DOCSLIB.ORG

An Environmental History of the Middle Rio Grande Basin

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
An Environmental History of the Middle Rio Grande Basin CHAPTER 6 OVERVIEW OF EARLY SCIENTIFIC WORK, RESOURCE DATA COLLECTION, MANAGEMENT, AND CONSERVATION 1812–1982 Historic Native American and Hispanic resource use degradation that subsequently were addressed in ever- and conservation prior to the Anglo occupation and domi- increasing degrees by governmental agencies. nation of the Middle Rio Grande Basin was documented Most notable is the characteristic evolution from virtu- in Chapters 3–5. Various Indian groups exploited water ally unregulated resource use on the frontier, especially and a range of faunal and floral resources, arable soil, on the public domain. Driven and supported by federal and rock materials. They developed strategies, in some and local legislative acts, policies, agencies, and monetary instances, for sustained use of these resources on a sub- remuneration, the pattern shifted to a relatively well- sistence basis. Their relatively low populations and low regulated and reasonably balanced resource management levels of technology generally ensured an ongoing relative system emphasizing self-sustainable and wise use pro- abundance of most of these resources. In rare situations grams and policies, involving an array of public agencies where intensive local use or climatic events depleted a and “watchdog” environmental groups. A few legislative needed resource, Native Americans moved to a new area acts from the early exploitation period, such as the 1872 or traded for the scarce commodity. In the colonial pe- Mining Act, remain in effect. The 104th Congress has at- riod, the Spanish generally interrupted such strategies. tempted to modify many resource management laws cre- Hispanics brought not only an array of new technolo- ated in recent decades. gies, which enabled them to exploit eco-cultural resources The following overview includes (1) a discussion of the more extensively and intensively than the indigenous early naturalists and environmental scientists and their populations, but they also brought a new attitude regard- work, (2) a chronological narrative about conservation and ing environmental use. The Spanish, unlike Native management of land and water resources by public agen- Americans, saw themselves as separate from nature and cies, (3) significant resource management legislation, and viewed natural disasters as acts of God over which they (4) a discussion of important private organizations' effect had no control (Weber 1992: 29). Although most residents on management and preservation of the region’s environ- maintained basic subsistence lifestyles, some resources mental resources during the territorial and statehood (to were exported to Mexico by wealthier private individu- 1982) periods. A chronology of landmark events, the work als or government officials. By the late 18th century, in of naturalists, scientists, government agencies, and envi- spite of some governmental regulation, there were some ronmental organizations and resource legislation follows. local water shortages and contamination, decimation or depletion of forage, and soil erosion. By the time of the EARLY NATURALISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL arrival of the U.S. Army and early Anglo settlers in the SCIENTISTS IN THE STUDY REGION, 1831–1924 mid- to late-1840s, grass and wood supplies were in de- cline or nearly exhausted around the Rio Grande Valley Various Native American groups, who have lived in the from above Cochiti Pueblo to below Socorro. region for more than 10,000 years, might be called the first Anglo Americans also brought new technologies and, “naturalists.” Over thousands of years, knowledge of more important, a new attitude toward the environment. geography, surface waters, rocks and minerals, plants and Like that of the Spaniards, Anglos' attitudes emanated animals—their distribution, seasonal or annual occur- from a religious background that viewed humans as sepa- rences, and uses—was gained through observation, study, rate from the natural environment. Also related to this and experimentation. Native Americans passed this philosophy was a resource exploitation strategy based on knowledge orally from one generation to the next. They maximum harvest of resources for maximum profit. To shared non-sacred aspects of this information with promote primarily Anglo settlement and development of Hispanics who began settling in New Mexico at the end the region, the Federal Government passed many natural of the 16th century. Hispanics brought new plants, ani- resource laws, created numerous agencies, and appropri- mals, and associated knowledge, which in turn they ated many millions of dollars. Initially, virtually all fed- shared with Native Americans. eral and territorial laws promulgated intensive use of the Native Americans also had considerable knowledge of environment. This led to various forms of environmental astronomical phenomena and extensive knowledge of the USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS–GTR–5. 