Changes in environmental law scholarship

Recently published in Journal of Environmental Law: Ole Pedersen, "The Evolution and Emergence of Environmental Law Scholarship—A Perspective from Three Journals". The abstract:

In the attempt to lay the foundations for a better understanding of environmental law scholarship, this article offers a local perspective of environmental law scholarship in the UK. Through a study of more than 1,400 articles published in three leading UK environmental law journals over the course of three decades, the article considers the ways in which environmental law scholarship has changed over time by reference to gender and geographical location of authors. The article also interrogates the ways in which the topics of scholarship have changed over time, as well as the extent to which environmental law scholars make use of empirical methods and external sources of funding for their research. Finally, the article explores the extent to which environmental law scholarship is published in generalist law journals.

There are a lot of interesting data in the article. Here, for instance, is a graph showing the changes (mainly increases) in the number of environmental law articles published in leading UK generalist law journals:

It would be interesting to see parallel date for other countries.

How control of nature shaped the international order

Posted recently to International Law Reporter, a nomination by Gail Lythgoe for the most interesting, important, or influential article or book published in 2022:

Joanne Yao, The Ideal River: How Control of Nature Shaped the International Order (Manchester Univ. Press 2022)

This book explores the geographical imaginaries of three rivers (the Rhine, Danube, and Congo) and how these very imaginaries shaped the constitutions, structure, and life of three early international organizations. It is a marvellous tale of how (and why) experts sought to tame nature and also says much about law’s relationship to the physical geography. I always really recommend and admire it because of how well written and engaging it is.

From the publisher's website:

The ideal river examines nineteenth-century efforts to establish international commissions on three transboundary rivers - the Rhine, the Danube, and the Congo. It charts how the Enlightenment ambition to tame the natural world, and human nature itself, became an international standard for rational and civilized authority and informed our geographical imagination of the international. This relationship of domination over nature shaped three core International Relations concepts central to the emergence of early international order: the territorial sovereign state; imperial hierarchies; and international organizations. The book contributes to environmental politics and international relations by highlighting how the relationship between society and nature is not a peripheral concern, but one at the heart of international politics. 

Problems with formalizing rights in the commons

Political Geography recently published "Grabbing the commons: Forest rights, capital and legal struggle in the Carpathian Mountains", by Stefan Voicu and Monica Vasile. The abstract:

In this paper we show that formalizing communal rights is a process riddled with struggles leading to a partial or total grabbing of commons. Drawing on long-term research and using interviews, surveys, and historical sources, we analyze struggles that emerged from processes of formalizing rights to commons, occurring one century apart in the Carpathian Mountains of Romania. The first wave of formalization, initiated by the state in 1910, institutionalized a model of hybrid commons in which individual rights to communal forests and pastures were understood as inheritable and tradable shares. This generated never-ending contention and a vulnerability to capital, allowing timber companies to grab shares and dispossess rightsholders. The second formalization, post-1989, enabled local communities to regain rights to forests that had been nationalized by the state at the beginning of the socialist rule. However, this resurgence of mountain commons unleashed again a suite of legal struggles, bringing back to life previous vulnerabilities and dispossessions. We argue that the formalization of rights often does not bring clarity and security to commons rightsholders. Instead, it creates a suite of vulnerabilities, ambiguities, and complexity within regulatory texts, begetting the grabbing of the commons.

Barat Roland, Lambs in the autumn in the mountains

Nazi legislation against animal cruelty

From Sydney Criminal Lawyers, on Lexology (via Legal History Blog): "The History of Laws Against Cruelty to Animals". A particularly interesting section discusses the Nazis:

There can be no words to sufficiently encapsulate the appalling atrocities perpetrated by one of history’s most evil people, Adolf Hitler, and his fascist Nazi party.

And one must take special care before giving credit for any act to the person at the helm of history’s most disgusting and shameful political, social and cultural regime, whereby millions of innocent men, women and children were tortured and murdered, including the systematic use of humans for medical experimentation, annihilation of ‘undesirable’ groups in society including the disabled and slaughter of large segments of targeted racial and religious groups.

Hitler and his extreme right-wing party exemplified the very worst of humankind, and the regime’s ultimate demise was a Godsend to all moral people.

But the irony must also be acknowledged that while on the way to murdering millions of human beings, the famously vegetarian and dog-loving Hitler took unprecedented steps to protect non-human animals from cruelty. And many of the enacted laws go way further than present day legislation.

In that regard, 24 November 1933 saw the German parliament (the Reichstag) the under the Chancellorship of Hitler and Presidency of Hermann Göring) pass the Reichstierschutzgesetz, or Reich Animal Protection Act, which is listed in the above table.

The law imposed a total ban on the almost-universally accepted, and even encouraged and publicly funded, practices of vivisection (operating or experimenting on live animals) and slaughter of animals without anaesthetic.

In a 1933 speech approved by Hitler, Göring declared an end to the “unbearable torture and suffering in animal experiments” and warned that those who “still think they can continue to treat animals as inanimate property” would be sent to concentration camps.

The regime saw a range of further prohibitions to protect animals including bans on animal trapping, the boiling of crustaceans such as crabs and lobsters, live baiting, neglect and cruel acts to domestic animals, and severe restrictions on hunting.

And so it was – perhaps history’s most evil regime was ironically perhaps the most benevolent in the treatment of non-human animals.

This is just one one section of the long post, which includes a chronology of developments and a discussion of Australian law. 

