Policy Sciences

, Volume 41, Issue 2, pp 139–164 | Cite as

The underappreciated role of regulatory enforcement in natural resource conservation



This article analyzes the role of prescriptive regulation and citizen-suit litigation (regulatory enforcement) in natural resource conservation in the USA. It first briefly explains why the judiciary is so involved in resource management and why litigation is so often used as a conservation tool. It then summarizes the extent to which regulatory enforcement is being threatened and/or undermined by Congress, the executive branch, and other interests. The analysis shows how regulatory enforcement often facilitates the use of less adversarial conservation strategies and that there are important synergies between them. Regulatory interactions with collaborative conservation, land and resource acquisitions/easements, and adaptive ecosystem management are analyzed.


Natural resource policy Environmental policy Governance Conservation Regulation Collaboration Easements Adaptive management 



I would like to thank Holly Doremus, Christopher McGrory Klyza, Courtney Schultz, and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful thoughts and suggestions. In no way are these individuals responsible for this article’s content and analysis.


  1. Austin, J. E., Carter II, J. M., Klein, B. D., & Schang, S. E. (2004). Judging NEPA: A ‘Hard Look’ at judicial decision making under the National Environmental Policy Act. Environmental Law Institute.Google Scholar
  2. Babich, A. (2003/2004). The wages of sin: The violator-pays rule for environmental citizen suits. Widener Law Review, 10, 219–278.Google Scholar
  3. Barker, A., Chamberlain, H., Eyre, J., Gomez, B., Hofberger, J., Jones, J., Kingston, A., McBride, M., Robinson, K., Smith, D., Smith, M., Smith, M., & Ressetar, R. (2003). The role of collaborative groups in federal land and resource management: A legal analysis. Journal of Land, Resources and Environmental Law, 23, 67–141.Google Scholar
  4. Bates Van de Wetering, S. (2006). The legal framework for cooperative conservation. University of Montana, MT: Public Policy Research Institute.Google Scholar
  5. Bates Van de Wetering, S., & Adler, R. W. (2000). New directions in western water law: Conflict or collaboration? Journal of Land, Resources, and Environmental Law, 20, 15–40.Google Scholar
  6. Bear, D. (2003). Some modest suggestions for improving implementation of the National Environmental Policy Act. Natural Resources Journal, 43, 931–960.Google Scholar
  7. Bechtold, T. (1999). Listing the bull trout under the Endangered Species Act: The passive-aggressive strategy of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to prevent protecting warranted species. Public Land and Resources Law Review, 20, 99–129.Google Scholar
  8. Bemelmans-Videc, M. L., Rist, R. C., & Vedung, E. (Eds.). (1998). Carrots, sticks and sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  9. Bengston, D. N., Fletcher, J. O., & Nelson, K. C. (2004). Public policies for managing urban growth and protecting open space: Policy instruments and lessons learned in the United States. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69: 271–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Benson, B. L. (2006). Unnatural bounty: Distorting the incentives of major environmental groups. PERC Policy Series, PS-37.Google Scholar
  11. Blackfoot Challenge. (2007). Available at: http://www.blackfootchallenge.org. Accessed on April 1, 2007.
  12. Blumm, M. C. (2004). The Bush Administration’s Sweetheart Settlement Policy: A Trojan Horse Strategy for advancing commodity production on public lands. Environmental Law Reporter, 34, 10397–10420.Google Scholar
  13. Brewer, R. (2003). Conservancy: The land trust movement in America. Lebanon, NH: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  14. Brick, P., Snow, D., & Van de Wetering, S. (Eds.). (2000). Across the great divide: Explorations in collaborative conservation and the American West. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  15. Brunner, R. D., Colburn, C. H., Cromley, C. M., Klein, R. A., & Olson, E. A. (2002). Finding common ground: Governance and natural resources in the American West. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Brunner, R. D., Steelman, T. A., Coe-Juell, L., Cromley, C. M., Edwards, C. M., & Tucker, D. W. (2005). Adaptive governance: Integrating science, policy, and decision making. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Buzbee, W. W., Glicksman, R. L., Shapiro, S. A., & Sokol, K. (2005). Regulatory underkill: The Bush Administration’s insidious dismantling of public health and environmental protections. Center for Progressive Regulation White Paper, No. 503.Google Scholar
  18. Chayes, A. (1975/1976). The role of the judge in public law litigation. Harvard Law Review, 89, 1281–1316.Google Scholar
  19. Cheever, F., & McLaughlin, N. A. (2004). Why environmental lawyers should know (and care) about land trusts and their private land conservation transactions. Environmental Law Reporter, 34, 10223–10233.Google Scholar
  20. Chertow, M. R., & Esty, D. C. (Eds.). (1997). Thinking ecologically: The next generation of environmental policy. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Coglianese, G. (1996). Litigating within relationships: Disputes and disturbance in the regulatory process. Law and Society Review, 30, 735–766.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Coglianese, G. (2001/2002). Social movements, law, and society: The Institutionalization of the Environmental Movement. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 150, 85–118.Google Scholar
  23. Comer, R. D. (2004). Cooperative conservation: The federalism underpinnings to public involvement in the management of public lands. University of Colorado Law Review, 75, 1133–1158.Google Scholar
  24. Community-Based Collaborative Research Consortium. (2007). Available at: http://www.cbcrc.org. Accessed on March 30, 2007.