1998 331 geography of the region. Early Spanish explorers relied century, such as W.H.H. Davis (1982), wrote rather de- on Indian guides for travel directions, locations of water, tailed accounts of land use along the Middle Rio Grande and food sources. This kind of information was also made Valley. available to Spanish Colonial New Mexico’s Hispanic and The first individuals trained in the physical or biologi- later Anglo explorers and settlers. Chronicles from early cal sciences to work in the study region were botanists. Spanish expeditions (Hammond and Rey 1966, 1967; Two East Coast botanists, John Torrey of Columbia and Hodge 1946; and Schroeder and Matson 1965) contain the Asa Gray of Harvard, collected, classified, and named first written descriptions, albeit sketchy, of the land, wa- plants for a botanical study of North America in the 1840s. ter, biotic components, and indigenous peoples. Thomas Nuttall, a prominent Philadelphia botanist, and The best known map maker in Spanish Colonial New George Engelmann, a St. Louis physician and expert on Mexico was Captain Don Bernardo Miera y Pacheco. Af- cacti, assisted in this ambitious project (Dickerman 1985: ter his arrival in Santa Fe in 1756, he produced several 159; Goetzmann 1966: 321). These plant and zoological maps, including perhaps his best known map, prepared collections resulted in descriptive catalogs and invento- in 1779 (Fig. 74). This map shows, with relative accuracy, ries that organized large amounts of data for use by later, streams and rivers, mountain ranges, place names, and more theoretically oriented biologists. Scientists for- settlements. He died in Santa Fe in 1785 (Adams and warded faunal specimens to the Smithsonian Institution, Chavez 1956: 2–4, 161; Chavez 1975: 229–230). where they were cataloged and classified under the di- The most comprehensive work on the geography, agri- rect supervision of Spencer F. Baird, a student of John culture, and human populations of colonial New Mexico James Audubon (Goetzmann 1966: 322–323). was produced by Fray Francisco Atanasio Dominguez, a Collecting in New Mexico began in 1841, when Will- Franciscan priest who traveled across the region in 1776 iam Gambel, a protege of Nuttall, arrived in Santa Fe in (Adams and Chavez 1956). He carefully recorded his ob- July. He collected botanical and zoological specimens in servations on the landscape and settlements, which re- the nearby Rio Grande Valley and Sangre de Cristo Range. sulted in a large manuscript discovered in Mexico City in The Gambel oak was later named in his honor (Dickerman 1928 and first published 28 years later. Several other reli- 1985: 159, 163–164). gious figures and government officials, such as Benavides In 1846 another plant collector, Frederick A. Wislizenus (Ayer 1965), Morfi (Simmons 1977), Chacon (Simmons (1969), came to New Mexico just prior to the U.S. Army’s 1985), and Pino, Barreiro, and Escudero (Carroll and Hag- invasion. During his relatively brief passage through the gard 1942), authored manuscripts that contain less region and into Chihuahua, Wislizenus collected five new comprehensive and detailed, but nonetheless useful, en- species, including pinyon and ponderosa pines, walking- vironmental history data on the period. stick cholla, a yucca, and an echinocactus (Dickerman The first scientific studies of the region were carried out 1985: 164–166). by Anglo naturalists from the midwestern or eastern Later in 1846, Lt. William Emory of the U.S. Corps of United States, some of whom were actually trained as Topographical Engineers collected botanical specimens medical doctors. They primarily collected plants and ani- along the Santa Fe and Chihuahua trails. Two of the plants mals that were sent back east for study and naming. They he collected, an oak and a mesquite, were later named for were followed by geologists, paleontologists, botanists, him (Dickerman 1985: 167–168). Emory also produced the zoologists, and ornithologists, who were generally part first detailed maps of the region. of military expeditions or railroad surveys. Early photog- Another topographical engineer, Lt. James W. Abert raphers, artists, and map makers, also part of the same (1962), was interested in the flora, fauna, and geology of kind of field parties, provided basic imagery of the land New Mexico. Under Emory’s command, Abert described and its people. These collected specimens, associated sci- the plants and animals on his route of travel along the Rio entific data, and photographs and maps composed a body Grande Valley as far south as Valverde, west to the Rio of knowledge that was subsequently
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Qui Tam Suits Under the Refuse Act (Connecticut Action Now, Inc
