Supporters of NEPA describe it as the Magna Carta of environmental legislation. It requires federal agencies to evaluate major projects proposed for public lands and waters, through environmental impact statements and less-comprehensive environmental assessments.
Defenders of Wildlife examined 172 court cases that were argued during 2001 and 2002 by Bush officials. The group found that 54 percent of the time, the administration presented “NEPA-hostile” arguments to the court. According to the study, administration lawyers have tried to sidestep the law by using unfounded legal arguments, by trying to assert that no NEPA review is necessary because likely impacts are not significant, and by presenting deceptive or inaccurate information to the courts.
For the full report, go to www.defenders.org/publications/nepareport.pdf.
- After attack, the country’s oldest park ranger is back at work
- Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake’s criticism of Trump wins him national prominence
- Emotions run high over monument designation in Utah
- BLM moves away from landmark Northwest Forest Plan
- How Utah coal interests helped push a secret plan to export coal from California
- Doug Johnson on In this season of potential megaburns, nix the campfire
- The Taylors on Latest: The BLM to study surgical sterilization of wild horses
- Marcia Ewell on New measures could reduce Glen Canyon Dam’s impact on the Grand Canyon — a bit
- Charles Fox on Federal coal leasing needs a major overhaul
- Carl Reese on Study finds surprising source of Colorado River water supply