The US Supreme Court’s earliest pollution cases

Over at Legal Planet, Dan Farber recently posted on "The Supreme Court’s Earliest Pollution Cases". Farber writes:

Well over a century ago, the Supreme Court ruled that it had that power to remedy interstate water pollution. That was in 1901. Six years later, the Court decided its first air pollution case.  Notably, these cases came during the conservative Lochner era when the Court was hardly known for its liberalism.  Quite the contrary. Yet the Court didn’t hesitate to address pollution issues.

The water pollution case was Missouri v. Illinois.  In a feat of engineering prowess or incredible hubris, depending on how you look at it, Illinois had built a canal to reverse the flow of a river from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi. The canal then became a dumping place for the city’s raw sewage. Missouri claimed that the sewage was befouling the water as far away as St. Louis. The Court had long heard other law suits between states, but this was apparently the first one to involve pollution.

Chicago Drainage Canal being built (from The New Student's Reference Work (1914))

I'm not sure this was really the US Supreme Court's first pollution case - how about the Slaughterhouse Cases? In any case, Farber goes on to also discuss Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co., an interstate air pollution case. He comments:

These two cases are little known today, but they have cast long shadows.  Very briefly, here were some of their longterm impacts:

1. International law. This line of precedent got the attention of an international tribunal in the Trail Smelter case, which involving a Canadian smelter polluting across the U.S. border. The tribunal held that a country has a duty to prevent its inhabitants from inflicting serious harm within another country. Thus, Canada had to take responsibility for the pollution. This principle is now famous in international law as the Smelter Trail rule. In turn, that principle of international law was taken up in international concords such as the 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
   
   
2. Water pollution. Use of federal common law to pursue water pollution cases enjoyed a big revival in the 1960s and early 1970s. It was ended by the Supreme Court, which held that the then-new Clean Water Act took over the field of interstate water pollution in lieu of court-made rules.
   
   
3. Climate change.  In a groundbreaking climate decision, Massachusetts v. EPA, Justice Stevens invoked this line of cases to emphasize the special interest that states have in access to the Court to protect their interests as sovereigns.  The upshot was to give states standing to sue EPA for failing to take action against carbon emissions. Also, this line of cases was repurposed  early in this century in order to bring lawsuits against major carbon emitters in federal court. The Supreme Court ultimately said that since the Clean Air Act covered climate change, lawsuits based on judge-made federal rules were no longer needed. It left open the possibility of lawsuits based on state law, and state lawsuits against oil companies are now underway.

More on the US Supreme Court and the history of environmental law here.

A prize for my article

I'm happy to report that my article,  "Horizontal and vertical influences in colonial legal transplantation: water by-laws in British Palestine", recently was awarded the best article prize by the Israel Association for Law and History. (See related posts here.) I'd like to reproduce (in translation) one point made by the  prize committee in its statement, as I think it could be useful for others' research:

Beyond the excellence of the article itself, the committee believes that Schorr's article can serve as a model for future studies of legal transplantation. The article considers not only the process of transplantation as a product of the sovereign or lawyer's will, but also the material objects through which transplantation takes place - letters, memos, newspapers, and statute books - and it shows the importance of prosaic, everyday factors for this process, such as bureaucratic practices or even the location of law libraries.

In short, material factors matter - a point that environmental history knows full well, but is often shortchanged by legal histories.

Jerusalem Water Works. Ras el Ain. Engine room (Matson, 1930s?)

More on the Clean Water Act at 50

Legal Planet's Richard Frank posted today on the US Clean Water Act's 50th birthday. An excerpt:

The CWA as enacted a half-century ago was enormously ambitious and, with the benefit of hindsight, quite naive: in the law’s legislative findings, Congress declared that “it is the national goal that the discharge of pollutants into the navigable waters be eliminated by 1985.”  That obviously did not, and will not, happen.

Nevertheless, and with the possible exception of the Clean Air Act, no law enacted as part of the outpouring of federal environmental legislation in the 1970’s has proven more successful and transformational than the CWA.  The nation’s rivers, streams, lakes and ocean waters are dramatically cleaner and healthier than they were a half-century ago.

That’s primarily due to two key features of the CWA: first, a nationwide permit system designed to mandate aggressive application of pollution control technology to limit pollution from “point sources” such as factories and power plants.  The second feature is a massive infusion of federal funding to state and local governments to upgrade sewage treatment plants across America.

Another key element of the CWA is its incorporation of “environmental federalism” principles.  Subject to federal review and approval (and incentivized by generous federal funding), willing states were allowed to assume responsibility for administering and enforcing the CWA’s federal permit systems.  California was the first state to seek and obtain this delegation of federal CWA authority in 1972, and most–but not all–states have since done so as well.

Yet another important element of the CWA has been its incorporation of the principle of private enforcement.  In virtually all other nations, enforcement of water pollution control and other environmental laws is the sole responsibility of government regulators.  But the CWA authorizes and incentivizes private citizens and organizations to enforce the statute as well.  Today, the private enforcement model is replicated in many of the nation’s environmental laws.  But far more private enforcement actions are brought under the CWA than any other federal environmental statute.  And the number of private CWA enforcement lawsuits far exceeds those brought by federal and state regulators.

More on the history of the Clean Water Act here and here. 