    St. John's Law Review Volume 47 Number 2 Volume 47, December 1972, Number Article 17 2 Qui Tam Suits Under the Refuse Act (Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co.) St. John's Law Review Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in St. John's Law Review by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ST. JOHN'S LAW REVIEW [Vol. 47:313 Qui Tam SUITS UNDER THE REFUSE ACT Connecticut Action Now, Inc. v. Roberts Plating Co. As the preceding cases indicate, the Second Circuit, like courts all over the country, has been besieged in recent years by citizens seek- ing to enforce environmental laws. The enactment of new statutes, such as NEPA, has not deterred environmental plaintiffs from testing the possibilities presented by other statutes, both old and new. Clearly, a threshold question in a suit brought to enforce statutory provisions is whether the plaintiff has standing to bring the action. Although recent decisions have taken a liberal view of requirements,100 a plain- tiff must still show that he has been or may be injured in fact, eco- nomically or otherwise, and that the "interest sought to be protected ... [is] ... arguably within the zone of interests to be protected... by the statute . in question. 1' 01 The case to be discussed in this comment demonstrates that, even where these requirements appear to be met the prospective plaintiff may find his action blocked by the nature of the statute under which he attempts to protect environ- mental interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Pubhclaw95-87 , : : : ' ; -'
    PUBLIC LAW 95-87—AUG. 3, 1977 91 STAT. 445 PubHcLaw95-87 ,:::'; -' ' ^ 95th Congress An Act To provide for the cooperation between the Secretary of the Interior ano the Aug. 3, 1977 States with respect to the regulation of surface coal mining operations, and [H.R. 2] the acquisition and reclamation of abandoned mines, and for other purposes. Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assemhled^ That this Act Surface Mining may be cited as the "Surface Mining Control and Eeclamation Act Control and of 1977". Reclamation Act TABLE OF CONTENTS ^} 1977. 30 use 1201 TITLE I—STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND POLICY note. Sec. 101. Findings. Sec. 102. Purposes. TITLE II—OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT Sec. 201. Creation of the Office. >- TITLE III—STATE MINING AND MINERAL RESOURCES AND RESEARCH INSTITUTES Sec. 301. Authorization of State allotments to institutes. Sec. 302. Research funds to institutes. Sec. 303. Funding criteria. Sec. 304. Duties of the Secretary. Sec. 305. Autonomy. " '•-'•• Sec. 306. Miscellaneous provisions. Sec. 307. Center for cataloging. Sec. 308. Interagency cooperation. Sec. 309. Advisory committee. TITLE IV—ABANDONED MINE RECLAMATION Sec. 401. Abandoned Mine Reclamation Fund and purposes. Sec. 402. Reclamation fee. Sec. 403. Objectives of fund. Sec. 404. Eligible lands and water. Sec. 405. State reclamation programs. Sec. 406. Reclamation of rural lands. Sec. 407. Acquisition and reclamation of land adversely affected by past coal mining practices. Sec. 408. Liens. Sec. 409. Filling voids and sealing tunnels. Sec. 410. Emergency powers. Sec. 411. Fund report.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting America's Wetlands Under Rapanos: Defining "The Waters of the United States"
    Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development Volume 23 Issue 1 Volume 23, Spring 2008, Issue 1 Article 8 Protecting America's Wetlands Under Rapanos: Defining "the Waters of the United States" Adam Redder Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/jcred This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Civil Rights and Economic Development by an authorized editor of St. John's Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. PROTECTING AMERICA'S WETLANDS UNDER RAPANOS: DEFINING "THE WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES" ADAM REDDER* INTRODUCTION When can a landowner dredge and fill wetlands on his or her property without fear of intervention by the federal government? If one wants to build a structure on his or her property, should he or she be concerned about the small stream or wetland in the backyard? Does the size of the stream or wetland matter? Does it matter if the stream flows continuously throughout the year? What if there is a lake nearby? What if one receives a nod from state authorities to go forward with a development project-can one initiate such a project without authorization from the federal government? The answer to these questions is unclear even in light of a recent United States Supreme Court case specifically addressing the matter.1 The scope of federal jurisdiction over wetlands and other land features exhibiting saturated soil conditions in the United States is defined by the Clean Water Act (hereinafter CWA).2 The Supreme Court has attempted to appropriately define the * J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water Ross Sandler New York Law School
