Invoking Private Property Rights for Environmental Purposes: The Takings Implications of Government-Authorized Aerial Pesticide Spraying
Royal C. Gardner
Stetson University College of Law
Stanford Environmental Law Journal, Vol. 18, p. 65, 1999
Part II of this article summarizes the history of medfly eradication efforts in the United States and the events surrounding Florida's 1997 infestation and eradication experience. Part III reviews private property rights in light of physical takings cases. Applying the principles examined in Part III to wide-scale aerial pesticide spraying, Part IV explains why these invasions constitute takings, despite their minimal size and limited duration. Part IV also examines the possible government defenses of nuisance and necessity, and notes the difference between governmental intervention to protect public health and safety and invasive action to protect a specific industry. Part V assesses the implications of a takings challenge to wide-scale aerial pesticide spraying.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 42
Keywords: private property rights, takings, 5th Amendment's Takings Clause, government-authorized aerial pesticide spraying, medfly eradication, nusiance and necessity, public health and safety
Date posted: May 7, 2008
© 2016 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollobot1 in 0.187 seconds