English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The complex, yet vague nature, of legislation being generated by lawmakers in Washington, DC requires that public administrators be afforded administrative discretion in carrying out their respective duties. It is no longer possible for policymakers to be fully informed regarding the multitude of variables that exist in the offshore fishing environment, nor is it possible to articulate that spectrum of variables in codified laws and regulations. The academic debate between controlling the exercise of administrative discretion on the one hand and extending the leash of judgment on the other has been around as long as the profession of public administration. In the case of the eleven-inch fish (the fish is one inch shy of being a legal catch), the public administrator on the scene of the infraction has a choice to make. The administrator can choose to overlook the incident, issue a warning, or issue a $100 notice of violation and seize the fish. I know which alternative I chose. The question is, which alternative would you choose?

The Case of the Eleven-Inch Fish: A Study in Administrative Discretion