Wildlife
Wisconsin criminal case shows how courts value wildlife
|
Spiritual and aesthetic values don’t figure into it. Expert witness calculates replacement costs.
Great Lakes Echo (https://greatlakesecho.org/tag/law/page/10/)
Spiritual and aesthetic values don’t figure into it. Expert witness calculates replacement costs.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has upheld an Itasca County decision that no environmental impact statement is required to build a proposed summer camp and retreat on Deer Lake.
The agreement resolves a decade-long dispute that began with EPA inspections in September 2004 of a plant then owned and operated by PolyOne Corp.
Zoning doesn’t intrude on state’s regulatory oversight, court says. Minority dissent argues that local ordinances do more than regulate land use.
Judge says there is no constitutional right to hunt.
“We are aware that the issues involved in this case stir the passions of many people, but our role is limited to faithfully applying the law, whether or not that decision is popular,” the court said.
The project has stalled, perhaps permanently, because of the withdrawal of the lead private investor and elimination of a federal mandate for ethanol made from wood.
The Wisconsin Court of Appeals has upheld a decision by Buffalo County officials to grant a permit that would allow more than 100 truckloads a day of fracking sand to be trucked on local roads.
A jury trial is scheduled to begin April 29 on asbestos-related criminal charges stemming from the conversion of a former Bay City. Mich., church into a charter school. Roy Bradley Sr. and Gerald Essex are accused of violating the Clean Air Act by failing to properly handle, remove and dispose of material containing asbestos on the Bay City Academy project. The charter school has more than 500 students from kindergarten through 9th grade at the former church and two other buildings. Bradley was in charge of the project and Essex was the foreman supervising demolition and renovation activity at the site between August 2010 and September 2011, according to court documents.
The status of using what are also called Unmanned Aerial Vehicles — UAVs -commercially is in a holding pattern after a federal judge ruled last month that the Federal Aviation Administration had no authority to issue a $10,000 fine against a Virginia drone pilot.
That set off celebrations in the drone community that were short-lived.