The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that the Bureau of Reclamation did not violate the ESA when it renewed water contracts with two water user groups. The Ninth Circuit found that since one contract did not prevent the Bureau from complying with the ESA, the plaintiffs could not causally link the contract with harm to the fish and thus lacked Article III standing to pursue their case. The Court characterized the renewal of the second contract as a mandatory duty inherent in the contract itself. Further, the non-discretionary nature of the contract renewal exempted the Bureau from its obligations under Section 7(a)(2) of the ESA
Are farmers who have received water from an irrigation district intended third-party beneficiaries...
The tide in the legal battle surrounding anadromous fish protections in the Columbia River watershed...
The U. S. Supreme Court held in California v. United States, 98 S. Ct. 2985 (1978), that under secti...
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that the Bureau of Reclamation d...
In January 1993, the U.S. Fish & Wild Life Service (“FWS”) added the delta smelt, a small, silvery b...
In Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership v. Salazar, the United States District Court of Appea...
Nearly ten years ago, California’s Legislature enacted Senate Bill (SB) 610, a new law requiring tha...
A group of environmentalists brought suit against the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Uni...
The San Juan-Chama Project provides water to municipalities and irrigation interests in the Middle R...
It finally happened. For the first time, a court has held that restrictions imposed under the Endang...
Two environmental advocacy groups challenged the decision of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS...
In 2009, Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C. proposed to build a 678-mile pipeline from Wyoming to Oregon that wou...
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation operates hundreds of dams in seventeen western states; the storage an...
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation operates hundreds of dams in seventeen western states, and storage an...
Trout Unlimited’s effort to overturn the EPA’s Water Transfers Rule was stifled by the Second Circui...
Are farmers who have received water from an irrigation district intended third-party beneficiaries...
The tide in the legal battle surrounding anadromous fish protections in the Columbia River watershed...
The U. S. Supreme Court held in California v. United States, 98 S. Ct. 2985 (1978), that under secti...
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit determined that the Bureau of Reclamation d...
In January 1993, the U.S. Fish & Wild Life Service (“FWS”) added the delta smelt, a small, silvery b...
In Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership v. Salazar, the United States District Court of Appea...
Nearly ten years ago, California’s Legislature enacted Senate Bill (SB) 610, a new law requiring tha...
A group of environmentalists brought suit against the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Uni...
The San Juan-Chama Project provides water to municipalities and irrigation interests in the Middle R...
It finally happened. For the first time, a court has held that restrictions imposed under the Endang...
Two environmental advocacy groups challenged the decision of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS...
In 2009, Ruby Pipeline, L.L.C. proposed to build a 678-mile pipeline from Wyoming to Oregon that wou...
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation operates hundreds of dams in seventeen western states; the storage an...
The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation operates hundreds of dams in seventeen western states, and storage an...
Trout Unlimited’s effort to overturn the EPA’s Water Transfers Rule was stifled by the Second Circui...
Are farmers who have received water from an irrigation district intended third-party beneficiaries...
The tide in the legal battle surrounding anadromous fish protections in the Columbia River watershed...
The U. S. Supreme Court held in California v. United States, 98 S. Ct. 2985 (1978), that under secti...