User:MLJnotK/sandbox

The case is stated very clearly. The rule and analysis compliment the conclusion very well. The group determines that Susan is liable for the death of Lars. Perhaps group 1 can elaborate on the compensation and damages that Susan faces. Also, group 1 does a good job of explaining the impact on endangered species based on regulations.

Aaron, Angela, Danny, Abraham (Group 4)

The example was well written and we agree with the conclusion of the IRAC, that Lazy Susan can be held liable due to the bear attack. Like what group 4 has said, group 1 can extend their analysis/conclusion to say how much the traveler's family would get. Another suggestion we have is, instead of one season, you can rephrase it to be one day. Also as we read the summary, we couldn't quite get what issue/question your group is trying to answer. If possible, can you include your question or rephrase your summary in a way that readers can understand what you're arguing?

Ivy & Coral (Group 3)

IRAC:

Wolverine should be lower case. State Department of Fish and Wildlife (is it capitalized or all lower case?). I like your updates scenario and I agree with your rules, analysis, especially your conclusion.

Summary:

Capitalize United Nations. I really like how your group took the suggestions that Coral and I had for your old IRAC and summary, and revised it. I now have a clearer idea and deeper understand of what your paper will be arguing. It might be smart to find an article or two to say that COVID-19 may have came from animals (there's many conspiracies). Overall, good job!

Ivy

IRAC Problem
Scenario:

Jason was on a trip with his family to his farm in a rural area. One day, when he was driving, he accidentally hit and killed a Wolverine, which is considered as an endangered species. Jason was very worried and he called the state department of fish and wildlife wishing to resolve this accident. Jason has not done anything else that could be considered illegal. Jason then called his lawyer and asked what might happen to him.

Issue:

Will Jason be charged with any criminal penalties?

Rules:


 * 1) The endangered species act makes it illegal to import, export, take, possess, sell, or transport any endangered or threatened species. A violation of the act can result in severe fines or jail time.
 * 2) In 1995, the state senate repealed criminal penalties for accidental killings of endangered species.
 * 3) If the person is involved in other illegal activities while the accidental killing of endangered species happens (such as trespassing), the person will face criminal charges.

Analysis:


 * 1) Jason’s act of killing the Wolverine was considered accidental because he hit the wolverine while driving unintentionally, so he will not face criminal charges. The lawyer could recommend him to apply for an “incidental take permit” to avoid any charges.
 * 2) Jason has not been involved in trespassing activities on lands that are regulated, so he would not face penalties for any illegal activities.

Conclusion:

The lawyer would advise him to apply for an “incidental take permit” and let the state department of fish and wildlife know as soon as possible about the case. Jason should not face any criminal charges because his acts were purely accidental which does not violate the endangered species act.

Summary
Increasingly interconnected globalization fosters international trade in a wide diversity of products, extending even to exotic animal products. Traders and consumers who still participate in the international exotic animal market ignore the detrimental effects of depleting our environment and ecosystem and instead give priority to individual consumer benefits, such as monetary gains or high fashion. Some people and groups have realized these choices cannot be sustained or tolerated.

Many species are not protected until they are endangered, and this delay in protection results in significant losses of biodiversity in the ecosystem. Legislation, such as the Endangered Species Act (ESA), serves to regulate human environmental intervention on the international scale to protect and preserve “species of fish, wildlife, and plants (that) have been so depleted in numbers that they are in danger of or threatened with extinction” and their habitats and to hold those in violation of it accountable. As the international community increases efforts in monitoring and controlling environmental damage, the United Nations aims to create more protected habitats and ecosystems.

Wildlife trafficking is a rising international crisis that is not only taking away animal rights but also threatening the world on global environmental, social, and economic levels. It’s contributing to an illegal economy and having detrimental effects on humans’ well-being. The COVID-19 pandemic is suspected to have begun in an exotic animal “wet market” in Wuhan, China. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) works along with international treaties like Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) and Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), aiming to combat transnational crimes and make joint efforts for wildlife protection. The penalties as a result of breaking these laws are fines as small as $500 per violation and as large as $25,000 per violation or imprisonment up to 6 months. These laws are weakened by these limited penalties and extensive exceptions. These exceptions include “scientific purposes or to enhance the propagation or survival of the affected species…, undue economic hardships…, and  Pre-Act endangered species parts exemption; application and certification; regulation; validity of sales contract; separability; renewal of exemption; expiration of renewal certification.” In light of these growing concerns, we aim to understand international laws governing the laws of exotic animals and their effectiveness.