Editor's Summary: The Klamath Basin of southern Oregon and northern California is the setting of a water rights conflict that is about much more than just water. In this Article, Esther Westbrook examines a recent decision of the Court of Federal Claims, Klamath Irrigation District v. United States, that addresses some of the legal issues implicated when water rights, unsustainable land use, and endangered species collide.

Editors' Summary: The wetland mitigation banking business has grown dramatically in the last decade. But as is true with any business, mitigation banks are subject to risk, including the risk of going bankrupt. This Article looks at how bankruptcy law can affect the rights and obligations of the mitigation banker and government agencies. After providing an overview of wetland mitigation banking and a primer on bankruptcy law, the Article examines two ongoing bankruptcy actions that involve mitigation banks.

Editors' Summary:

Editors' Summary: Many parties and factors are participating in shaping the future of wetland loss mitigation. Considerations of the status and viability of the "no net loss" wetlands policy are urgent in light of increasing population and urban development. In this Article, Holly Campbell examines U.S. wetlands law and policy, particularly the role of mitigation. She begins the Article with some background information on wetlands compensatory mitigation and where it fits within the law.

Editors' Summary: Humpback whales are endangered marine mammals, protected by the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) and the ESA. Hawai'i's seasonal thrill craft ban in humpback habitat provides additional protection. In 2004, a federal court ruled that the state's seasonal ban was preempted by the MMPA and the ESA. Below, Koalani Kaulukukui discusses the interplay of these two statutes, concluding that when a marine mammal is listed under the ESA, the more protective MMPA or ESA provision applies.

I. Military Training Versus Endangered Species Protection

Executive Summary

Editor's Summary: The exact contours of wetlands jurisdiction has been in dispute ever since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook County v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Today, the Court has been given the chance to clarify this area of law as it faces two cases dealing with wetlands jurisdiction. In Rapanos v. United States, the Court must decide whether CWA jurisdiction extends to a series of wetlands that do not abut a navigable-in-fact water. And in Carabell v. U.S.

Editor's Summary: The largest portion of global mercury emissions comes from Asia, in particular China. Because mercury and its compounds are highly mobile and move with prevailing wind currents, China's failure to regulate mercury emissions provides ample reason for worry in the United States. In March 2005, the United States promulgated the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) to regulate mercury emissions from coal activities. Yet any reductions achieved under the CAMR program may be offset by China's economic plans and energy needs.

Editors' Summary: Environmental professionals continue to consider the implications of the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision regarding CWA jurisdiction, Rapanos v. United States. In this Article, Matthew A. Axtell uses Justice William O. Douglas'travel description of Alaska's Last Lake as a hypothetical to test the potential impact of the 2001 SWANCC decision as well as Rapanos on the federal government's CWA authority in Alaska. He begins by analyzing the CWA regulatory regime that applied for many years to Alaskan tundra wetlands before SWANCC and Rapanos.