* Note Editor, Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, 2003–04. I would like to thank my editorial staff for their infinite hours spent on enhancing this Note, and Frank Bond for his insights and encouragement. I would also like to thank my mother, Kyung Ja Kong, and Derek Domian for their affection, inspiration, and support.
1 Lisa Mighetto, Wild Animals and American Environmental Ethics 27 (1991).
2 3 Cai. R. 175, 175 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1805). While Post was pursuing a fox on unowned property, Pierson, knowing that the fox was being hunted, killed and carried off the same fox. Id. The court found for Pierson, holding that mere chase of wildlife is insufficient, and mortal wounding is necessary to confer rights of possession over wildlife. Id. The case of Pierson v. Post is often a part of first-year property curricula in numerous law schools across the United States.
3 Id.
4 Id.
5 Id. at 178.
6 The term “ferae naturae” means “of a wild nature” and refers to “wild animals.” Black’s Law Dictionary 256 (pocket ed. 1996).
7 See, e.g., Mighetto, supra note 1.
8 Simon Lyster, International Wildlife Law: An Analysis of International Treaties Concerned with the Conservation of Wildlife, at xxii (1985); Thomas A. Lund, Early American Wildlife Law, 51 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 703, 706 (1976).
9 David G. Lombardi, Comment, The Migratory Bird Treaty Act: Steel Shot Versus Lead Shot for Hunting Migratory Waterfowl, 22 Akron L. Rev. 343, 343 (1989).
10 See Mighetto, supra note 1, at 38.
11 Id.
12 Id.
13 Id. (quoting James B. Trefethen, An American Crusade for Wildlife 129 (Winchester Press 1975)).
14 Larry M. Corcoran & Elinor Colbourn, Shocked, Crushed and Poisoned: Criminal Enforcement in Non-Hunting Cases Under the Migratory Bird Treaties, 77 Denv. U. L. Rev. 359, 359 (1999).
15 Conrad A. Fjetland, Possibilities for Expansion of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act for the Protection of Migratory Birds, 40 Nat. Resources J. 47, 47 (2000).
16 Corcoran & Colbourn, supra note 14, at 359.
17 Mighetto, supra note 1, at 27. In fact, the Audubon Society, an organization dedicated to protecting birds and other wildlife, was founded by a sportsman. Id. at 38. The members of the Audubon Society advocated against killing non-game birds, destroying their nests and eggs, and wearing decorative feathers. Id.
18 Convention Between United States and Great Britain for the Protection of Migratory Birds, Aug. 16, 1916, U.S.-U.K., 39 Stat. 1702 [hereinafter Canadian Convention].
19 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. �� 703–712 (2000).
20 Id. � 703.
21 See, e.g., United States v. Moon Lake Elec. Ass’n, Inc., 45 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1079–82 (D. Colo. 1999).
22 55 Cong. Rec. 4402 (1917). A “pothunter” is a hunter who kills and takes for food without regard for the rules of the sport. See, e.g., Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary 921 (1985).
23 55 Cong. Rec. 4402 (1917).
24 Id. at 4816.
25 56 Cong. Rec. 7360 (1918).
26 Id.
27 See, e.g., id. at 7360 (statement of Representative Stedman emphasizing that the purpose of this bill is to give effect to the convention that insectivorous migratory birds, in addition to migratory game birds, are embraced in the terms of the treaty).
28 Id.
29 Id.
30 56 Cong. Rec. 7458 (1918).
31 Id.
32 Id. at 7357.
33 Erin C. Perkins, Comment, Migratory Birds and Multiple-Use Management: Using the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to Rejuvenate America’s National Environmental Policy, 92 Nw. U. L. Rev. 817, 822 (1998).
34 Lombardi, supra note 9, at 343.
35 252 U.S. 416, 434–35 (1920).
36 Id.
37 Convention for the Protection of Migratory Birds and Game Mammals, Feb. 7, 1936, U.S.-Mex., 50 Stat. 1311 [hereinafter Mexican Convention].
38 Convention for Protection of Migratory Birds and Birds in Danger of Extinction in their Environment, Mar. 4, 1972, U.S.-Japan [hereinafter Japanese Convention].
39 Convention Concerning the Conservation of Migratory Birds and Their Environment, Nov. 19, 1976, U.S.-U.S.S.R., 29 U.S.T. 4647 [hereinafter Russian Convention].
40 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. �� 703–712 (2000).
41See generally Russian Convention, supra note 39; Japanese Convention, supra note 38; Mexican Convention, supra note 37; Canadian Convention, supra note 18.
42 Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702.
43 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312.
