Sqwertz wrote:

> On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:42:48 -0800, Blinky the Shark wrote:
>
>> Afterthought: I'm not trying to be a hard-ass, here -- honest. But my
>> thinking is that if there are *laws* about taking endangered species (from
>> woodpeckers to tigers, not just fish), they must be based on something
>> more organizationally authoritative than a local aquarium, however groovy
>> that local aquarium is. "You are sentenced to 3 years of community
>> service for keeping that blue-footed lake trout, because the Lake
>> Winnebago Aquarium says they're endangered", doesn't seem probable.
>> So I'm just looking for what that real authority might be.
>
> http://www.fws.gov/Endangered/wildlife.html

Excellent. Thanks for the legwork on that. Bookmarked.

568 species listed worldwide. No orange roughy. I wasn't asking for an
authority so I could prove them not listed; I just wanted an authority.
But they're not listed, regardless of my motivations.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Blinky: http://blinkynet.net