|
JURISDICTION
- FEDERAL/STATE
Summary: This research discusses
state/federal relations regarding establishment of protected lands and the
further maintenance/protection of the land and the species that live therein.
Lands in Alaska can't be designated protected under this title, they
must be so designated by separate approval of the Congress. In general
federal law governs lands and federal organizations maintain the land. In
some cases state organizations are responsible though, especially when there
is no federal group doing so. The governments should work together
for the preservation of fish and wildlife. International agreements
regarding fish and wildlife protection are within the power of the president.
Purpose: ANWR is federal land and
it is important to understand the power the state of Alaska has in matters
concerning ANWR.
Relevance: Though none of the specific
regulations apply to Alaska these Sections set important state/federal guidelines.
Since ANWR is federal land Alaska can't make a decision, as a state
government, regarding opening ANWR for drilling. The international
jurisdiction brings another key argument into play. Many of the species
that live in ANWR for parts of the year also live in other countries. Does
the US government have the right to disturb the habitat of animals and birds
that may be protected under another nation's laws or even under international
law?
Title 43: Public Lands: Interior
Chapter 35: Land Policy
Section 1784-Lands in Alaska
-"Notwithstanding any other
provision of law, section 1782 of this title shall not apply to
any lands in AK."
-Sec. can issue a report for areas he "determines
are suitable" and Congress can
"inclusion of any such areas in the National Wilderness Preservation
System"
Section 1782
-roadless land study, Sec. of Interior
shall report to President; these lands
will be defined here after as wilderness if approved. Report by July
1, 1980
Chapter 2: Bureau of Land Management, Department of the
Interior
Section 6301.1 - Purpose
-"This part governs the management of
BLM Wilderness Areas outside of Alaska."
Chapter 24: Department of the Interior Fish & Wildlife
Policy: State-Federal Relationships
Section 24.1
(a)-"In 1970,. . .intergovernmental
cooperation in the preservation, use and
management
of fish and wildlife resources. . .(36 FR 21034, Nov. 3, 1971)
-Confusion sometimes exists between governments
about who has the authority
over land and what exists upon it.
-"Federal authority exists for specified
purposes while State authority regarding fish and
resident wildlife remains the comprehensive backdrop
applicable in the absence of
specific, overriding Federal law."
(b)-Fish and wildlife are important, according
to the government, to the
quality of life of all citizens.
-"The Secretary of the Interior
reaffirms that fish and wildlife must be maintained for their
ecological, cultural, educational, historical, aesthetic,
scientific, recreational,
economic, and social value to the people of the
United States. . ."
(c)-This section establishes that the
Department of the Interior Fish &
Wildlife Policy will be used to maximize
the cooperation of state and
governments in the common goal of preserving fish and wildlife for
future
generations.
Section 24.3
(b)-"Congress has, in fact, reaffirmed
the basic responsibility and authority of the
States to manage fish and resident
wildlife on Federal lands."
-The Secretary of Interior assumes jurisdiction
of the lands as head of the Department
of the Interior.
Section 24.4
(e)-The National Wildlife Refuge
System Administration Act of 1966 (16
USC 668dd) defines federal and state authorities in wildlife
refuges. In general the federal
government has jurisdiction, but tries to comply with
all state laws possible to maximize flexibility and
coordination.
(g)-"In areas of exclusive Federal jurisdiction,
State laws are not applicable. However,
every attempt shall be made to consult with the appropriate
states to minimize
conflicting and confusing regulations which may cause undue
hardship."
Section 24.5
(a)-"International conventions
have increasingly been utilized to address fish and
wildlife issues having
dimensions beyond national boundaries. The authority to enter
into such agreements is reserved to the
President by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate."
-Any negotiations with Canada about a natural
gas pipeline will have to go
through the executive branch instead of the legislative branch. It
seems
as though Canada would have the same intents and purposes as
the U.S., but the second part of (a) provides a loophole.
-"However, while such agreements may
be valuable in the case of other nations, in a
Federal system such as ours sophisticated fish and wildlife
programs already
established at the State level may be weakened or not
enhanced."
Source: U.S. Code Annotated. United
States of America, 2000.
|
|
|