Class and conservation

Recently published in the American Journal of Legal History is William B Meyer's "Class, Conservation, and the Police Power in the American Gilded Age: The Origins of Lawton v. Steele". The abstract:

The leading police power case of Lawton v. Steele, decided by the US Supreme Court in 1894, offers insight into the question of judicial class bias during the decades following the Civil War. Conflict arose in rural northern New York State over restrictions on livelihood fishing by nets imposed to protect sport angling by affluent tourists. Opposition to the restrictions was grounded in a producerist worldview and class consciousness. The matter reached the courts in a challenge to state laws permitting the summary destruction, without legal process, of nets placed illegally. Seemingly prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment and previous case law, such destruction was upheld by a Supreme Court divided along ideological lines, correlating with the justices’ Whig or Jacksonian antecedents. The dissenters, those of Jacksonian sympathies, argued unsuccessfully against the challenged laws.

Winslow Homer, Adirondack Lake (Blue Monday) (1892)

The US Clean Water Act at 50

Another 50th anniversary: Legal Planet reports that the California Environmental Law & Policy Center at U.C. Davis School of Law will convene a conference to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the federal Clean Water Act on Friday, October 7th. Highlights include "a stimulating conversation between two water quality experts who were instrumental in drafting the Clean Water Act in 1972 and California’s landmark Porter-Cologne Act, the state’s comprehensive water pollution control statute that both predated and influenced the CWA."

The free, in-person conference will be held at the U.C. Davis School of Law.  Advance registration is required.

UNEP at 50

A little while back Environmental Politics carried a review by Katarina Eckerberg of The Untold Story of the World’s Leading Environmental Institution: UNEP at Fifty by Maria Ivanova (MIT Press, 2021). From the review:

UNEP’s mission was to assess the state of the environment and to inform, inspire, empower, and catalyse the UN system in environmental affairs. But why has progress been so slow? There is urgent need to critically assess what UNEP has achieved – and not – in the past 50 years, to investigate why it has yet not become sufficiently powerful in the struggle for a more sustainable world, and what can be done to improve this.

Maria Ivanova’s book helps to understand exactly those issues. It delivers profound knowledge about the functioning of international relations, politics, and administration in practice, by revealing how UNEP’s successes, crises, and turning points have been shaped by both politics, geography, and individuals within and beyond UNEP itself. The book addresses a concern at the core of international environmental politics, focusing on the history and performance of the world’s leading global environmental authority over 50 years.

Its theoretical contribution lies foremost in the thick narratives of the development of our major international environmental conventions – including reversing the depletion of the ozone layer, regional seas pollution, chemicals and waste, climate change, as well as tackling land degradation, and the loss of biodiversity and forests. By applying the concepts of capacity, connectivity, and credibility as elements of performance she guides us through both the empirical analysis and the potential ways forward. Capacity here refers to the people and resources, connectivity to infrastructure and representation, and credibility to authority and legitimacy of the institution.

Success on the commons

Last year Environmental History published a review by Frederica Bowcutt of Mexico’s Community Forest Enterprises: Success on the Commons and the Seeds of a Good Anthropocene, by David Barton Bray (U. Arizona Press, 2020). Some excerpts:

According to Bray, Garrett Hardin justified enclosure and centralized land management based on an ahistorical understanding; shared-pool commons have always been regulated by rules to prevent overuse. They are not, as Hardin suggested, a free for all. Ownership of land with valuable forest resources incentivizes rural Mexican communities to adopt, develop, and adhere to rules designed to prevent a tragedy of the commons. Results thus far indicate that community-based management of local forest resources “can be as effective as public protected areas in conserving forest cover and biodiversity, while also generating income for local communities” (p. 246).

A model treaty for transboundary pollution

The Scandinavian Journal of History recently published an article by Melina Antonia Buns, "Making a model: the 1974 Nordic Environmental Protection Convention and Nordic attempts to form international environmental law". The abstract:

This article investigates the 1974 Nordic Environmental Protection Convention. It shows that the ulterior motives for such a convention were Nordic ambitions to regulate and reduce transboundary pollution originating outside of the Nordic region. Emphasizing the inter-organizational dynamics between institutionalized Nordic cooperation and international organizations, it examines how the Nordics drew on developments within international organizations and how they pursued their agenda of shaping international environmental law within the OECD. Ultimately, the article argues that the Nordic countries tried to create a model convention to be exported to and implemented at the international level with the aim of reducing transboundary pollution and establishing transnational responsibilities and accountabilities. By setting out this argument and shedding light on the first legally binding international convention to address transboundary pollution with procedural principles, the article breaks new ground on the history of Nordic environmental cooperation as well as on the development of international environmental law.

Black snow, Tryvann, Oslo in 1974 (NILU - Norwegian institute for Air Research, nordics.info)

Bounties and land-use regulation

Jack Whiteley recently posted "Property in Wolves", forthcoming in the Cornell Law Review. The abstract:

From colonial times until the mid-twentieth century, governments paid bounties to kill wolves, mountain lions, and other wild animals. Clearing the wild was a sustained legislative project. Yet interest in these statutes has remained confined to scholarship on wildlife conservation, and important insights for legal theory have gone unobserved.

Based on new research, I argue that these bounty statutes have implications for the history and theory of property. The statutes were, in their intent and effect, land use regulations. For more than three centuries, they encouraged livestock. By removing wild animals, the statutes made livestock-raising a more cost-effective use of land than it otherwise would have been for landowners. And by removing wolves and other ecologically important species, they changed the character of land in ways that diminished the value of wilder uses. The statutes chose winners among land uses, and they operated over a much longer timeframe than conventional accounts, which date land use regulation’s origin to 1916, would suggest.

The statutes also had a deeper consequence. They encouraged private property in land. Predation on livestock is the kind of “large event” that, on a famous theory developed by Robert Ellickson, makes collectively-owned land valuable. By acting to remove the threat of wild animal predation on livestock in settlement communities, governments weighted the scale toward privately-owned, fee-simple land regimes. This discovery raises questions for a popular normative justification for private property in land.

