Abstract
Of the nearly 2,000 threatened and endangered species protected by the Endangered Species Act (ESA), not one is a highly migratory fish. Despite well-documented population declines in many species of highly migratory fish over the past fifty years, including tuna, marlin, and shark, no highly migratory fish has ever been listed for protection. In light of current controversy over the proposed protection of Atlantic bluefin tuna under international and domestic law, this Comment seeks to explore reasons for the curious absence of any protection for highly migratory fish under the ESA. Specifically, this Comment will examine how societal perceptions and values of fish as commercial commodities perpetuate a statutory and administrative regime that militates against the protection of highly migratory fish under the ESA.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