  25. Congressional Record. (1970). A University view of the forest service. A select committee of the University of Montana presents its report on the Bitterroot National Forest.Google Scholar
  26. Conley, A., & Moote M. (2003). Evaluating collaborative natural resource management. Society and Natural Resources, 16, 371–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cooperative Conservation. (2007). Available at http://cooperativeconservation.gov. Accessed on March 30, 2007.
  28. Cortner, H. J., & Moote, M. (1999). The politics of ecosystem management. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  29. Council on Environmental Quality. (1997). The National Environmental Policy Act: A study of its effectiveness after twenty-five years. Washington, DC: CEQ.Google Scholar
  30. Daggett, S. D. (2002). NGOs as lawmakers, watchdogs, whistle-blowers, and private attorneys general. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy, 13, 99–113.Google Scholar
  31. Donahue, D. L. (2005). Western grazing: The capture of grass, ground, and government. Environmental Law, 35, 721–806.Google Scholar
  32. Doremus, H. (2001). Adaptive management, the Endangered Species Act, and the institutional challenges of new age environmental protection. Washburn Law Journal, 41, 50–89.Google Scholar
  33. Doremus, H. (2003). A policy portfolio approach to biodiversity protection on private lands. Environmental Science and Policy, 6, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Duane, T. P. (1997). Community participation in ecosystem management. Ecology Law Quarterly, 24, 771–797.Google Scholar
  35. Durant, R. F., Fiorino, D., & O’Leary, R. (Eds.). (2004). Environmental governance reconsidered: Challenges, choices, and opportunities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  36. Echeverria, J. D. (2005). Regulating versus paying land owners to protect the environment. Journal of Land, Resources, and Environmental Law, 26, 1–46.Google Scholar
  37. Environmental Law Institute. (2007). Endangered Environmental Laws Program: Background paper. Available at: http://www.endangeredlaws.org/index.htm. Accessed on: February 4, 2007.
  38. Fairfax, S. K., Gwin, L., King, M. A., Raymond, L., & Watt, L. A. (2005). Buying nature: The limits of land acquisition as a conservation strategy, 1780–2004. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Farber, D. A. (1999). Taking slippage seriously: Noncompliance and creative compliance in environmental law. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 23, 297–325.Google Scholar
  40. Farber, D. A. (2000). Triangulating the future of reinvention: Three emerging models of environmental protection. University of Illinois Law Review, 2000, 61–81.Google Scholar
  41. Feldman, M. D. (1997). The New public land exchanges: Trading development rights in one area for public resources in another. Rocky Mountain Mineral Law Institute 43.Google Scholar
  42. Feller, J. M. (2004). The BLM’s proposed grazing regulations: Serving the most special interest. Journal of Land, Resources, and Environmental Law, 241–248.Google Scholar
  43. Field Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife, and Water of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, United States Senate, 108th Cong. (April 23, 2004). Oversight of the Endangered Species Act.Google Scholar
  44. Flournoy, A., Glicksman, R. L., & Clune, M. (2005). Regulations in name only: How the Bush Administration’s National Forest Planning Rule frees the forest service from mandatory standards and public accountability. A Center for Progressive Reform White Paper, No. 508.Google Scholar
  45. Freyfogle, E. T. (2003). The land we share: Private property and the common good. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  46. Freyfogle, E. T. (2007). On private property: Finding common ground on the ownership of land. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  47. General Accounting Office. (1992). Rangeland management: Interior’s monitoring has fallen short of agency requirements. GAO/RCED-92-51.Google Scholar
  48. General Accounting Office. (2000). BLM and the forest service: Land exchanges need to reflect appropriate value and serve the public interest. GAO/RCED-00-73.Google Scholar
  49. Government Accountability Office. (2006). Forest Service: Use of categorical exclusions for vegetation management projects, Calender Years 2003 through 2005. GAO-07-99.Google Scholar