The Article finally offers thoughts as to why animal eradication was such a pronounced public policy. The phenomenon suggests the influence of cultural preferences on property regimes.

Note: Apparently bounties are still with us, as can be seen in the recent poster below. 

(Boise State Public Radio)

Carbon dioxide as an air pollutant

More on the co-production of environmental science and law: Just out in Environment and History is an article by Ashton Macfarlane, "The Many Pollutant Identities of Carbon Dioxide: Global Climate Monitoring and Air Pollution Research in New Zealand, 1968–1975", that discusses the way carbon dioxide was framed as an air pollutant due to the modern air pollution statutes of the 1960s and '70s. The abstract:

In the late 1960s, New Zealand and the United States collaborated to establish a southern hemispheric carbon dioxide (CO2) monitoring station on New Zealand’s coastal cliffs. The New Zealand CO2 Project, as it came to be known, is an underappreciated landmark in the history of environmental monitoring. The archival record of its early years reveals the extent to which efforts to measure atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations interacted closely with one of the most hotly debated political issues of the mid-twentieth century: urban air pollution. The designation of CO2 as air pollution on a planetary scale had profound legal implications in an era in which clean air legislation increasingly brought air pollution within the scope of governmental regulation, and administrative agencies began to jostle for control of the monitoring enterprise. The precise nature of CO2 as an air pollutant, however, was difficult to pin down. In these initial years of concerted carbon dioxide monitoring, when the lines between climate science and air pollution research were still blurred, CO2 developed its many pollutant identities. The nature of these identities – and the ways in which scientists and science administrators negotiated their boundaries – retain their relevance today, as nations continue to link air pollution and climate legislation in the twenty-first century.

NIWA's Baring Head monitoring station (Dave Allen)

Nuisance law and forced labor

I recently participated in the great Legal Histories of Empire conference that met in Maynooth, Ireland. There were a number of papers on environment-related topics (especially about the oceans), but one that really stood out for me was that of Erin Braatz on nuisance law in colonial Gold Coast (Ghana). 

Braatz showed that the largest category of criminal prosecutions in the Gold Coast was for nuisance, and especially sanitary offenses, and suggested a surprising (for me, at least) explanation: the colonial government's desire for forced labor. After the abolition of slavery, colonial rulers and settlers cried out for (cheap) working hands, and sentencing locals to terms of labor for nuisance violations was one way of providing them.

I've often noted before connections labor issues and environmental regulation, but Braatz's research suggests a new (and unsettling) angle.

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

The latest  issue of the English Historical Review has an article by Matthew Kelly, "Habitat Protection, Ideology and the British Nature State: The Politics of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981". The abstract:

The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 was the most important piece of environmental legislation passed by a British government since the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. It sought to enhance the protection of listed flora and fauna, prevent further damage to existing habitat and resolve issues that had arisen with respect to rights of public access to the countryside. Although the bill was long and complex, many of its provisions sought to rationalise existing statutes or extend existing provision rather than create new powers. Provisions seeking to protect habitat proved highly contentious. The proprietary interest resented what it saw as an unjustified interference in private property rights; statutory bodies were alarmed that the centralising aspects of the Act would empower ministers at the expense of their ‘scientific’ independence; and the emergent environmental lobby, increasingly frustrated by the cautious approach of the statutory bodies, was determined that the bill’s habitat protection provisions be strengthened. This article examines the lengthy and disputatious consultation and parliamentary process in terms of longer-term frustration with the apparent weakness of statutory protections and how it brought the environmental effect of agricultural intensification into mainstream political debate. This article contextualises the growing insistence that there was a public interest in the health of the natural environment and situates the argument with respect to what environmental historians have started to analyse as the history of the ‘nature state’, a distinct realm of state activity comparable to the welfare state, warfare state or security state.

Negotiating regulatory science

More on the law-science nexus: The latest issue of Comtemporanea has an article by David Stradling, "Negotiating Regulatory Science. Dredging the Great Lakes in the Age of Ecology". The abstract:

In the mid-1960s residents around North America’s lower Great Lakes expressed growing concern about the dumping of dredge spoils in open waters, which they suspected of harming water quality. The act of dumping spoils, particularly from industrial harbors, became a target for government regulators eager to show progress in solving the environmental crisis. Scientific studies of dredging’s ecological impact and the regulation of dredging increased in Canada and the United States. The multiplicity of bureaucracies involved ensured that the International Joint Commission (IJC), established to resolve policy conflicts along the international border, would address the issue of dredging. The IJC response to the dredging conundrum provides a case study of how bureaucracies negotiated scientific knowledge in the age of ecology. Scientists turned data into knowledge and knowledge into policy guidance inside bureaucracies with conflicting missions that reflected divisions in the broader public. The public’s vague but powerful fear about sediment tainted by the industrial cities in which it accumulated forced the creation of a remarkable body of scientific knowledge related to how pollutants move through and accumulate in lake ecosystems. Activists forced governments to define pollution, to determine which of the many effluents of industrial cities affected human and ecological health, and at what concentrations they became a threat. In the age of ecology, regulation often outpaced science, and scientific research raced to meet public demands.

