- Cap ( @Cap@kbin.melroy.org ) 54•1 month ago
The 1970 act explicitly protected “fish,” which were initially defined as invertebrates. And because the act has protected snails and other invertebrates that live on land since, Tuesday’s ruling said it interpreted the legislation to also include bees.
I’d link to the article but it’s a nightmare.
- Mothra ( @Mothra@mander.xyz ) English14•1 month ago
Ohhh I see so they initially defined fish as invertebrates. Got it.
- Leate_Wonceslace ( @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English7•1 month ago
We need scientists advising every lawmaker.
- AVincentInSpace ( @AVincentInSpace@pawb.social ) English15•1 month ago
To clarify, though, we do not need scientists to tell lawmakers that bees are not fish. We need scientists to tell lawmakers not to put conservation laws into effect that only cover fish, and then not publish any new ones so we have to keep expanding that one by reclassifying more and more things as fish.
- MindTraveller ( @MindTraveller@lemmy.ca ) English4•1 month ago
Fish have spines, you asshole regulators
- prof ( @prof@infosec.pub ) English32•1 month ago
It’s so christians can eat bees during fasting. duh.
- jabathekek ( @jabathekek@sopuli.xyz ) English3•1 month ago
Chuck Testa was once Governor of California.
- illi ( @illi@lemm.ee ) English3•1 month ago
Was it really Chuck Testa? Or… just Chuck Testa?
- Leate_Wonceslace ( @Leate_Wonceslace@lemmy.dbzer0.com ) English2•1 month ago
Yes, although the first one would be nice to have.
- 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️ ( @Kolanaki@yiffit.net ) English2•1 month ago
Does that mean I need a fishing license to catch bees?