  50. Great Northern Environmental Stewardship Area. (2007). Available at http://www.gnsa.org. Accessed on April 11, 2007.
  51. Greenwald, D. N., Suckling, K. F., & Taylor M. (2006). The listing record. In D. D. Goble, J. M. Scott, & F. W. Davis (Eds.), The Endangered Species Act at thirty (Vol. 1, pp. 51–67). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  52. Grumbine, R. E. (1994). What is ecosystem management? Conservation Biology, 8, 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Gustanski, J. A., & Squires, R. H. (Eds.). (2000). Protecting the land: Conservation easements past, present, and future. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  54. Hartt, L. (2002). Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations v. NFMS: A case study of successes and failures in challenging logging activities with adverse cumulative effects on fish and wildlife. Environmental Law, 32, 671–716.Google Scholar
  55. Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests of the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources U.S. Senate, 109th Cong. (2006). Implementation of the Healthy Forests Restoration Act, July 19.Google Scholar
  56. Holling, C. S., & Meffe, G. K. (1996). Command and control and the pathology of natural resource management. Conservation Biology, 10, 328–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Houck, O. A. (1993/1994). The secret opinions of the United States Supreme Court on leading cases in Environmental Law, never before published. University of Colorado Law Review, 65, 459–517.Google Scholar
  58. Houck, O. A. (1995/1996). The water, the trees, and the land: Three nearly forgotten cases that changed the american landscape. Tulane Law Review, 70, 2279–2310.Google Scholar
  59. Humphries, M. (2004). Oil and gas exploration and development on public lands. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  60. Hurst, J. (2006). Notes from an Old Stump Jumper. Range Magazine, Fall.Google Scholar
  61. Jones, E. S., & Taylor, C. P. (1995). Litigating agency change: The impact of the courts and administrative appeals process on the forest service. Policy Studies Journal, 23, 310–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Kagan, R. A. (2001). Adversarial legalism: The American way of law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Karkkainen, B. C. (2001–2002). Collaborative ecosystem governance: Scale, complexity, and dynamism. Virginia Environmental Law Journal, 21, 189–243.Google Scholar
  64. Karkkainen, B. C. (2002a). Environmental lawyering in the age of collaboration. Wisconsin Law Review, 2002, 555–574.Google Scholar
  65. Karkkainen, B. C. (2002b). Toward a smarter NEPA: Monitoring and managing government’s environmental performance. Columbia Law Review, 102, 903–972.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Karkkainen, B. C. (2003). Adaptive ecosystem management and regulatory penalty defaults: Toward a bounded pragmatism. Minnesota Law Review, 97, 943–998.Google Scholar
  67. Karkkainen, B. C. (2005). Transboundary ecosystem governance: Beyond sovereignty? Environmental Law Reporter, 35, 10094–10099.Google Scholar
  68. Keele, D. M., Malmsheimer R. W., Floyd D. W., & Perez J. E. (2006). Forest service land management litigation 1989–2002. Journal of Forestry, 104, 196–202.Google Scholar
  69. Keiter, R. B. (2002). Biodiversity conservation and the intermixed ownership problem: From nature reserves to collaborative processes. Idaho Law Review, 38, 301–324.Google Scholar
  70. Keiter, R. B. (2003). Keeping faith with nature: Ecosystems, democracy, and America’s public lands. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Keiter, R. B. (2006). The law of fire: Reshaping public land policy in an era of ecology and litigation. Environmental Law, 36, 301–384.Google Scholar
  72. Kendall, D., & Lord C. (1998). The takings project: A critical analysis and assessment of the progress so far. Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 25, 509–587.Google Scholar
  73. Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York, NY: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  74. Klyza, C. M., & Sousa D. (2008). American environmental policy, 1990–2006. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  75. Koontz, T. M., Steelman, T. A., Carmin, J., Moseley, C., & Thomas, C. W. (2004). Collaborative environmental management: What roles for government? Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.Google Scholar