Corpus linguistics and the history of environmental law

The article by Caroline Laske in the new issue of Comparative Legal History, "Corpus linguistics: the digital tool kit for analysing language and the law", argues for the utility of this computational methodology with an example (among others) from the history of environmental law. First the article abstract:

Corpus linguistics methodologies offer innovative ways of reading legal historical sources. Studying the language of source texts using computational techniques that retrieve linguistic data makes detailed searches of words, phrases, and lexical/grammatical patterns and structures possible and provides multiple contextual data that is both quantitative and qualitative, empirical rather than intuitive. It helps us understand not just what is being said, but also how it is being said, how language is used to encode meanings, and what that can tell us about underlying contents and the socio-political, cultural, geopolitical, economic, and other contexts and discourses in which these texts were produced. This paper argues that the use of corpus linguistics is relevant across comparative legal history and can be applied in comparative legal historical research independent of the area of the law or the historical period. Detailed studies incorporating corpus linguistics will be discussed to show the potential of this methodological shift.

The example of environmental law is used to demonstrate how corpus linguistics (CL) can be used to study rapid change in the law (notes omitted):

Crusader riparian rights

The latest issue of Water History has an article by Tobias Hrynick, "The mills of god grind slowly: the Na’aman River milling dispute and the thirteenth-century hydraulic crisis in the Crusader States", that looks into a dispute over water rights between neighboring water mills that seems a precursor to the riparian-rights disputes that were so numerous in the nineteenth century. The abstract:

In the mid-thirteenth century, the Hospitaller and Templar military orders engaged in a long-running dispute over the supply of water to two hydraulic gristmills outside the city of Acre in the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem that prompted international scandal, royal and papal intervention, and mutual attempts at sabotage. This article examines this dispute in the context of a broad survey of milling operations in the Crusader States and argues that this dispute was representative of a widespread hydraulic shortfall in the Latin East by the thirteenth century, when the kingdom’s military collapse and the increased cultivation of sugar cane aggravated a pre-existing shortage of water-power in the relatively labor-poor eastern Mediterranean. The efforts of local landholders like the military orders to maintain access to hydraulic resources provide an instructive example of a pre-modern society’s efforts to accommodate an environmental crisis.

The Templar mill on the Na'aman today (photo: Liorca)

The complexity of Roman water law

The latest issue of Water Alternatives has an interesting article by Alberto Quintavalla, "Roman Law and Waters: How Local Hydrography Framed Regulation". The article provides a fresh and nuanced look at how Roman law dealt with water, showing that it did not have a coherent or unified approach to the many sites and types of uses made of water, and drawing some possible lessons for modern law. The abstract:

Is there a relationship between the conceptualisation of water and its regulation? There is no simple or obvious answer to this question. This paper contends that the Roman regulatory framework mirrored the fragmented conceptualisation of water that was dominant in pre-modern times. The paper aims to show that water regulation is sensitive to the particular conceptualisation of water that a society adopts, which in turn reflects the specific historical period in which it is embedded. It also aims to show that there may be a way to deal with local hydrography differently from the paradigm currently promoted by the integrated water resource management framework. These considerations are not moot in today’s discussions on water resource management. 

Pont du Gard, part of the Nîmes aqueduct, France

Before Yellowstone

Dan Farber recently posted at Legal Planet on "The Arkansas Origin of National Parks". Farber writes:

The origins of the national park system is usually traced back Lincoln’s 1864 signature of the Yosemite Grant Act.  But Congress had actually had the idea of protecting extraordinary places over thirty years earlier, in Arkansas of all places. Hot Springs isn’t high on the list of American places to see, which may be one reason this episode had been forgotten. But it deserves to be remembered as a milestone in federal policy.

*****

On April 20, 1832, Andrew Jackson signed legislation to set the springs and surrounding mountains from development.  The legislation provides that the township surrounding the springs “shall be reserved for the future disposal of the United States, and shall not be liable to be entered, located, or appropriated, for any other purpose whatever.” The law also authorizes the governing to use the revenue from short-term leases of the spring to fund “the opening and improving such lands in said territory, as said legislature may direct, and to no other purpose whatever.”

Unfortunately, Congress didn’t appropriate any money to supervise the area, and the result was helter-skelter private developments. The private owners later sued to establish title to the land they were using, under a law that Congress passed specifically to authorize federal litigation on the issue. The Supreme Court ruled against them in In re Hot Springs cases, 92 U.S. 698 (1875). That ruling cleared the way for active federal management of the land by the Interior Department. The land is now a National Park.

Yellowstone is in some ways a clearer story about preserving nature. Hot Springs began with the different but related goal of ensuring that valuable public resource was used for the benefit of the public.  That may be one reason why the Hot Springs story hasn’t gotten as much attention.  Hot Springs did set an important precedent, however, about keeping land of public value out of the hands of developers. That’s a story worth telling.

The elimination of leaded gasoline in Japan

In Custodia Legis recently carried an interesting post by Sayuri Umeda on the history of the elimination of leaded gas in Japan. Among other things, it demonstrates that environmental regulation is often driven politically by pressure from businesses that stand to profit from the regulation, a phenomenon we have also seen, for instance, in the history of the Montreal Protocol on ozone-depleting substances. This is an important lesson for those trying to drum up political support for regulation. (It is also a shocking story of greed and regulatory failure in the US and elsewhere.)

Umeda writes (some links removed):

When I saw news headlines online on March 7, 2022, saying that a study found Americans born before 1996 might have a lower IQ from exposure to leaded gasoline, I seriously thought that my own IQ could be lower for the same reason, having grown up in Japan.

I checked when Japan banned leaded gasoline and found that actually, I was safer in Japan. Japan was the first country to ban leaded gasoline.