44 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4649; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3331.
45 See, e.g., Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4650–51; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3332–33; Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1313–14; Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702–03.
46 Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702–03.
47 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1313–14.
48 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3332.
49 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4650.
50 Id. at 4656.
51 See, e.g., Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1703.
52 See, e.g., id. at 1704.
53 Id. (emphasis added).
54 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1313 (emphasis added).
55 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–53; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333–34; Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312–13; Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1704.
56 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333–34; Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312–13.
57 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–53; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333–34.
58 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. �� 703–712 (2000).
59 Id. � 703.
60 Id. � 704(a).
61 Id. � 706.
62 Id. � 707.
63 Id.
64 16 U.S.C. � 711.
65 Id. � 712.
66 50 C.F.R. �� 10–23 (2003).
67 Id. � 10.12.
68 Id. � 10.13.
69 Id. � 20.11.
70 See, e.g., 50 C.F.R. �� 21.12–.14.
71 Id. � 21.1.
72 Id. � 21.2.
73 Id. �� 21.13–.14.
74 Id.
75 Id. � 21.21.
76 50 C.F.R. � 21.23.
77 Id. � 21.27.
78 Id. � 21.26.
79 Id. �� 21.28–.29.
80 Id. � 21.30.
81 Id. �� 21.13–.14.
82 Captive-breeding can be achieved through natural breeding or artificial insemination. Peter Gill, Modern Captive Breeding, The Falconers Web, at http://www.falconers.
com/articles/captive_breeding_1/ (last visited Apr. 21, 2004). In natural breeding, male and female birds are placed together in the breeding chamber and fertile eggs are laid after copulation takes place. Id., at http://www.falconers.com/articles/captive_breed-
ing_2/(last visited Apr. 21, 2004). Artificial insemination involves inseminating into the female bird the collected male semen, either voluntarily (female presents herself for voluntary copulation) or involuntarily (female refuses to stand for voluntary copulation at which point a breeder holds and injects semen into the female bird). Id. After the eggs are laid, they are incubated either naturally, by surrogate parents, or by incubators. Id. at http://www.falconers.com/articles/captive_breeding_3/ (last visited Apr. 21, 2004). Incubating eggs naturally refers to leaving the eggs with the parent bird, which poses difficulties when the individual parent breaks eggs either accidentally or intentionally, or refuses to sit on the eggs. Id. Another particular concern during hatching time is that some parent birds eat their emerging offspring. Id. Hence, many breeders opt to use surrogate parents for incubation, usually using parents that are diligent with incubation. Id. Yet another method to matching the fertilized eggs is through the use of electromechanical incubators, such as Brinsea Incubator used by the National Birds of Prey Centre. Nat’l Bird of Prey Centre, at http://www.nbpc.co.uk/breed.htm (last visited Apr. 21, 2004).
83 See, e.g., National Bird of Prey Centre, http://www.nbpc.co.uk/success.htm.
84 Id.
85 Id.
86 Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Falconry: Legal Ownership and Sale of Captive-Bred Raptors, 4 Pace Envtl. L. Rev. 349, 398 (1987).
87 See, e.g., United States v. Conners, 606 F.2d 269, 270–73 (10th Cir. 1979); United States v. Richards, 583 F.2d 491, 491–97 (10th Cir. 1978).
88 50 C.F.R. � 10.12 (2003) (emphasis added).
89 Id. � 21.13.
90 Id. � 21.14.
91 296 F.2d 53, 54–61 (8th Cir. 1961).
92 Id. at 55–56.
93 Id. at 54.
94 Id. at 60.
95 Id.
96 Id.
97 583 F.2d 491, 493 (10th Cir. 1978).
98 Id. at 495.
99 Id. at 496–97.
100 United States v. Conners, 606 F.2d 269, 270–73 (10th Cir. 1979).
101 Id. at 273.
102 Id. at 271–72.
103 Id. at 271.
104 Id.
105 Id. at 273.
106 George C. Coggins & William H. Hensely, Constitutional Limits on Federal Power to Protect and Manage Wildlife: Is the Endangered Species Act Endangered?, 61 Iowa L. Rev. 1099, 1110 (1976).
107 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. � 703 (2000).
108 See id. �� 703–712.
109 Corcoran & Colbourn, supra note 14, at 359.
110 Perkins, supra note 33, at 824.
111 Lombardi, supra note 9, at 343.
112 See, e.g., 16 U.S.C. � 703.
113 Lombardi, supra note 9, at 343.
114 Id. at 344.
115 See discussion, infra Parts II.B–E.
116 Id.
117 Id.
118 Id.
119 Id.
120 See generally, e.g., Mexican Convention, supra note 37; Canadian Convention, supra note 18.
121 See generally Russian Convention, supra note 39; Japanese Convention, supra note 38; Mexican Convention, supra note 37; Canadian Convention, supra note 18.
