2 results
Advisory Board 3 results
Copyright Page 3 results
- 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.
- is a trademark registered in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
- West, West Academic Publishing, and West Academic are trademarks of West Publishing Corporation, used under license.
- Open Chapter
Dedication 2 results
Summary of Contents 6 results (showing 5 best matches)
- Publication Date: May 8th, 2015
- ISBN: 9780314290168
- Subject: Natural Resources
- Series: Hornbooks
- Type: Hornbook Treatises
- Description: This treatise is a thorough assessment of the important and growing field of natural resources law. It provides comprehensive coverage of the laws, policies, and decision-making processes pertinent to the “core” commodity natural resources – rangeland, timber, mineral resources, energy resources, and water. It also covers the management and protection of non-commodity resources, such as wildlife, wilderness, and other types of preservation and recreation lands. As an essential addition to any environmental, natural resources, or public lands library, the book puts natural resources law in context with a review of the National Environmental Policy Act, a history of natural resources use and regulation, as well as a user-friendly description of resource economics.