When Democrats and Republicans united to repair the Earth

H-FedHist recently published a review by Bart Elmore (recent recipient of the Dan David Prize) of Gregg Coodley and David Sarasohn's The Green Years, 1964-1976: When Democrats and Republicans United to Repair the Earth (U. Press of Kansas, 2021). Elmore writes:

Building on the work of numerous environmental historians—including Robert Gottlieb, Martin V. Melosi, Carolyn Merchant, Roderick Nash, Adam Rome, and Paul Sutter, among many others—Coodley and Sarasohn offer here an exhaustive play-by-play account of the legislative battles between 1964 and 1976 that led to the passage of some of the most important environmental laws in the United States. The central takeaway of this book is that though Democrats controlled Congress throughout these years, “all environmental laws passed from 1964 to 1976 commanded huge bipartisan support” (p. 257). Coodley and Sarasohn explore how political compromises formed to yield environmental laws, like the Clean Water Act of 1972 or the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976, but also save room for concluding chapters that discuss the factors that led Republican Party members away from supporting environmental legislation in the 1980s and beyond.

*****

An important point of emphasis in the section on the late 1960s and early 1970s is that though Nixon was never personally passionate about environmental issues—he once “walked on the beach in wingtips,” quip Coodley and Sarasohn— key members of Nixon’s staff, especially Pacific Northwesterner John Ehrlichman and Council of Environmental Quality adviser Russell Train, were major proponents of big legislation designed to preserve and protect America’s wildlands, waters, and natural resources (p. 4). The central message here is that Nixon’s impressive environmental legacy—which included the signing of the National Environmental Policy Act in 1970, creating the EPA the same year, and supporting the Clean Air Act and the Endangered Species Act of 1973—was largely a product of Nixon’s calculating desire to maximize political capital by supporting signature legislation that had widening popular support from constituencies on both sides of the political aisle.

But Coodley and Sarasohn are careful to point out that Nixon’s willingness to push for environmental laws did not last forever. The turning point in the book is the winter of 1971 and 1972 where Nixon began to express serious concern that he would soon face major backlash from pro-industry voters if he continued to support stiff environmental regulations. “I have an uneasy feeling that perhaps we are doing too much,” he wrote his chief of staff, H. R. Haldeman, in February 1971. “Just keep me out of trouble on environmental issues,” he told Ehrlichman around the same time (p. 142). Nevertheless, despite Nixon’s waning interest in environmental issues, Republican members of Congress continued to find common ground with Democratic colleagues even as the toxic political bitterness of the Watergate scandal embroiled the nation. 

The review goes on to discuss the book's treatment of the post-Nixon years, as well. 

Acid rain and Nordic-Russian cooperation

The recently published book, Greening Europe: Environmental Protection in the Long Twentieth Century – A Handbook, edited by Anna-Katharina Wöbse and Patrick Kupper (De Gruyter Oldenbourg, 2021), has a number of law-related chapters. One is Arne Kaijser's "Combatting 'Acid Rain': Protecting the Common European Sky",  which has an observation on Soviet-Scandinavian relations that takes on additional interest given the news of the day regarding Sweden, Finland, and NATO. The abstract:

In the late 1960s, Scandinavian scientists asserted that the long-range air pollution was causing serious acidification and that emissions all over Europe would have to be diminished. The prevailing view at the time was that air pollution was a local phenomenon best handled by building high smoke-stacks, and the major polluting countries were opposed to spending money on protecting areas far away in other countries. This chapter analyses how the discovery of “acid rain” triggered the first international research projects to confirm long-range air pollution and how, in a second phase, international negotiations involving scientists, policymakers, and diplomats resulted in the Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution in 1979. Later on, special protocols were adopted, and the signing nations promised to decrease their emissions in accordance with specific goals. Cold War politics played an interesting role in the negotiations and led to an unexpected alliance between Nordic countries and the Soviet Union.

Effects of acid rain, woods, Jizera Mountains, Czech Republic

Environmentalism Then and Now

I just came across a site by the American Bar Association's Division for Public Education with teaching materials on the history of environmental law. 

It's an eclectic group of resources. For instance the PowerPoint presentation entitled "Environmentalism Then and Now: Is Going Green New? You Be the Judge..." includes slides on a 1681 regulation by William Penn requiring Pennsylvanians to conserve one tree for every five cut down, and a 1739 petition by Benjamin Franklin to the Pennsylvania Assembly to stop waste dumping in Philadelphia harbor.

There's also a unit on the Exxon Valdez spill and ensuing litigation, including Supreme Court briefs.

Exxon Vladez - skimming operation (NOAA)

CFP: Law and Art in the 19th Century: Power in Images

Here's a call for papers for a conference set to take place at the Universita’ di Verona this coming October, on a topic that I think relevant to the intersection of environmental and legal history:

The research team, set up to further study the project Images, Law and Power in the Modern Age, within the framework of the Excellence Project of the Department of Legal Sciences of the University of Verona (2018-2022), is organising a conference on the theme of the artistic representation of law in the 19th century, from the French Revolution to the early twentieth century.

The purpose is to investigate the ways in which, during the nineteenth century, the substantial change in the structural characteristics of the legal phenomenon, and the emergence of an alternative legal experience, corresponded to the replacement - or re-semantization - of the symbols and images traditionally expressed in the law, so that they were more suitable to convey the new concept of the juridical in society.

Details are on the conference website.

Elihu Vedder, Good Legislation mural, Library of Congress Jefferson Building (1896)

French planning law

The French journal Revue d'histoire des Facultés de droit et de la culture juridique recently published a collection of articles on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of "la loi Cornudet", the 1919 French statute on urban planning (known by the name of the legislator who initiated it). The papers are based on those delivered at a conference at the Sorbonne in 2019.