  76. Lazarus, R. J. (2004). The making of environmental law. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  77. Leopold, A. (1949). A Sand County Almanac and sketches here and there. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Lewicki, R., Gray, B., & Elliott, M. (Eds.). (2003). Making sense of intractable environmental conflicts: Concepts and cases. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  79. Long, E. A. (2005). Two prongs of public interest lawyering under the Endangered Species Act: Building a cooperative strategy from litigation and collaborative efforts. Environmental Law Reporter, 35, 10690–10702.Google Scholar
  80. Luther, L. (2006). The National Environmental Policy Act: Streamlining NEPA. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar
  81. Malmsheimer, R. W., Keele, D., & Floyd, D. W. (2004). National forest litigation in the U.S. court of appeals. Journal of Forestry, 102, 20–25.Google Scholar
  82. Meidinger, E. E. (1997). Organizational and legal challenges for ecosystem management. In K. A. Kohm & J. F. Franklin (Eds.), Creating a forestry for the 21st century: The science of ecosystem management (pp. 361–379). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  83. Merenlender, A. M., Huntsinger, L., Guthey, G., & Fairfax, S. K. (2004). Land trusts and conservation easements: Who is conserving what for whom? Conservation Biology, 18, 65–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Morrisette, P. M. (2001). Conservation easements and the public good: Preserving the environment on private lands. Natural Resources Journal, 41, 373–426.Google Scholar
  85. NEPA Task Force. (2003). Report to the Council on Environmental Quality: Modernizing NEPA implementation. Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  86. Nie, M. (2006a). Governing the Tongass: National forest conflict and political decision making. Environmental Law, 36, 385–480.Google Scholar
  87. Nie, M. (2006b). The 2005 National forest system land and resource management planning regulations: Comments and analysis. Public Land and Resources Law Review, 27, 99–106.Google Scholar
  88. Nie, M. (2008). The governance of western public lands: Mapping its present and future. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  89. Oversight Field Hearing Before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, 108th Cong. (2003). Management challenges on Montana’s National Forests, July 2.Google Scholar
  90. Oversight Hearing (a), Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources of the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong. (2005). The impacts of environmental regulations on energy and mineral development: The Wildlands Project, June 16.Google Scholar
  91. Oversight Hearing (b), Before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong. (2005). NEPA litigation: The causes, effects and solutions, November 10.Google Scholar
  92. Oversight Field Hearing Before the Committee on Resources, U.S. House of Representatives, 109th Cong. (2005). The role of NEPA in the States of Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, and Alaska, April 23.Google Scholar
  93. Owen, D. (2002). Prescriptive laws, uncertain science, and political stories: Forest management in the Sierra Nevada. Ecology Law Quarterly, 29, 747–804.Google Scholar
  94. Parker, V. (1995). Natural resources management by litigation. In R. L. Knight & S. F. Bates (Eds.), A new century for natural resources management (pp. 209–220). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  95. Petersen, J. D. (2006). Don’t Shoot, I’m not a lawyer!’. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Montana Society of American Foresters, Missoula, MT, March 31.Google Scholar
  96. Plater, Z. J. B., Abrams, R. H., Goldfarb, W., Graham, R. L., Heinzerling, L., & Wirth D. A. (2004). Environmental law and policy: Nature, law, and society. New York, NY: Aspen.Google Scholar
  97. Plum Creek. (2000). Final Plum Creek Timber Company Native Fish Habitat Conservation Plan.Google Scholar
  98. Pralle, S. B. (2006). Branching out, digging in: Environmental advocacy and agenda setting. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Quincy Library Group. (2007). Available at http://www.qlg.org. Accessed on April 2, 2007.
  100. Rasband, J. R. (2004). Buying back the west. Journal of Land, Resources, and Environmental Law, 24, 179–186.Google Scholar
  101. Raymond, L., & Fairfax, S. K. (2002). The ‘Shift to Privatization’ in land conservation: A cautionary essay. Natural Resources Journal, 42, 599–639.Google Scholar