    digitalcommons.nyls.edu Faculty Scholarship Articles & Chapters 1972 The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water Ross Sandler New York Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/fac_articles_chapters Part of the Environmental Law Commons Recommended Citation American Bar Association Journal, Vol. 58, Issue 5 (May 1972), pp. 468-471 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at DigitalCommons@NYLS. It has been accepted for inclusion in Articles & Chapters by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@NYLS. The Refuse Act of 1899: Key to Clean Water by Ross Sandier The Refuse Act of 1899, although Enforcement means no more than approaching its diamond anniversary, F ORin thePERSONS environment genuinely and theinterested abate- ordering the polluter to conform to the is alive and well and providing the ment of water pollution, the last year desired standard and, on his failing to best legal framework for cleaning or two must surely look like the dawn- meet that standard, imposing sanc- up the nation's navigable streams ing of a new age. The distinction be- tions. Under the Refuse Act of 1899 and their tributaries. Its absolute tween today's relatively optimistic pic- the Federal Government has been standard of no pollution, which is ture and the past rests on the emerging doing precisely this. As many legisla- ameliorated through practical use its tures and the Congress contemplate application, is to be preferred over consensus that government must attempts to provide elaborate enforcement powers to bring a halt to pollution abatement legislation, it is statutory standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Supreme Court of Tfjc Untteb States
    wltAKY *> ' ',ARY ~fvi: 3 COURT- U- S-RECF.VEO SCllDCfurufp^ COURT,» - U._ :t. u. s. MAR^t *s DFFJCE In the flf» 3 4 22 PM *73 Supreme Court of tfjc Untteb States UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) Petitioner, } ) vs, ) No. 72-624 ) PENNSYLVANIA INDUSTRIAL ) CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ) ) Respondent, ) Washington, D. C. March 27, 1973 Pages 1 thru 50 Duplication or copying of this transcript by photographic, electrostatic or other facsimile means is prohibited under the order form agreement. HOOVER REPORTING COMPANY, INC. Official 'Reporters Washington, D. C. 546-6666 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TIIE UNITED STATES UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, Vo No . 72-624 PENNSYLVANIA INDUSTRIAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Respondent» Washington,, D„ C, f Tuesday, March 27, 1973,, The above-entitled matter came on for argument at 11:14 o'clock, a»rn„ BEFORE: WARREN E. BURGER, Chief Justice of the United States WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS, Associate Justice WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, JR„, Associate Justice POTTER STEWART, Associate Justice BYRON R. WHITE, Associate Justice THURGOOD MARSHALL, Associate Justice HARRY A. BLACKMUN, Associate Justice LEWIS F. POWELL, JR„, Associate Justice WILLIAM II. REIINQUIST, Associate Justice APPEARANCESi WILLIAM BRADFORD REYNOLDS, ESQ», Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D„ C» 20530; for the Petitioner» HAROLD GONDELMAN, ESQ», Baskin, Boreman, Wilner, Sachs, Gondelman & Craig, 1018 Frick Building, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219; for the Respondents ORAL ARGUMENT OF: PAGE William Bradford Reynolds, Esq,, for the Petitioner 3 In rebuttal 48 Harold Gondelman, Esq», for the Respondent 22 3 P R O C E E D I N G S MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGERs We will hear arguments next in No.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Crimes Monthly Bulletin September 2007
    ENVIRONMENTAL CRIMES MONTHLY BULLETIN September 2007 EDITOR’S NOTE: Please continue to submit information on relevant case developments in federal prosecutions for inclusion in the Bulletin. If you have a significant photograph from the case, you may email this, along with your submission, to Elizabeth Janes: MaterialAT alsoA GmaLy beA faxedNC Eto Elizabeth at (202) 305-0396. If you have information to submit on state-level cases, please send this to the Regional Environmental Enforcement Associations’ website: http://www.regionalassociations.org. You may quickly navigate through this document using electronic links for Significant Opinions, Active Cases, and Quick Links. ECS Monthly Bulletin September 2007 AT A GLANCE SIGNIFICANT OPINIONS Northern California River Watch v. City of Healdsburg, ___ F.3d___, 2007 WL 2230186 (9th Cir. Aug. 6, 2007) . United States v. Moses, ___ F.3d ___, 2007 WL 2215954 (9th Cir. Aug. 3, 2007). United States v. Citgo Petroleum Corp., ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2007 WL 1125792 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 16, 2007). United States v. Hylton, ___ F. Supp. 2d ___, 2007 WL 1674183 (W.D. Okla. June 7, 2007). 2 ECS Monthly Bulletin September 2007 Districts Active Cases Case Type / Statutes United States v. James Jairell Bear Hunting/ Lacey Act, Conspiracy D. Alaska United States v. IMC Shipping Vessel/ Refuse Act, Migratory Bird Co. Pte. Ltd. Treaty Act United States v. David Bachtel Vessel Scuttled/ Clean Water Act, Obstruction, False Statement, Sinking C.D. Calif. Boat in Navigation Channel United States v. Robert Robertson Waste Recycler/ False Statement C. Colo. United States v. Jan Swart Leopard Hunting/ Smuggling United States v.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeff Miller, Former Epa Director of Superfund
