User:Kkihara

Kkihara Wikipedian since March 2011
 Main Goals
 * Working with Stephanie Lum on Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities for a Great Oregon
 * Help in the efforts for Wikipedia's Public Policy Initiative
 * Work on an articles that will benefit the Wikipedia information super highway
 * Help change the world

A Little About Me...
 I'm a graduate student at the University of San Francisco getting my Masters in Environmetal Management. I'm from Hawaii and have a small background in invasive species threatening Hawaii's native avifauna, which was my senior research project for my Biology undergraduate degree from the University of Hawaii. On my free time I enjoy hiking, snowboarding, and working out.

/sandbox

=Articles I'm working on= Babbitt v. Sweet Home Chapter of Communities For a Great Oregon Summary: Babbitt, Secretary Of the Interior v. Sweet Home Chapter Of Communities For A Great Oregon, 515 U.S. 687 (1995), is a U.S. Supreme Court case, decided by a 6-3 vote, in which the defendents challenged the Department of Interior's (DOI) interpretation of the word 'harm' in the Endangered Species Act (ESA).

Potential Articles
 1. Citizens to End Animal Suffering and Exploitation v. The New England Aquarium  Summary: The primary issue addressed by the court was whether a dolphin, named Kama, had standing under the MMPA. The court found the MMPA does not authorize suits brought by animals; it only authorizes suits brought by persons. The court would not impute to Congress or the President the intention to provide standing to a marine mammal without a clear statement in the statute. http://www.animalrights.net/2003/citizens-to-end-animal-suffering-and-exploitation-v-new-england-aquarium-1993/

2. Defenders of Wildlife v. Dalton  Summary: Plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction to prevent defendant government official from lifting the embargo against tuna from Mexico's vessels in the Eastern Pacific Ocean. Plaintiffs alleged irreparable injury if three stocks of dolphins became extinct. The court found plaintiffs failed to produce evidence showing irreparable injury. http://animallaw.info/cases/speciescases/caspdolphin.htm

3. Anderson v. Evans  Summary: Advocacy groups challenged governments approval of quota for whale hunting by the Makah Indian Tribe. The Court of Appeals held that in granting the quota, the government violated the NEPA by failing to prepare an impact statement, and, that the MMPA applied to the tribe's whale hunt. REVERSED.

'''4. Cetacean Cmty. v. President of the United States'''  Summary: Plaintiff, a community of whales, dolphins, and porpoises, sued Defendants, the President of the United States and the United States Secretary of Defense, alleging violations of the (NEPA), the (APA), the (ESA), and the (MMPA). The Plaintffs were concerned with the United States Navy's development and use of a low frequency active sonar (LFAS) system. The community alleged a failure to comply with statutory requirements with respect to LFAS use during threat and warfare conditions. http://animallaw.info/cases/speciescases/caspwhale.htm

5. Stryker's Bay Neighborhood Council v. Karen  Summary: The Court of Appeals erred in concluding that, when the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) considered alternative sites before redesignating a proposed site for middle-income housing as one for low-income housing it should have given determinative weight to environmental factors. http://supreme.justia.com/us/444/223/