  102. Red Lodge Clearinghouse. (2007). Available at http://www.redlodgeclearinghouse.org. Accessed on March 30, 2007.
  103. Ring, R. (2005). Write-off on the range. High Country News, May 30.Google Scholar
  104. Sandler, R., & Schoenbrod, D. (2003). Democracy by Decree: What happens when courts run government. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Sax, J. L. (1971). Defending the environment: A strategy for citizen action. New York, NY: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
  106. Sax, J. L., & Keiter, R. B. (1987). Glacier National Park and its neighbors: A study of federal interagency relations. Ecology Law Quarterly, 14, 207–263.Google Scholar
  107. Sax, J. L., & Keiter, R. B. (2006). The realities of regional resource management: Glacier National Park and its neighbors revisited. Ecology Law Quarterly, 33, 233–312.Google Scholar
  108. Scarlett, L. P. (2002). A new approach to conservation: The case for the four Cs. Natural Resources and Environment, 17, 73–113.Google Scholar
  109. Shaffer, M. L., Scott, J. M., & Casey, F. (2002). Noah’s options: Initial cost estimates of a national system of habitat conservation areas in the United States. BioScience, 52, 439–443.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Sher, V. M., & Hunting, C. S. (1991). Eroding the landscape, eroding the laws: Congressional exemptions from judicial review of environmental laws. Harvard Environmental Law Review, 15, 435–491.Google Scholar
  111. Sive, D. (1970). Some thoughts of an environmental lawyer in the wilderness of administrative law. Columbia Law Review, 70, 612–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. Sive, D. (2001/2002). The litigation process in the development of environmental law. Pace Environmental Law Review, 19, 727–754.Google Scholar
  113. Smith, M. D. (2006). Cumulative impact assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act: An analysis of recent case law. Environmental Practice, 8, 228–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Snape III, W., & Carter, J. M. (2003). Weakening the National Environmental Policy Act: How the Bush Administration uses the judicial system to weaken environmental protection. Judicial Accountability Project and Defenders of Wildlife.Google Scholar
  115. Snow, D. (2001). Coming home: An introduction to collaboration conservation. In P. Brick, D. Snow, & S. Bates Van de Wetering (Eds.), Across the great divide: Explorations in collaborative conservation and the American West (pp. 1–11). Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  116. Stankey, G. H., Bormann, B. T., Ryan, C., Shindler, B., Sturtevant, V., Clark, R. N., & Philpot, C. (2003). Adaptive management and the Northwest Forest Plan: Rhetoric and reality. Journal of Forestry, 101, 40–46.Google Scholar
  117. Stewart, R. B. (2001). A new generation of environmental regulation. Capital University Law Review, 29, 21–182.Google Scholar
  118. Stone, D. (1997). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making. New York, NY: Norton.Google Scholar
  119. Tarlock, D. A. (2002). The future of environmental ‘Rule of Law’ litigation. Pace Environmental Law Review, 19, 575–610.Google Scholar
  120. Tierney, J. (2003). Trying for balance at Interior Department. New York Times, June 9.Google Scholar
  121. Thompson Jr., B. H. (2002). Providing biodiversity through policy diversity. Idaho Law Review, 38, 355–384.Google Scholar
  122. Turner, T. (1990). Wild by law: The Sierra Club legal defense fund and the places it has saved. San Francisco, CA: Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund.Google Scholar
  123. Turner, T. (2002). Justice on Earth: Earth justice and the people it has served. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.Google Scholar
  124. Turner, T. (2004). Unsettling development. The Environmental Forum, 21, 32–41.Google Scholar
  125. University of Michigan’s Ecosystem Management Initiative. (2007). Available at http://www.snre.umich.edu/ecomgt//index.htm. Accessed on April 2, 2007.
  126. U.S.D.A. Forest Service. (2002). The process predicament: How statutory, regulatory, and administrative factors affect National Forest Management, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  127. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. (1994). Conservation agreement among Plum Creek Timber Co, L.P. and Montana Department of State Lands and U.S.D.A. Forest Service, Flathead National Forest, and United States Fish and Wildlife Service, February 23.Google Scholar
  128. U.S. Forest Service. (2007). Available at USFS http://www.fs.fed.us/r5/hfqlg/index.shtml. Accessed on April. 2, 2007.
  129. Vaughn, J., & Cortner, H. (2005). George W. Bush’s healthy forests: Reframing the environmental debate. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.Google Scholar
  130. Villamana, M. (2003). Enviros seek intervention rights in case challenging Sierra framework. Greenwire, April 24.Google Scholar
  131. Vincent, B. (2006). Ash and smoke. Range Magazine, Fall.Google Scholar
  132. Walters, C. J., & Holling, C. S. (1990). Large scale management experiments and learning by doing. Ecology, 71, 2060–2068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. Weber, E. P. (2003). Bringing society back in: grassroots ecosystem management, accountability, and sustainable communities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  134. Western Lands Project. (2007). Available at http://www.westlx.org. Accessed on April 6, 2007.
