Lesson 17
Environmental Law
环境法
(Excerpt 1)
节选
As recently as the early 1960s, the phrase “environmental law” would probably have produced little more than a puzzled look, even from many lawyers.
早在二十世纪六十年代初,“环境法”这个词所能引起的本来就只是人们困惑的表情,甚至许多律师们也是这样。
Such issues as clean air, pure water and freedom from noise pollution were not important public concerns.
洁净的空气,纯净水和远离噪音污染这些问题那时不是公众所关注的重要问题。There were, of course, numerous state and some federal laws intended to protect America’s rivers and streams from excessive industrial pollution and to guard wildlife from the depredations of man.
当然,美国各州都制订了联邦法律,以保护国内的河流免受过度工业污染的侵害,同时保护野生动物免受人类的捕杀。
But these regulations were generally ignored.
但是人们通常对这些条例视而不见。
With enforcement power dispersed among many federal, state and local agencies, most of which were seriously undermanned, and with noncompliance penalties so slight as to have little more than harassment value, there were few incentives to obey the laws.
由于强制执行力在许多联邦、州和当地代理处这些人员严重不足的机构分散开来,以及对于违反条例行为的惩罚措施力度太小,无法引起人们重视,所以没有什么鼓励措施使人们去遵守法律。
Indeed, many environmental statutes were so little publicized and so vaguely worded that their existence was hardly known and their meaning was scarcely understood.
事实确实是这样,许多环境法章程缺乏推广普及,言辞又模棱两可,以致于它们的存在很少为人知晓,它们的意义也几乎无人理解了。
Then, in 1962, came a book called Silent Spring by Rachel Carson.
然而,1962年,雷切尔卡尔森写的一本名为《寂静的春天》的书出版了。
A powerful indictment of America’s disregard of ecology, Silent Spring was aimed chiefly at the wholesale use of chemical pesticides, especially DDT.
寂静的春天一书有力地控诉了美国对于生态环境的漠视,主要针对大规模使用化
学农药进行了控诉。
In 1965 a court action took place that ranks in environmental importance with the publication of Silent Spring.
1965年,紧随着《寂静的春天》的出版,一场同样有着重要环境保护意义的法庭诉讼发生了。
That was the reversal by a court of appeals of a Federal Power Commission decision to grant a license for a Consolidated Edison power plant at Storm King Mountain on the Hudson River in New York.
联邦能源委员会在上诉法庭上实现了逆转,决议要为纽约哈得孙河边的斯托姆金山上的爱迪生发电厂颁发许可证。
The court ordered new proceedings that were to “include as a basis concern the preservation of natural beauty and of national historic shrines.”
法庭颁布了新的议程,即要“把维护自然之美与国家的历史圣地作为一项最基本的关注的焦点”
环境法
(Excerpt 1)
节选
As recently as the early 1960s, the phrase “environmental law” would probably have produced little more than a puzzled look, even from many lawyers.
早在二十世纪六十年代初,“环境法”这个词所能引起的本来就只是人们困惑的表情,甚至许多律师们也是这样。
Such issues as clean air, pure water and freedom from noise pollution were not important public concerns.
洁净的空气,纯净水和远离噪音污染这些问题那时不是公众所关注的重要问题。There were, of course, numerous state and some federal laws intended to protect America’s rivers and streams from excessive industrial pollution and to guard wildlife from the depredations of man.
当然,美国各州都制订了联邦法律,以保护国内的河流免受过度工业污染的侵害,同时保护野生动物免受人类的捕杀。
But these regulations were generally ignored.
但是人们通常对这些条例视而不见。
With enforcement power dispersed among many federal, state and local agencies, most of which were seriously undermanned, and with noncompliance penalties so slight as to have little more than harassment value, there were few incentives to obey the laws.
由于强制执行力在许多联邦、州和当地代理处这些人员严重不足的机构分散开来,以及对于违反条例行为的惩罚措施力度太小,无法引起人们重视,所以没有什么鼓励措施使人们去遵守法律。
Indeed, many environmental statutes were so little publicized and so vaguely worded that their existence was hardly known and their meaning was scarcely understood.
事实确实是这样,许多环境法章程缺乏推广普及,言辞又模棱两可,以致于它们的存在很少为人知晓,它们的意义也几乎无人理解了。
Then, in 1962, came a book called Silent Spring by Rachel Carson.
然而,1962年,雷切尔卡尔森写的一本名为《寂静的春天》的书出版了。
A powerful indictment of America’s disregard of ecology, Silent Spring was aimed chiefly at the wholesale use of chemical pesticides, especially DDT.
寂静的春天一书有力地控诉了美国对于生态环境的漠视,主要针对大规模使用化
学农药进行了控诉。
In 1965 a court action took place that ranks in environmental importance with the publication of Silent Spring.
1965年,紧随着《寂静的春天》的出版,一场同样有着重要环境保护意义的法庭诉讼发生了。
That was the reversal by a court of appeals of a Federal Power Commission decision to grant a license for a Consolidated Edison power plant at Storm King Mountain on the Hudson River in New York.
联邦能源委员会在上诉法庭上实现了逆转,决议要为纽约哈得孙河边的斯托姆金山上的爱迪生发电厂颁发许可证。
The court ordered new proceedings that were to “include as a basis concern the preservation of natural beauty and of national historic shrines.”
法庭颁布了新的议程,即要“把维护自然之美与国家的历史圣地作为一项最基本的关注的焦点”
以上内容来自专辑
用户评论
还没有评论，快来发表第一个评论！
© 2014-2024 喜马拉雅 版权所有