As the French law was roughly contemporaneous with salient American planning and zoning laws and the English Town Planning Acts, it would seem that there should be ample room for fruitful comparative and transnational research. I hope someone takes up the challenge!

Paris development plan of 1934

Paolo Grossi and the environment

The French-language Revue interdisciplinaire d’études juridiques published two articles last year on the relevance of leading Italian legal historian Paolo Grossi's work to environmental issues. 

Paolo Grossi, 2016 (Quirinale.it)

The abstract of the first, by Alessia Tanas and Serge Gutwirth, "Le pluralisme juridique retrouvé au temps des désordres écologiques. Penser la relation entre le droit et les communs de la terre avec Paolo Grossi" (Legal pluralism at times of ecological disorders: thinking the relationship between landed commons and the law with Paolo Grossi):

In this contribution, the authors introduce a few key aspects of Paolo Grossi’s research path and link them to their work on the legal questions raised by landed-commons and local ecologies.

There follows a contribution by Grossi himself, "Une autre façon de posséder. Réflexions historico/juridiques sur les aménagements fonciers en Italie" (An alternative to private property. Reflections on land set-ups in Italy from a legal history perspective):

In his contribution Paolo Grossi provides his viewpoint as a legal historian on collective land set-ups in Italy and shows how, through constitutional jurisprudence and the adoption of Law n° 168 of 20 November 2017, the Italian legal order not only recognizes their legal autonomy but also recovers its pluralism and complexity. Such recognition benefits to the protection of the environment.

Water, fish and property in colonial India

Last week I enjoyed attending on online event of the Asian Legal History Seminar, at which Devika Shankar presented her article, "Water, Fish and Property in Colonial India, 1860–1890", recently published in Past & Present. I recently covered similar issues in my article, "Nature Versus the Common Law: Nature as a Norm in the Water Law of the British World", published last summer in Clio@Themis, though I totally missed the cases discussed by Shankar, and she comes at the topic from a wholly different angle.

The abstract of Shankar's article:

Almost exactly a hundred years after the Permanent Settlement of 1793 revolutionized property relations in Bengal, a far less studied legislation would subtly extend the rule of property to include the province’s waters. Bengal’s Private Fisheries Protection Act 1889, which is usually regarded as having been motivated by conservationist or economic concerns, was in fact an attempt to resolve intractable legal problems surrounding the status of flowing waters and fish that had confounded judges and colonial officials in India for decades. Could water be owned like land? And could fish swimming in open waters be claimed as property? These questions would give rise to a number of important disputes in colonial India in the late nineteenth century, during a time associated with unprecedented changes in the agrarian economy. Coinciding with other legal manoeuvres that increasingly helped to render water as property in other parts of the world, the Private Fisheries Protection Act and important judgments that preceded it helped to create exceptional private rights over flowing waters in colonial India. Turning to these developments, this article examines the ways in which judges attempted to resolve contradictions generated by water’s very materiality in an economy that rested so heavily on property.

Devika Shankar, A line of fishing stakes on the Malabar coast, July 2018

International environmental law panel for ASLH

Reposting from H-Environment:

Dear all,

I am a doctoral candidate at Rutgers University New Brunswick, and I am currently seeking co-panelists for the American Society of Legal History conference to be held in Chicago, Illinois, November 10-12, 2022. The conference welcomes papers dealing with legal history from any time period or geographical area, but is only accepting panel proposals. I am seeking to put together a panel dealing with international environmental law in the 20th century, in the broadest possible sense. My paper specifically will talk about the interplay between international conservation efforts and French national interests in the creation of a "French Antarctic national park" in the subantarctic Kerguelen Islands in 1924.

Here is a link to the ASLH website For more information: https://aslh.confex.com/aslh/2022/cfp.cgi

Panel submissions are due March 18th. I know this is a short turn around but I hope to find interest through this forum. The ASLH is a great organization that offers a helpful forum for discussing a broad range of legal history topics, and is especially supportive of graduate students and early career scholars.

Please feel free to contact me at kms557@history.rutgers.edu if you are interested in joining this panel.

All best,

Katherine Sinclair

Bruno Navez, Remains of vats and boilers at Port-Couvreux, Kerguelen Islands, used for the making of elephant seal oil at the beginning of the XXth century

California's 19th-century water law

 Over at Legal Planet, Holly Doremus complains:

California’s water law was developed in the 19th century. It has not been comprehensively reformed since, despite substantial population growth, changing social values, and the appointment 45 years ago of a blue-ribbon commission to recommend changes. Now the “new normal” of the anthropocene promises reduced water availability coincident with increased demand.

It is past time for comprehensive reconsideration of California’s water law system. Fellow Planeteer Rick Frank and I have been working with a diverse group of water law experts to come up with some initial recommendations for change.

The experts' report, titled "Updating California Water Laws to Address Drought and Climate Change",  is here. 

California water law is indeed antiquated, arcane, and impossibly complex. The odd thing to my mind is how mild the reforms being called for are - things like speeding up stream adjudications, protecting domestic wells, improving monitoring and enforcement, and the like - mostly very nineteenth-century ideas themselves (see my book, The Colorado Doctrine). Nothing questioning the basics of the mixed appropriation and riparian system that California uses, or adopting ideas from the many models of water law in countries around the world. I suspect that the authors think this is all that is politically and constitutionally feasible at this point, but it seems to me that even if all these reforms are adopted, California will remain with a very nineteenth-century water law. 

Perhaps a reminder of how much legal history is never just history.

