5 ms·
> They did. They said that “fish” includes, among other things, any inverterbrate. This is incorrect. It includes "invertebrates", not "any invertebrates". The
by tyrfing 4y ago
> They did. They said that “fish” includes, among other things, any inverterbrate.
This is incorrect. It includes "invertebrates", not "any invertebrates". The question is whether a bumblebee is as much of a "fish" as a mollusk.
- tptacek 4y agoThat is not in fact the question. The headline of this story asks you to believe it's the question, but the real story is much more boring than that, which you'll easily see by reading the actual decision. No, in fact, the word "invertebrates" was chosen specifically to include several endangered terrestrial invertebrates.
- tyrfing 4y ago> We certainly agree section 45 is ambiguous as to whether the Legislature intended for the definition of fish to apply to purely aquatic species. There's 9 pages of analysis on the scope. Changing "invertebrate" to "any invertebrate" clearly begs the question.
- tptacek 4y agoNo, it doesn't.