Indian Treaties and the Survival of the Great Lakes

Wenona T. Singel, M. Fletcher
{"title":"Indian Treaties and the Survival of the Great Lakes","authors":"Wenona T. Singel, M. Fletcher","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.955715","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Federal and state statutory and regulatory protections do not appear to be the answer to preventing the calamity ongoing in the waters of the Great Lakes. To fill in the gap, environmental advocates and scholars devote much of their attentions to the public trust doctrine, first articulated in this context by Joseph Sax. There is little attention devoted to the insights of Indian tribes or the potential legal benefits of invoking Indian treaty rights. The Supreme Court has long affirmed the supremacy of Indian treaty provisions and, while the Court's interpretation of some treaties has been cramped at best, the Great Lakes and Pacific Northwest treaties have been interpreted in a manner that suggests there is room to provide for protection of major water bodies. We propose to incorporate Indian treaty jurisprudence into the strategy for saving the Great Lakes. The interests of the parties tend to be the same - the preservation of the resource. Indian treaties negotiated by Indian peoples that relied on water as a means of survival - economic, cultural, and political - provide a potential (and as yet untested) legal tool for the preservation of major water bodies such as the Great Lakes.","PeriodicalId":18488,"journal":{"name":"Michigan State international law review","volume":"48 1","pages":"1285"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan State international law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.955715","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Federal and state statutory and regulatory protections do not appear to be the answer to preventing the calamity ongoing in the waters of the Great Lakes. To fill in the gap, environmental advocates and scholars devote much of their attentions to the public trust doctrine, first articulated in this context by Joseph Sax. There is little attention devoted to the insights of Indian tribes or the potential legal benefits of invoking Indian treaty rights. The Supreme Court has long affirmed the supremacy of Indian treaty provisions and, while the Court's interpretation of some treaties has been cramped at best, the Great Lakes and Pacific Northwest treaties have been interpreted in a manner that suggests there is room to provide for protection of major water bodies. We propose to incorporate Indian treaty jurisprudence into the strategy for saving the Great Lakes. The interests of the parties tend to be the same - the preservation of the resource. Indian treaties negotiated by Indian peoples that relied on water as a means of survival - economic, cultural, and political - provide a potential (and as yet untested) legal tool for the preservation of major water bodies such as the Great Lakes.
印第安人条约和五大湖的生存
联邦和州的法律和规章保护似乎并不是防止五大湖水域正在发生的灾难的答案。为了填补这一空白,环境倡导者和学者们把大部分注意力放在了公共信托理论上,这一理论最早是由约瑟夫·萨克斯(Joseph Sax)在这一背景下提出的。很少有人关注印第安部落的见解或援引印第安人条约权利的潜在法律利益。最高法院长期以来一直肯定印第安条约条款的最高地位,虽然法院对一些条约的解释充其量是狭隘的,但对五大湖条约和西北太平洋条约的解释方式表明,对主要水体的保护是有空间的。我们建议将印度条约的法理纳入拯救五大湖的战略。各方的利益趋于一致——保护资源。由依赖水作为经济、文化和政治生存手段的印第安人谈判的印第安条约,为保护五大湖等主要水体提供了一种潜在的(但尚未经过检验的)法律工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信