  135. Wondolleck, J. M., & Yaffee, S. L. (2000). Making collaboration work: Lessons from innovation in natural resource management. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  136. Zinn, J. (2002). Land and water conservation fund: Current status and issues. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.Google Scholar

Legal References

  1. 66 Fed. Reg. 54,834, Oct. 30, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 68 Fed. Reg. 68,452, Dec. 8, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 70 Fed. Reg. 1023, Jan. 5, 2005.Google Scholar
  4. 70 Fed. Reg. 1023, 1024, Jan. 5, 2005.Google Scholar
  5. 71 Fed. Reg. 39,402; July 12, 2006.Google Scholar
  6. 72 Fed. Reg. 48514, Aug. 23, 2007.Google Scholar
  7. Administrative Procedures Act (5 U.S.C. §706(2)(A).Google Scholar
  8. American Forest and Paper Association v. Veneman, No. 1:01-cv-00871-GK (D.D.C.).Google Scholar
  9. Beartooth Alliance v. Crown Butte Mines, 904 F. Supp. 1168 (D. Mont. 1995).Google Scholar
  10. Calvert Cliffs’ Coordinating Committee v. United States Atomic Energy Commission, 449 F. 2d 110 (D.C. Cir. 1971) (NEPA).Google Scholar
  11. Chevron U.S.A v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).Google Scholar
  12. Clean Air Act 42. U.S.C. §7604(a)(2).Google Scholar
  13. Citizens for Better Forestry, et al., v. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, et al., No. C 05-114 PJH.Google Scholar
  14. Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1971).Google Scholar
  15. Colorado Off-Highway Vehicle Coalition v. U.S. Forest Service, 357 F. 3d. 1130 (10th Cir. 2004).Google Scholar
  16. Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA) of 2000 (H.R. 701, 106th Cong.).Google Scholar
  17. Defenders of Wildlife et al., v. Johanns, et al., No. C-04-4512 PJH, (D. N. Cal., 2007).Google Scholar
  18. Endangered Species Act. 16 U.S.C. §1531(b).Google Scholar
  19. Energy Policy Act of 2005 (Pub. L. No. 109-58).Google Scholar
  20. Equal Access to Justice Act 5. U.S.C. §504.Google Scholar
  21. Forest Emergency Recovery and Research Act, H.R. 4200, 109th Cong.Google Scholar
  22. Friends of the Wild Swan, Inc. v. EPA, 130 F. Supp. 2d 1207, 1209 (D. Mont. 2000).Google Scholar
  23. Greater Boston Television Corp. v. FCC, 444 F. 2d 841, 850-52 (D.C. Cir. 1970).Google Scholar
  24. Healthy Forests Restoration Act (2003) (Pub. L. No. 108-148).Google Scholar
  25. International Snowmobile Manufacturers Association v. Norton, 340 F. Supp. 2d 1249 (D. Wyo. 2004).Google Scholar
  26. Izaak Walton League of America v. Butz, 522 F. 2d. 945 (4th Cir. 1975).Google Scholar
  27. Kootenai Tribe of Idaho v. Veneman, 142 F. Supp. 2d 1231 (D. Idaho 2001).Google Scholar
  28. Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Ass’n v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 463 U.S. 29, 43-44 (1983).Google Scholar
  29. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe v. U.S. Forest Service, 177 F. 3d 900 (9th Cir., 1999).Google Scholar
  30. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Hodel, 624 F. Supp. 1045, 1063 (D. Nev. 1985).Google Scholar
  31. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York City, 438 U.S. 104 (1978).Google Scholar
  32. Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. Federal Power Commission, 354 F. 2d 608 (2d Cir. 1965).Google Scholar
  33. Seattle Audubon Society v. Robertson, 771 F. Supp. 1081 (W. D. Wash. 1991).Google Scholar
  34. Seattle Audubon Society v. Mosely, 80 F.3d 1401 (9th Cir. 1996).Google Scholar
  35. Seattle Audubon Society v. Evans, 952 F.2d 297 (9th Cir. 1991).Google Scholar
  36. Seattle Audubon Society v. Lyons (1994), 871 F. Supp. 1291 (W. D. Wash. 1994).Google Scholar
  37. Senate Document No. 115, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970).Google Scholar
  38. Sierra Club v. Morton (405 U.S. 727, 1972).Google Scholar
  39. Strickland v. Morton, 519 F. 2d 467, 469 (9th Cir. 1975).Google Scholar
  40. Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, 437 U.S. 153, 184 (1978) (ESA).Google Scholar
  41. Threatened and Endangered Species Act, H.R. 3824, 109th Cong.Google Scholar
  42. Utah Shared Access Alliance v. U.S. Forest Service, 288 F. 3dd 1205 (10th Cir. 2002).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Forestry and ConservationUniversity of MontanaMissoulaUSA

Personalised recommendations