Bees Are Fish, California Court Rules

Thanks already working on it.
a reply to: nugget1

originally posted by: daskakik
I mean many people have said why not just add them to the endangered list. They can't, nor can the executive branch. Well, the judicial can,

No, they can't, this is a blatant violation of the separation of powers.

But yeah, when did a little thing like the constitution ever stop them.

Gender and identity freedom for all of creation !!!!!!?????

I can see a class action or two from the clown fish .
( they want to be politicians .... lol )

And maybe a ruling that killer bees can now be called

democrats or sharks ...

maybe even " blue zombie skunks" ? ....

Meanwhile in the real world ,

it's "business as usual"

a reply to: DBCowboy

But we do have to do everything we can to save the bees.




That's not stupid.

No it isn't. It's odd reasoning, but it's sound reasoning...once you wrap your head around it.

a reply to: tanstaafl

But yeah, when did a little thing like the constitution ever stop them.

It is a role of the judiciary to interpret the law and how it applies. Including the Constitution. From lower courts to the Supreme Court.
bscholarly.com...

a reply to: TheRedneck
While I agree with most of what you said, I found this in regard to the state fish and game code.

First off it isn't exclusive to fish:

2052. The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of the state to conserve, protect, restore, and enhance any endangered species or any threatened species and its habitat and that it is the intent of the Legislature, consistent with conserving the species, to acquire lands for habitat for these species.

Second, it does seem to give all state agencies power:

2055. The Legislature further finds and declares that it is the policy of this state that all state agencies, boards, and commissions shall seek to conserve endangered species and threatened species and shall utilize their authority in furtherance of the purposes of this chapter.

a reply to: daskakik

That might change things. I need to do some digging.

TheRedneck

a reply to: daskakik

I went back to the California Endangered Species Act. I think i found the problem.

The text specifies "a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant" in multiple locations, as well as "species of fish, wildlife, and plants." From that reading, it would appear that the legislature was intending to include any species of life and simply forgot to include insects. Now, that may not be the letter of the law, but it certainly seems to me to be the intent. So including the humble beeble-bum on that list doesn't really seem all that strange to me.

Another thing is that a precedent already exists... from the original article:

The Trinity bristle snail, a land-dwelling snail that was classified as a fish in order to make it onto the threatened species list in 1980, set the precedent for deciding that a fish doesn’t have to be something that swims—and by that logic, bees, too, are fish.

Now, it would have been a lot better had the legislature simply recognized the omission in 1980 and corrected it... maybe revise "a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant" to read "a native species of organism, including plants, animals, and any other accepted scientific classification" but apparently that is asking too much of the poor people who get paid big bucks to write laws for a living, bless their little hearts. The court is going out on a limb here based on the specific wording, a limb they should not have had to go out on. But I also see where this ruling is not quite as ridiculous as it appears on its face.

You gotta admit, it's funny though... could only come from California...

Good catch! Kudos!

TheRedneck

For once I say good on california, without Bee's we are screwed and they are in trouble.

Now if we can just get delta to understand, that leaving a crate full of bee's on the tarmac in late spring (so summer) in Atlanta is not good for their health we can make some progress.

a reply to: Irishhaf

For once I say good on california, without Bee's we are screwed and they are in trouble.

Without bee's honey? Without bee's pollination activity?

Or just without bees?

a reply to: Phage

well yea sure I guess once we develop nanobots, or lab created bees that can pollinate everything then we can do without bee's.

Personally, I love honey and greatly appreciate how local unprocessed honey helps my allergies.

Now go ahead and go on your I am smarter than you diatribe, I am off for bed.

a reply to: nugget1

Ha. They do this for threatened invertebrates not covered by the subsections of The California Endangered Species Act.

The first animal was a gastropod. Then a few decapods. Now an arthropod. And when you say it like that, it doesn't sound so weird.

The argument is, "If you can allow shrimp, snails, and crayfish."

Agricultural interests dont want to deal with the bureaucracy of CESA.

The best way to not get annoyed by it is to ignore it. I live here and I didn't even know about this. Had to look into it. The law article cited by Vice was helpful.

Main question being, "But will there still guacamole for my carne asada burrito? There are still bees for the avocados, right? Okay, we're good".

a reply to: nugget1

I hope Fishing Planet adds Honey Bees to their California map to make the game more realistic and up to date...lol

a reply to: Ironclad1964

Where is this "fishing planet" of which you speak? I would like to visit this world, I think. I enjoy fishing.

a reply to: Phage
If you love fishing... Playing Fishing Planet is a great way to do it when you can't be bothered getting in your car and driving to your local spot...lol

But like I said..

Someone needs to contact the devs and let them know about this new species of flying fish so they can add it to their US maps...

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: tanstaafl

It is a role of the judiciary to interpret the law and how it applies. Including the Constitution. From lower courts to the Supreme Court.

Changing the meaning of the terms in a law is not 'interpreting' except in the mind of radical leftist activist wingnuts - it is making law by judicial fiat/activism.

Do you not comprehend the difference?

a reply to: nugget1

So Amber heard's dog stepped on a fish ?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: nugget1

I mean, it's a stretch. But what is really head scratching is why they had to resort to this to protect bees.

That was my thought.

Why can't they just say bees are protected?

It is california, they are incompetent since they stopped hiring people based on their skills.

There was a million dollar effort by Democrats in California to reduce the penalty for knowingly infecting someone with HIV.

Can you believe for a year and millions of dollars Democrats worked to reduce charges for knowingly infecting someone with HIV?
Crazy.

Well actually they wanted zero charges , but it was such a crazy idea they were only allowed to lessen the charges.

there is probably some legislature surrounding fish as an environmental protection that puts them under immediate protections just the same until the EPA or federal can look into it and grant it the same status as whatever fish they looked at being determined the same.

It is actually a very smart move as an immediate response to a problem when some others are not that quick or responsive to act or move on it.

Likely in the meantime they will be writing up the actual protection so it moves through all the other legislatives required quicker.

What they may or may not know is that there is a beetle as it's companion species it looks almost exactly the same yet has no wings. Looking into the companion species numbers may be difficult and of course hunting them down for that information would likely be a problem to habitat in conservation... the companion beetle climbs into the holes and cleans them out keeps them packed in hibernation and then goes back to ground. Staking used pallets in a corner of unused property will help them for those sympathetic to the bees just don't steal the pallets to do it is my advice; They like pine trees and other pollen prone evergreens.