Petition For Rulemaking to Set Minimum Flows on the Shasta River

Mount Shasta Bioregional Ecology Center | January 20th, 2024

Decades of scientific inquiry make clear that adequate quality and quantity of flows are needed to prevent remaining fish populations from further decline. Yet this scien

Decades of scientific inquiry make clear that adequate quality and quantity of flows are needed to prevent remaining fish populations from further decline. Yet this science is not self-executing; effective government intervention is necessary to prevent the extirpation of salmonids in the Shasta. This type of government action is at the core of the Public Trust Doctrine, which requires the government to act as a trustee over public trust resources, and to the extent feasible, step in to protect these resources from over-allocation and over-use.

Public Trust Distrust

William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository | January 1st, 2001

This Comment reviews the theoretical underpinnings of the public trust, a doctrine originating in Roman common Jaw and now constitutionalized by many states, and explores

This Comment reviews the theoretical underpinnings of the public trust, a doctrine originating in Roman common Jaw and now constitutionalized by many states, and explores its contentious reception by green legal theorists. Since Professor Joseph Sax's revival of the doctrine as a vehicle for environmental legal advocacy in the early 1970s, it has been hatled by many ·as the most powerful tool available for protecting natural resource commons and attacked by others who argue that use of the property rights-based doctrine will rectify an ownership approach to natural resources and obstruct the development of more stewardship-oriented legal theories of natural resource management. Discussion focuses on the work of Professor Sax, representing the public trust advocates, and Professor Richard Lazarus, representing the green dissent. The Comment concludes that the green dissent may elide the theoretical growth of the modern constitutionalized version of the doctrine beyond its common Jaw roots.

Racanelli Decision: Detailed summary of the decision

Department of Justice (DOJ) | November 16th, 2007

At their meeting on October 25, 2007, the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force members asked for a summary of United States v. State Water Resources Control Board (1986) 1

At their meeting on October 25, 2007, the Delta Vision Blue Ribbon Task Force members asked for a summary of United States v. State Water Resources Control Board (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 82, commonly referred to as the “Racanelli Decision,” after the appellate judge who wrote the opinion. We repeat the Court’s own very short summary of the case, followed by a more detailed summary of the decision.

Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, Case No. Bcv-22-103220-Gap, Bring Back the Kern et al v. City of Bakersfield et al

Superior Court of California, County of Kern | October 30th, 2023

Targeting Public Trust Suits

Social Science Research Network (SSRN) | February 22nd, 2021

The California public trust doctrine empowers private individuals and interest groups to protect the public trust and to enforce state laws that protect the public trust.

The California public trust doctrine empowers private individuals and interest groups to protect the public trust and to enforce state laws that protect the public trust. California has long led the development of the doctrine in the United States, becoming the first state to allow citizen suits to protect the public trust in 1971. A number of other states have followed California’s lead, resulting in a significant expansion in environmental standing. This broadened standing seems to be settled law. In contrast, two California Court of Appeal decisions create some uncertainty about appropriate defendants in public trust lawsuits. These decisions counsel some caution as private parties pick their targets for public trust litigation.

The Public Trust Doctrine and California Water Law: National Audubon Society v. Department of Water and Power

University of California College of the Law, San Francisco (UC Law SF) | June 15th, 1982

Conflicting demands on dwindling surface water supplies in California have led to frequent challenges of state decisions to grant diversions of water that impair or destr

Conflicting demands on dwindling surface water supplies in California have led to frequent challenges of state decisions to grant diversions of water that impair or destroy ecological, recreational, or other instream uses of surface waters. This Comment examines the fundamental problems of surface water allocation in California and addresses the possibility of incorporating the public trust doctrine into the current water law system. The Comment then evaluates a recent attempt to apply the public trust doctrine in National Audubon Society v. Department of Water and Power. The Comment concludes by offering an alternative means to public trust protection of California's surface waters.

The Public Trust Doctrine in Natural Resource Law: Effective Judicial Intervention

Berkeley Law Scholarship Repository | January 1st, 1969

Public concern about environmental quality is beginning to be felt in the courtroom. Private citizens, no longer willing to accede to the efforts of administrative agenci

Public concern about environmental quality is beginning to be felt in the courtroom. Private citizens, no longer willing to accede to the efforts of administrative agencies to protect the public interest, have begun to take the initiative themselves. One dramatic result is a proliferation of lawsuits in which citizens, demanding judicial recognition of their rights as members of the public, sue the very governmental agencies which are supposed to be protecting the public interest. While this Article was being written, several dozen such suits were initiated-to enforce air and water pollution laws in states where public agencies have been created for that purpose; to challenge decisions of the Forest Service about the use of public land under its control; to question the Secretary of the Interior's regulation of federal offshore oil leases; and, in a myriad of cases against state and local officials, to examine airport extensions, highway locations, the destruction of parklands,  dredging and filling, oil dumping, and innumerable other governmental decisions dealing with resource use and management.  

The Public Trust Doctrine: Assessing Its Recent Past & Charting Its Future

University of California, Davis (UC Davis) | January 1st, 2012

For over four decades, the public trust doctrine has served as a foundational principle of modern environmental and natural resources law. This issue of the UC Davis Law

For over four decades, the public trust doctrine has served as a foundational principle of modern environmental and natural resources law. This issue of the UC Davis Law Review , and the related, major symposium that drew a standing-room-only audience to King Hall in March 2011, demonstrate the continuing vitality of the public trust. The scholarship featured in these pages continues the UC Davis Law School’s leadership role concerning the doctrine, examines its recent development, and poses key questions regarding its future course. Much has been written about the public trust doctrine, and the articles in this volume explore many of its nuances and implications. Simply stated, however, the doctrine provides that certain natural resources are held by the government in a special status — in “trust” — for current and future generations. Government officials may neither alienate those resources in to private ownership nor permit their injury or destruction. To the contrary, those officials have an affirmative, ongoing duty to safeguard the long-term preservation of those resources for the benefit of the general public.