    JEFF MILLER Former EPA Director of Superfund Enforcement Interview Date: October 27, 2005 Location: Boston, MA EPA Interviewer: For the record, this is an interview with Professor Jeff Miller of the Pace University Law School, whose early career was with EPA in its Region 1 office in Boston in the early 1970s. We’re conducting this interview on October the 27th for an oral history project in conjunction with the 25th anniversary of Superfund. Good morning, Jeff. Miller: Good morning. EPA Interviewer: Jeff, can you start out by telling us about teaching environmental law at Pace, including when you came to your current position? But if you could, give us any focus that you can on something or anything Superfund-specific. Miller: OK, I came here in 1987, and I teach primarily environmental law. We have over 25 courses in various kinds of environmental law, and we have graduate students from all over the world. I teach a course in hazardous wastes, which is RCRA [Resource Conservation and Recovery Act] and CERCLA [Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act], and I co-authored the casebook that we use with Craig Johnston, who is out at Lewis and Clark, and was with EPA in Region 1 after I was there. EPA Interviewer: Since you’ve been away from EPA for a long time, a lot of what we are going to discuss today will go back to the very beginning—not just of EPA, but of the Superfund some 10 years later. Before we jump into Superfund, would you tell us a little bit about Region 1 at the beginning of your career and what specific programs you were involved with there? Miller: I joined Region 1 in September of 1971 and EPA, as I recall, was put together in April of ’71, so it was right at the beginning.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pioneers-Establishing the Concept of Forestry in the Southwest, 1905-24
    Chapter 6 - The Pioneers-Establishing the Concept of Forestry in the Southwest, 1905-24 Ranching, lumbering, and mining were well established in the Southwest long before the earliest foresters or conservationists made their appearance. Ranchers grazed their cattle and sheep, loggers cut timber and chopped firewood, and prospectors explored for gold, silver, and copper on the public domain, almost as a right with no one disputing their course. The General Land Office of the Department of the Interior, which had jurisdiction over the Federal lands, was primarily interested in selling them. Anyone could buy land, usually at the minimum price of $1.25 per acre, either in large or small quantities. Homestead laws were generous, and settlers could claim 160 acres for each adult member of their family. Various special laws, such as the Timber Culture Act, and even more subterfuges enabled businessmen and corporations to acquire large blocks of land without paying even at the minimum price. Ranchers, accustomed to free use of the range, preferred to retain open access to the resources of the public domain-grass, water, timber, and minerals. They protested bitterly when Federal regulations curbed their frontier attitude. In like manner, ranchers, loggers, and others also invaded the railroad lands, taking what they wished and giving no thought to the long-range future of the region. The railroads, particularly the Santa Fe and the Southern Pacific, had few men to patrol their lands and found local opinion solidly against them when and if they attempted to prosecute trespassers for misappropriating property. This state of affairs was normal in the territories of Arizona and New Mexico for the last 50 years of the 19th century, from American annexation in 1848 to 1900.
    [Show full text]
  • History of the 1972 Clean Water Act: the Story Behind How the 1972 Act Became the Capstone on a Decade of Extraordinary Environmental Reform
    History of the 1972 Clean Water Act: The Story Behind How the 1972 Act Became the Capstone on a Decade of Extraordinary Environmental Reform by N. William Hines* ost environmental law scholars would probably ciples in statutory de#nitions of what acts or omissions would agree that three ambitious pieces of federal legis- constitute private and public nuisances as a matter of law. lation, adopted within a three-year period forty State courts, however, generally recognized that the organic Myears ago, form the backbone of the nation’s continuing common law of nuisance would continue to evolve.6 In one e!orts to control and prevent environmental pollution. Of bold stroke, the 1972 CWA abrogated this traditional legal the three iconic statutes—the National Environmental Pol- doctrine that de#ned actionable water pollution in terms of icy Act of 1969 (“NEPA”),1 the Clean Air Act of 1970,2 and unreasonable harm. "e new law accomplished this critical the 1972 Clean Water Act (“CWA”)3—many environmental reversal by adopting as a long-term goal the elimination of all law scholars would likely agree that the CWA was the best polluting discharges to the nation’s waters, and by creating a designed and most artfully drafted. At least some would also complex new regulatory regime employing technology-based agree that over the forty years of its existence, the CWA has e8uent limitations to accomplish this ambitious goal. been the most e!ective in achieving its objectives.4 Admirers Unlike Athena, the 1972 CWA did not spring full-grown of the impressive national progress under the CAA might from the brow of Zeus.
