names and protection

[Ron Gatrelle]

As I said. Try "any distinct...segment " in court. If law is anything, it
is not vague. A good Industrial lawyer would have a  picnic with such broad
undifinitive terms. Laws can't say "... and stuff like that." stuff has to
be difined. Segment = stuff. What's a segment - a spot on the news, the
distance from the elbow to the shoulder, half a city block, the bugs that
live on the south side of the pond. And what is "interbeed" The dictionary
says "to crossbreed, to breed or mate with a closely related individual."
Well, in this straw court how close is closely? Will hybridazation do. And
since this "segment" will breed with all the other like segments in the
state, nation, and world what makes it so unique that 2,550 jobs should be
lost to the community, not to mention the sorely needed tax revenue for our
schools in our rural area, so this tiny segment can be preserved at Dole's
Pond. Help the Jury understand this.

I am being the devil's advocate of course. We both want things protected
and habitat preserved. I just want the best evidence when we go to
"unfriendly" good-ole-boy South Carolina drain-the-wetlands type of courts.
Seriously, subspecies are totally valid zoological units! What does it hurt
to keep them?
It seems like you are saying. "Lets dump the subspecies bullet out of our
gun. We don't need it -in fact it's "unnecessary".

I will also say this. What is not said in a law or regulation is just as
important as what is said. For, example I had one USf&W law enforcement
agent tell me that by not saying invertebrates in a list that is otherwise
specific, e.g. vertebrates, fish, and birds - invertebrates are assumed to
be excluded from protection. Wildlife is also challengeable as a term that
is too broad. That is it does not distinguish between bacteria and eagles.
It is subjective to too much interpretation. Hanging chad, dimpled chad,
pregnant chad type of thing.

(Hey, James, Do you think we can get some  lawyers on line to argue about
this one?  This would be more fun than watching survivor, or who wants to
be a Millionaire. "Ta da" I love it!)


----- Original Message -----
From: "James J Kruse" <fnjjk1 at aurora.uaf.edu>
To: "Ron Gatrelle" <gatrelle at tils-ttr.org>
Cc: "Leps-l" <Leps-l at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 8:08 PM
Subject: names and protection


> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Ron Gatrelle wrote:
>
> > You are mistaken. Go to court against Big industry and try to get your
> > lawyer to win the case for a fly or worm or flea that does not have
> > scientific recognition. Convince the judge or jury. The Karner Blue
should
> > be so lucky.
>
> in response to my earlier post:
> > >
> > > This is not true. The law requires only that a population may be
> > > distinct somehow, and does not even have to be named. The rank of
> > > subspecies is unnecessary for protection.
> > >
>
> Um, no, the exact quote from the law book: "(15) The term "species"
> includes any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct
> population segment of any species or vertebrate fish or wildlife which
> interbreeds when mature."
>
> Ta da, "any distinct population segment". The argument that a population
> has to be formally recognized taxonomically is invalid.
>
> See it yourself at:
> http://endangered.fws.gov/esa.html
>
> click on definitions, scroll down to #15.
>
> Secondly, endangered candidates are petitioned. No lawyer. No judge or
> jury.
>
> Karners are easily managed by habitat manipulation. Bad example.
>
> James J. Kruse, Ph.D.
> Curator of Entomology
> University of Alaska Museum
> 907 Yukon Drive, PO Box 756960
> Fairbanks, AK  99775-6960
> Phone: 907.474.5579
> Fax: 907.474.1987/5469
> http://www.uaf.edu/museum/
>
>


 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl