posted on Jul, 1 2005 @ 02:15 PM
This is just too funny...
Two decades ago, Gale Norton (who is currently the Secretary of the Interior) had to reply to a request from the Native American Samish tribe that
they be registered as an 'endangered species'. Though she sounds as official as possible, it's evident that she's having fun with her rejection
notice. I'm putting it in this forum because she (sarcastically) mentions a variety of evolution v. creationism related issues. Note the commentary
about a 'reptile' who caused habitat loss in the lower euphrates valley...
"The petition raises the question of whether a group may be listed as an endangered “population” of a larger species. Such a “population” may
be listed. 16 U.S.C. [section] 1532(16). However, to qualify, such population must be “of any vertebrate fish or wildlife.” The question is thus
posed whether the Samish, or any portion of Homo sapiens, may be classified as “wildlife.” The petition correctly notes that our regulations
define “wildlife” to include “any member of the animal kingdom.” 50 C.F.R. [section] 424.02(n). The Service's more general regulations
indicate, however, that “wildlife” is properly confined to “any wild animal.” 50 C.F.R. [section] 10.12. Traditionally, wild animals are
“those wild by nature, which, because of habit, mode of life, or natural instinct, are incapable of being completely domesticated, and require the
exercise of art, force, or skill to keep them in subjection.” 3A C.J.S. Animals [section] 3 (1973). While certain classes of Homo sapiens may meet
this test, and all may meet it during certain periods (roughly the ages of 2-3 and 16-21), it cannot be said that Homo sapiens as a whole are not
Furthermore, if Homo sapiens, or a population thereof, were listed as endangered, the Fish and Wildlife Service would be allowed to authorize their
taking for scientific purposes, 16 U.S.C. [section] 1539 (a) (1) (A), and to allow their killing incidental to otherwise lawful activity. 16 U.S.C.
[section] 1539 (A) (1) (B). Alaskan natives would be entitled to kill them, sell the edible portions within their villages, and to convert them into
“authentic native articles of handicrafts and clothing.” 16 U.S.C. [section] 1539 (e). State laws on assault, homicide, and conversion of persons
into authentic native articles of handicrafts and clothing would be void as in conflict with activities permitted under ESA. 16 U.S.C. [section] 1535
(f). It would likewise be illegal to transport members of listed populations in interstate commerce, or to allow them to enter or leave the United
States. 16 U.S.C. [section] 1538 (a) (1). (4) "