122 Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702.
123 Id.
124 Id.
125 See id.
126 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1311–12 (emphasis added).
127 Id. at 1312.
128 Id.
129 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4652; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333.
130 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333.
131 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–52.
132 See id.
133 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3331.
134 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4649–50.
135 See id.
136 See id.
137 Mighetto, supra note 1, at 3.
138 Id. at 3–4 (quoting John Muir, Our National Parks (Houghton Mifflin 1901)).
139 Id. at 4.
140 Id. at 3.
141 The Heart of Thoreau’s Journals 4 (Odell Shepard ed., Houghton Mifflin 1927).
142 Id.
143 Id.
144 See id.
145 See Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1704.
146 Id.
147 Id.
148 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–53; Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333–34; Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312–13.
149 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312.
150 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333.
151 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4652.
152 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312.
153 Japanese Convention, supra note 38, at 3333.
154 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–52 (“Exception to these prohibitions may be made . . . for . . . other specific purposes not inconsistent with the principles of this Convention.”).
155 See, e.g., Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1704.
156 Id.
157 Id. (emphasis added).
158 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312–13 (emphasis added).
159 Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4652.
160 See Russian Convention, supra note 39, at 4651–53; Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312; Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1704.
161 See Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. �� 703–712 (2000).
162 Id. � 704.
163 See id.
164 Id.
165 Cerritos Gun Club v. Hall, 96 F.2d 620, 620 (9th Cir. 1938) (emphasis added).
166 See 16 U.S.C. � 711.
167 Id.
168 See id.
169 Id. � 712.
170 See id.
171 See, e.g., 56 Cong. Rec. 7447 (1918).
172 See, e.g., 55 Cong. Rec. 4816 (1917).
173 Id.
174 Id.
175 55 Cong. Rec. 4402 (1917).
176 56 Cong. Rec. 7447 (1918).
177 United States v. Moon Lake Electric Ass’n, Inc., 45 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1082 (D. Colo. 1999).
178 56 Cong. Rec. 7364 (1918).
179 See id.
180 See, e.g., 56 Cong. Rec. 7357, 7447 (1918).
181 See, e.g., id. at 7357.
182 Id.
183 Id. at 7458.
184 See 50 C.F.R. �� 20.1–21.43 (2002).
185 Id. �� 20.1(b), 20.20(b).
186 Id. � 20.21.
187 Id. � 20.23.
188 Id. � 20.24.
189 Id. � 20.36.
190 50 C.F.R. � 21.24.
191 Id. �� 21.1–23.
192 Id. � 21.11.
193 Id. � 21.1.
194 Id. � 21.23.
195 Id. � 21.27.
196 50 C.F.R. � 21.42.
197 Id.
198 Id. � 21.41(c)(4).
199 Id. � 21.42(c).
200 Id.
201 Id. � 21.43.
202 50 C.F.R. �� 21.13, 21.14. (This Note refers to the exception as “curious” because nothing in the text or history of the Act offers any rationale why such an exception should take place here. This curiosity has not been lost on the courts, where no satisfying explanation of this distinction other than the fact that the text seems to point that way has been offered).
203 Id. � 21.13.
204 Id. � 21.13(a).
205 See id.
206 Id. � 21.13(d).
207 Id. � 21.14.
208 50 C.F.R. � 21.14(d).
209 See id. �� 21.13, 21.14.
210 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1313; Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702–03.
211 Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702–03 (emphasis added).
212 Canadian Convention, supra note 18.
213 Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1313.
214 See id.
215 See 16 U.S.C. �� 703–712.
216 See, e.g., United States v. Conners, 606 F.2d 269, 270–73 (10th Cir. 1979); United States v. Richards, 583 F.2d 491, 495–97 (10th Cir. 1978); Koop v. United States, 296 F.2d 53, 54–61 (8th Cir. 1961).
217 See, e.g., Conners, 606 F.2d at 270–72; Koop, 296 F.2d at 54–61; see also Richards, 583 F.2d at 495–97 (finding no distinction between wild and captive-bred raptors, but only because defendant could never prove proper property interest in captive-bred raptors).
218 296 F.2d at 55.