Carleton E. Watkins, Horse-drawn cart beside artesian well, Kern County. c. 1880

Opportunity for Ukranian grad students and postdocs

Here's a call I just received from my home university, offering scholarships for Ukranian research students. Please pass it on to anyone for whom it might be relevant. More information here.

Yellowstone at 150

Anna Price of the Library of Congress's In Custodia Legis recently posted on the 150th anniversary of the creation of Yellowstone National Park, the US's first. Price goes through the legislative history of the statute creating the park, as well as some of the legal issues that arose, including American Indian treaty rights and potential conflicts with settlers claiming preemption and homesteading rights. The latter issue, as the blog points out, also arose in the context of Yosemite Park in the 1872 US Supreme Court Case of Hutchings v Low (a.k.a. The Yosemite Valley Case).

poster designed by Don C. Powell (LOC)

CFP: The 1972 Stockholm Conference, Fifty Years Later

H-Environment posted a call for papers for a special section of the journal The Annals of the Fondazione Luigi Einaudi. An Interdisciplinary Journal of Economics, History and Political Science on "The 1972 Stockholm Conference, Fifty Years Later: What Legacy?". From the call:

The special issue is meant to commemorate the 50 years since the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, universally known as the birthplace of global environmentalism. The Stockholm conference hosted 112 national delegations, UN specialized agencies, international NGOs, and a counter-conference organized by environmental activists. It established a range of institutional, political, intellectual, and cultural developments that made the environment a pressing global issue. Participants adopted instruments such as the Stockholm Declaration and Action Plan for the Human Environment and prepared the ground for the United Nations Environment Programme. This special issue wants to explore the conference and its legacy. The Stockholm Conference established international political goals and legal principles that have underpinned environmental discourse and law-making for a half-century. By stressing that environmental issues are inherently political – and not just scientific and technical - it devised systems for data research and monitoring. It also catalysed multilateral cooperation and treaty-making and the setup of national environmental ministries and environmental laws. Moreover, it contributed to the democratization of environmental debate and policy-making, opening to non-governmental organizations previously not included in the UN system.

The deadline for proposals is 30 March 2022. More details at H-Environment.

Fossil fuels and Jim Crow

Dan Farber recently posted at Legal Planet on "Jim Crow and the Fossil Fuel Industry":

This being Black History Month, I thought it would be worthwhile looking at the fossil fuel industry’s racial history.  Given the historic concentration of the oil and coal industries in the South, it is no surprise to find that these industries have also been deeply entangled with Jim Crow and its legacy of discrimination.

The conclusion:

In sum, the racial history of the oil and gas industry seems to have been much worse [than that of the coal industry], associated with more virulent and blatant racism. Blacks were nearly excluded from the industry.  In contrast, blacks found jobs in the coal industry, but only at the bottom of the job ladder. Those bottom rungs were decimated by new technology. In the end, the result in both industries was much the same: a workforce largely empty of Black faces. 

Black miners at New River Gorge (NPS)

More on water by-laws in Mandate Palestine

I recently posted a piece on H-Empire, based on my article, "Horizontal and vertical influences in colonial legal transplantation: water by-laws in British Palestine" (open access) (see also my recent post on this blog). An excerpt:

Zoltan Kluger, Dizengoff Square Circle in Tel Aviv, 1938 (National Photo Collection)

I ask two questions about the local bylaws enacted in the Mandate period (mainly in the last decade and a half of British rule, which ended in 1948) in the field of water supply and sewage (I'm working on a wider project on this history of water law in Mandate Palestine): Did the initiative for these bylaws, as well as the legal norms and language embodied in them, come from the residents of Palestine and their elected local governments or was it primarily the result pressure applied by the British rulers? And did legal influence cross communal boundaries, between Jewish and Arab local authorities, or did Arab towns tend to copy from other Arab towns, and Jewish from Jewish? The first question I conceptualize as one of "vertical" influence; the second as "horizontal".

Digital library VIII: Manwood's Treatise of Forest Laws

It's been a while since I updated the "Digital library of historical environmental law", so here's a new addition, connecting environmental law with Magna Carta: John Manwood's Treatise of the Forest Laws (4th edition (1717) here). 

GWU Law's Legal Miscellanea explains that Manwood was a barrister, gamekeeper, and Justice in Eyre of the New Forest under Elizabeth I. His Brefe Collection of the Lawes of the Forest was printed in 1592 for private circulation and the first edition of the Treatise, printed in 1598, was entitled A Treatise and Discovrse of the Lawes of the Forrest. The 4th edition (above) was "corrected and enlarged by William Nelson," a practitioner in the Court of Chancery.

Chris Besant, in his 1991 "From forest to field: A brief history of environmental law" (16 Legal Service Bull. 160 (1991)), explains further:

Forest law operated principally to protect two resources: vert and venison. Vert was the timber of the forest, plus any grasses, ground cover or vegetation necessary to support the venison, including cover or vegetation which provided shade. Venison denoted the wild beasts of the forest (hart and hind, hare, boar and wold), chase (buck, does, fox, matron and the roo), and warren (the hare, pheasant, partridge and the cunnie). All of these beasts were privileged and protected from capture within the forest by the forest law, although outside thereof, they could be taken through capture by anyone.

*****

Magna Carta is a general reaction against the centralisation of government in derogation of the feudal principle. The King in his weakness is forced to concede that he will not 'overreach' his proper bounds as defined by the common and forest laws of the land. Thus the Charter of the Forest is a further delimitation of forest custom in the interests of liberty, and is the beginning of the great destruction of England's natural environment.