A Note From the Partners Program Staff...

Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that we all have a right to an �adequate standard of living.� We could assume this includes the right to a clean environment although, in 1948 when the committee wrote the UDHR, they did not specifically include it as a right. In the past two decades, there has been a growing concern worldwide for the deterioration of ecosystems and the impact on human life and culture. In 1992, the United Nations held the first Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, where world leaders and environmentalists drafted Agenda 21, a declaration which states that long term economic progress must be linked to environmental protection. The Preamble states, �We must fulfill basic human needs, improve living standards for all and better protect and manage ecosystems. No nation can secure its future alone; but together we can: in a global partnership for sustainable development.�

One of the worst examples of using land for economic profit without consideration of environmental or cultural impact is the United States� historical and continual misuse and destruction of Native American territories. This issue of The Explorer addresses the negative impact of economic and industrial development on the environment and Native American cultures. This is not a historical human rights issue occurring in a foreign land; it is as local and immediate as the nuclear waste site at Prairie Island, the controversy over fishing rights on Mil Lacs Lake, and the energy we buy from NSP and Manitoba Hydro Plant which exploits the lands of the Cree Nation territories in the province of Manitoba. We can no longer remain uninformed and ignorant of the human rights abuses occurring in Minnesota to native people. We encourage you to check out the suggested web sites, books, and community newspapers listed in this month�s Explorer. And keep an eye out for our upcoming curriculum packet that will provide you with lesson plans and classrooms activities designed to educate yourself and your students on environmental and indigenous rights.

This issue�s lesson plan comes from teacher Jenny Eisele and lawyers Johanna Bond and Clarissa Klug.

MN Standard:
� Peoples and Cultures: Diverse Perspectives- Evaluate events and actions from diverse U.S. and world perspectives

Objectives:
Students will . . .
� describe viewpoints concerning differing perspectives
� identify issues around which conflict exists
� analyze arguments and synthesize their strengths and weaknesses

Preparatory Homework:
� Read through the Mock Trial Procedure, which is available in the Partners� training manual.
� Set up your classroom (or any large room) like a courtroom: place the judge�s desk on one side of the room; have a chair next to the judge for witnesses to sit and to testify; place two desks for each party�s lawyer facing the judge�s desk; and place twelve chairs for the jurors so that they have a good view of the judge and the witness "stand".
� You should also gather materials needed to make the trial seem more �authentic,� such as a graduation robe and a gavel for the judge.
� Students should read Owl in the Shower by Jean George, which illustrates environmental issues, the rights of people, and potential conflicts.

Mock Trial Instructions: Rivertown vs. The Federal Government

1. Give students the following background information, which describes the federal statute and the hypothetical community where the trial will take place:

The community of Rivertown and its primary business of Rivertown Logging Company are jointly suing the federal government for $3.31 million for the devaluation of 56 acres of land due to a ban on logging under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. The company has been the main business in Rivertown for the past fifty years. The population of Rivertown is 860. Rivertown Logging�s land consists of about 400 acres located next to or within national forest land. There are a pair of spotted owls nesting on Rivertown Logging�s land.
The Act states that it is unlawful to �take� endangered or threatened species. �Take� is defined as to �harass, harm, pursue, wound, or kill� and includes �significant habital modification or degradation.� A Supreme Court ruling in June 1995 stated that the government can ban the destruction of natural homes of endangered or threatened species on private property.

2. Several students can play the roles of various court officials. Two students play the roles of the defense lawyer representing the federal government and the prosecution lawyer representing Rivertown and the Rivertown Logging Company. Each presents opening and closing statements and tries to convince the jury whether it should award the $3.3 million to the community. Several students play jurors, who must decide whether to grant the award to Rivertown after listening to each lawyer�s arguments. One student should play the judge, who resolves disagreements between parties and ensures a fair and orderly trial.

3. Each student lawyer can call on expert witnesses, played by other students, to provide testimony to help him or her support his or her case:

Raptor biologists, who have determined that owls need 50% suitable habitat to survive. If Rivertown Logging goes through with its proposed logging plan, only 15% of the owls� home nesting range would contain suitable habitat.

Friends of the Spotted Owls, who are protesting logging in Rivertown and worry that if loggers continue to disturb the area, few owls will survive and the food chain will be altered.

Federal Wildlife Agency Employee, who enforces the Endangered Species Act that protects the spotted owls but feels that, on a national level, this piece of property is not critical to their survival (even though it is the largest roost site in the state).

State Department of Natural Resource Employee, who wants to preserve the owls� habitat but also wants to maintain a neutral stance so other logging in the area won�t be affected. Shutting down lumber companies could affect forestry management, financial support, and public access to land used for hiking and biking trails.

Mayor of Rivertown, who thinks preserving endangered species is important but does not believe the government should interfere with private property. The Mayor also fears that if Rivertown Logging loses money or shuts down, the town will face a severe economic crisis.

Landowners, who are upset because their property value has decreased as it can no longer be logged.

Rivertown Banker, who has lent money to Rivertown Logging and many of its employees. If there is no logging, many people may not be able to pay back their loans. Other businesses that depend on Rivertown Logging to purchase goods and services would be hurt, too.

Rivertown Lumber Company Owner, whose family-run company has kept the mill and a moderate-sized workforce employed for three generations but because of the owl problem, has been unable to have access to the old growth lumber. The company owner feels that if the government had managed public lands as his or her family managed its land, neither would be in this predicament.

Rivertown Logging Employee, who depends on Rivertown Logging to earn extra money to pay bills, feed and clothe the family, and make payments on the truck. The employee believes that trees grow back and feels that most birds adapt to changes whether caused by clear-cut logging or fires. He/she also knows that a portion of the taxes on lumber sales return to help the community�s schools and businesses.