219 Id. at 55–56.
220 Id. at 55.
221 Id.
222 Id. at 56.
223 Id. at 55–56.
224 Koop, 296 F.2d at 55.
225 Id. at 58.
226 Id.
227 Id.
228 Id. at 59.
229 Id.
230 Koop, 296 F.2d at 59.
231 Id. (quoting 2 Cooley, Torts 838 (3d ed. 1906)).
232 Id.
233 Id. at 59–60.
234 Id. at 58–59.
235 Id. at 60.
236 Koop, 296 F.2d. at 60.
237 Id. at 60–61.
238 Id. at 59–60.
239 Id. at 60–61.
240 583 F.2d 491, 493 (10th Cir. 1978).
241 Id.
242 Id.
243 Id.
244 Id. at 493–94 (citing 50 C.F.R. � 10.12 (1978)).
245 Id. at 494–95 (citing 16 U.S.C. �� 703, 704, 707 (1976)).
246 Richards, 583 F.2d at 494–95.
247 Id. at 496.
248 Id. at 495 (citing United States v. Lumpkin, 276 F. 580, 583 (1921)).
249 Id.
250 Id.
251 Id.
252 Richards, 583 F.2d at 496–97.
253 Id.
254 See id at 495.
255 See id. at 493–95.
256 See id. at 494–95.
257 606 F.2d 269, 270–73 (10th Cir. 1979).
258 Id. at 273.
259 Id. at 270–71.
260 Id. at 270. The field trials consisted of throwing mallard ducks or other birds into a pond located at the arsenal whereupon trained dogs were released to retrieve the birds. Id.
261 Id.
262 Id. at 271–72.
263 The Canadian Convention defined protected migratory game birds to include “wild ducks,” and the Mexican Convention established a closed season only for “wild ducks.” Mexican Convention, supra note 37, at 1312–13; Canadian Convention, supra note 18, at 1702–03.
264 Conners, 606 F.2d at 271.
265 Id. at 273.
266 Id. at 272 n.4.
267 Id. “The unique fact that the treaties and regulations specifically refer to ‘wild ducks’ rather than simply ‘ducks,’ distinguishes this case from Richards.” Id.
268 See discussion supra Part II.D.
269 See, e.g., Andrus v. Allard, 444 U.S. 51, 51–68 (1979).
270 Id. at 56, 61–62.
271 Id. at 60.
272 Id. (citing 16 U.S.C. � 711 (1976), which provides: “[n]othing in this subchapter shall be construed to prevent the breeding of migratory game birds on farms and preserves and the sale of so bred under proper regulation for the purpose of increasing the food supply.”).
273 Id. at 60–61.
274 45 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1075 (D. Colo. 1999).
275 Id.
276 Id. For instance, the MBTA prohibits the sale of protected birds regardless of how such birds are collected, trapped, or killed. 16 U.S.C. � 668(a).
277 Moon Lake Elec. Ass’n, 45 F. Supp. 2d at 1073 (quoting United States v. Manning, 787 F.2d 431, 435 n.4 (8th Cir. 1986)).
278 Migratory Bird Treaty Act, 16 U.S.C. � 707(a) (2000).
279 Id. � 707(b).
280 See id. � 711; 50 C.F.R. �� 21.13–.14 (2003).
281 16 U.S.C. � 711.
282 50 C.F.R. �� 21.13–.14.
283 United States v. Conners, 606 F.2d 269, 270–73 (10th Cir. 1979); Koop v. United States, 296 F.2d 53, 53–61 (8th Cir. 1961).
284 16 U.S.C. � 711.
285 Id.
286 50 C.F.R. �� 21.13–.14.
287 Id. � 21.13.
288 Id. � 21.14.
289 See discussion supra Part II.D.
290 See United States v. Moon Lake Elec. Ass’n, 45 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1080 (D. Colo. 1999).
291 Id. at 1082. Representative Huddleston stated:
assuming no kind of punishment is too severe for the boy who robs a bird’s nest, I call attention to the fact that this bill [MBTA] does not protect game birds. Instead of being called “a bill for the protection of game birds,” it ought to be named “a bill for the protection of game-bird hunters.” The real purpose of this bill, so far as it applies to game birds, is not to protect the birds, is not to give them life, but to fix it so that the ragged boys, the people far away in the country who have not bird dogs—to fix it so that the common people of the country can not get their fair share of the game and so that only those who are able to afford game preserves and fancy equipment for hunting and all the paraphernalia that goes with it . . . can get the game.
56 Cong. Rec. 7364 (1918).
292 56 Cong. Rec. 7357 (1918).
293 Id. at 7375.
294 Liberty Hyde Bailey, The Holy Earth 20 (Charles Scribner’s Sons 1915).
295 Mighetto, supra note 1, at 118.