    [Show full text]
  • September 2, 2021
    September 2, 2021 Via www.regulations.gov The Honorable Michael Regan The Honorable Jaime A. Pinkham Administrator Acting Assistant Secretary of the Army for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Civil Works 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Department of the Army Washington, DC 20460 108 Army Pentagon Washington, DC 20310 Mr. John Goodin Director Mr. Vance F. Stewart III Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds Acting Principal Deputy U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of the Assistant Secretary of the 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Army for Civil Works Washington, DC 20460 Department of the Army 108 Army Pentagon Washington, DC 20310 Re: Request for Recommendations on Defining “Waters of the United States” Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2021-03281 Dear Administrator Regan, Acting Assistant Secretary Pinkham, Mr. Goodin, and Mr. Stewart: Together, our 85 organizations write to ask you to take two steps to protect critical wetlands, streams, and other waters that we and our millions of members rely on for swimming, fishing, boating, drinking water, and our livelihoods. First, we urge the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (“Corps”) (together, the “Agencies”) to promptly restore and implement the regulatory framework in effect prior to the so-called Navigable Waters Protection Rule (“NWPR”). Second, we urge the Agencies to promulgate a new definition of “waters of the United States” that is rooted in science, consistent with Supreme Court precedent, and faithful to the objective of the Clean Water Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Qui Tam Actions Under the 1899 Refuse Act: Possibility of Individual Legal Action to Prevent Water Pollution
    Missouri Law Review Volume 36 Issue 4 Fall 1971 Article 4 Fall 1971 Qui Tam Actions under the 1899 Refuse Act: Possibility of Individual Legal Action to Prevent Water Pollution Charles N. Drennan Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Charles N. Drennan, Qui Tam Actions under the 1899 Refuse Act: Possibility of Individual Legal Action to Prevent Water Pollution, 36 MO. L. REV. (1971) Available at: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol36/iss4/4 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Missouri Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Missouri School of Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Drennan:MISSOURI Drennan: LAW Qui REVIEW Tam Actions [Vol. 36 QUI TAM ACTIONS UNDER THE 1899 REFUSE ACT: POSSIBILITY OF INDIVIDUAL LEGAL ACTION TO PREVENT WATER POLLUTION "A river is more than an amenity, it is a treasure."' I. INTRODUCTION During the decade of the 1960's a host of environmental problems were brought to the attention of the American public, including overpopulation, poisoning from pesticides, air pollution, and water pollution.2 As a result, concerned individuals joined to form conservation dubs and other groups in an attempt to find methods of combating the various problems.3 One of the methods proposed in the water pollution area arose from certain provisions in an 1899 statute which has now come to be known as the 1899 Refuse Act.4 Briefly stated, the Act prohibits the discharge of any refuse matter into navigable water without first obtaining a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
    [Show full text]
  • An Environmental History of the Middle Rio Grande Basin
    CHAPTER 3 HUMAN SETTLEMENT PATTERNS, POPULATIONS, AND RESOURCE USE This chapter presents an overview, in three main sec- reasoning, judgment, and his ideas of enjoyment, tions, of the ways in which each of the three major eco- as well as his education and government (Hughes cultures of the area has adapted to the various ecosys- 1983: 9). tems of the Middle Rio Grande Basin. These groups consist of the American Indians, Hispanos, and Anglo-Americans. This philosophy permeated all aspects of traditional Within the American Indian grouping, four specific Pueblo life; ecology was not a separate attitude toward groups—the Pueblo, Navajo, Apache, and Ute—are dis- life but was interrelated with everything else in life. cussed in the context of their interactions with the environ- Another perspective on Native Americans was given by ment (Fig. 15). The Hispanic population is discussed as a Vecsey and Venables (1980: 23): single group, although the population was actually com- posed of several groups, notably the Hispanos from Spain To say that Indians existed in harmony with na- or Mexico, the genizaros (Hispanicized Indians from Plains ture is a half-truth. Indians were both a part of and other regional groups), mestizos (Hispano-Indio nature and apart from nature in their own “mix”), and mulatos (Hispano-Black “mix”). Their views world view. They utilized the environment ex- and uses of the land and water were all very similar. Anglo- tensively, realized the differences between hu- Americans could also be broken into groups, such as Mor- man and nonhuman persons, and felt guilt for mon, but no such distinction is made here.
    [Show full text]