Footnotes

1035 United States v. Chandler-Dunbar Water Power Co., 229 U.S. 53, 80 (1913).1036 See United States v. Weyerhaeuser Co., 538 F.2d 1363, 1366-67 (9th Cir. 1976) (“[G]overnment projects may render property valuable for a unique purpose.”); see, e.g., United States v. 46,672.96 Acres of Land in Doña Ana Ctys., 521 F.2d 13, 15-16 (10th Cir. 1975) (“absolutely no evidence that anyone other than the government could or would use the land for a missile range”); cf. United States v. 320 Acres of Land, 605 F.2d 762, 783 n.26 (5th Cir. 1979) (“[T]he use which the Government proposes to devote the property to should not be considered unless private owners could also reasonably devote the property to that use.”).

1027 See Section 4.3.3.1028 See Greer Coal., Inc. v. U.S. Forest Serv., 470 F. App’x 630, 636 (9th Cir. 2012) (unpubl.) (“an exchange is concerned with the relative value of two sets of property rather than the absolute value of either”); see generally Section 4.2 (discussing date of valuation).

1031 Mt. St. Helens National Volcanic Monument Act, Pub. L. No. 97-243, 96 Stat. 301 (1982), 16 U.S.C. § 431 note (1982) (repealed 2014). 1032 Mt. St. Helens Mining, 384 F.3d at 729; Pub. L. No. 97-243, § 3(b); 36 C.F.R. § 254.9(b) (2015).1033 See Section 4.3.

1029 See, e.g., Desert Citizens Against Pollution v. Bisson, 231 F.3d 1172, 1185 (9th Cir. 2000); cf. 43 U.S.C. § 1716(d).1030 See Mt. St. Helens Mining & Recovery Ltd. P’ship v. United States, 384 F.3d 721, 729 (9th Cir. 2004) (noting date of valuation for specific acquisitions set by statute).

1033 See Section 4.3.1034 United States v. Buhler, 305 F.2d 319, 328 (5th Cir. 1962); see Section 4.3.2.1.

1030 See Mt. St. Helens Mining & Recovery Ltd. P’ship v. United States, 384 F.3d 721, 729 (9th Cir. 2004) (noting date of valuation for specific acquisitions set by statute).1031 Mt. St. Helens National Volcanic Monument Act, Pub. L. No. 97-243, 96 Stat. 301 (1982), 16 U.S.C. § 431 note (1982) (repealed 2014). 1032 Mt. St. Helens Mining, 384 F.3d at 729; Pub. L. No. 97-243, § 3(b); 36 C.F.R. § 254.9(b) (2015).

1038 Desert Citizens, 231 F.3d at 1181; accord NPCA v. BLM, 606 F.3d at 1067-68; see Section 4.3.1039 Chandler-Dunbar, 229 U.S. at 80-81; compare NPCA v. BLM, 606 F.3d at 1067-68 (noting “obvious and well-known presence of competing

1020 Penn Central Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104, 124 (1978).1021 In contrast, direct acquisitions, while often voluntary, may involve at least a possibility that the government can exercise the power of eminent domain to take property for a public purpose with payment of just compensation.

1019 Ark. Game & Fish Comm’n v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 511, 518 (2012).1020 Penn Central Transp. Co. v. City of New York, 438 U.S. 104, 124 (1978).

1015 The U.S. Court of Federal Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over inverse takings claims exceeding $10,000 under the Tucker Act. 28 U.S.C.§ 1491. Federal district courts have concurrent jurisdiction for claims for $10,000 or less. 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2) (the “Little Tucker Act”). These statutes waive sovereign immunity, allowing the United States to be sued, in recognition of the fact that unintended takings may occur despite federal agencies’ efforts to avoid them. Cf. Uniform Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4651(8) (“No Federal agency head shall intentionally make