NationStates Jolt Archive

(OOC: The second paragraph of my agrument seems vague... and I'm not sure if the first sentence about the UN is a violation of some sort or not. Also, I'm wondering if it should state a standard by which it can be determined whether or not a species is considered "endangered" or not. Finally, I'm wondering if there is a better way of saying "species without rights" (I came up with "non-persons")... since there are apparently non-human nations in NationStates)

==PURPOSE==

To protect from extinction those species deemed "endangered" by taking the necessary steps to stop the decrease in the species' population.

==ARGUMENT==

RECOGNIZING that there are a number of non-person species' (species' without basic rights) which are hunted, injured, and/or killed for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, or some other purpose. ALSO RECOGNIZING that without restricting said hunting, injury, and death of said species', that certain species' for which there is high demand may decrease in population from one year to the next. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT that a species "in danger" of becoming extinct may be appropriately deemed "endangered". CONVINCED that without restrictions, the populations of said endangered species' may continue to drop until the species has become extinct, eliminating the resource from the world, never to exist again.

In time, the United Nations could come to learn which non-person species' (species' without basic rights) are in danger of becoming extinct, therefore deemed "endangered", and restrict the hunting, injuring, and killing of said endangered species, thereby helping to regenerate said species and protect species from further decimation. By doing so, said species' could be bred not only for purposes of regeneration, but also to fulfill the demand of the species' for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, etc.

==RESOLUTION==

This proposals resolves to:
I. Make it illegal to hunt, injure, and/or kill any member of any species deemed "endangered".
II. Preserve the remaining population of the species.
III. Encourage the remaining population to procreate, so the species' may no longer be considered "endangered".

==PURPOSE==

To protect from extinction those species deemed "endangered" by taking the necessary steps to stop the decrease in the species' population.

Clear, concise, gets the point across in the short attention spans of most readers. Keep.

==ARGUMENT==

RECOGNIZING that there are a number of non-person species' (species' without basic rights) which are hunted, injured, and/or killed for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, or some other purpose.

Just call them unintelligent plants and animals.

ALSO RECOGNIZING that without restricting said hunting, injury, and death of said species', that certain species' for which there is high demand may decrease in population from one year to the next. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT that a species "in danger" of becoming extinct may be appropriately deemed "endangered". CONVINCED that without restrictions, the populations of said endangered species' may continue to drop until the species has become extinct, eliminating the resource from the world, never to exist again.

You'll have to set a limit on what is considered endangered.

In time, the United Nations could come to learn which non-person species' (species' without basic rights) are in danger of becoming extinct, therefore deemed "endangered", and restrict the hunting, injuring, and killing of said endangered species, thereby helping to regenerate said species and protect species from further decimation. By doing so, said species' could be bred not only for purposes of regeneration, but also to fulfill the demand of the species' for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, etc.

DLE has been actively trying to exterminate certain species because they are harmful to my cities and civilians while not serving an unfillable slot in nature. I would make it a point to add in something to recognize that some species must be exterminated for safety reasons.

==RESOLUTION==

This proposals resolves to:
I. Make it illegal to hunt, injure, and/or kill any member of any species deemed "endangered".
II. Preserve the remaining population of the species.
III. Encourage the remaining population to procreate, so the species' may no longer be considered "endangered".

I'd add in an exception for dangerous species that must be exterminated by nations due to the danger they pose. I'd also add in that each nation must establish a science foundation that has the job of keeping track of animal populations and regularly report to the UN on what is going on with them.

DLE has been actively trying to exterminate certain species because they are harmful to my cities and civilians while not serving an unfillable slot in nature. I would make it a point to add in something to recognize that some species must be exterminated for safety reasons.I would argue that no species deserves to be exterminated. For all we know, they may be crucial to existence in the future. Once extinct, there is absolutely no way the species can be brought back. I believe an attempt to control the species rather than kill it off, would be more appropriate.

I'd add in an exception for dangerous species that must be exterminated by nations due to the danger they pose. I'd also add in that each nation must establish a science foundation that has the job of keeping track of animal populations and regularly report to the UN on what is going on with them.
the only problem there is that a nation could say a species is a dangerous one, thus leaving a very big loophole

I would argue that no species deserves to be exterminated. For all we know, they may be crucial to existence in the future. Once extinct, there is absolutely no way the species can be brought back. I believe an attempt to control the species rather than kill it off, would be more appropriate.

We would invite the representative from Myxx to... tour our region of Antarctica. Currently, we will inform you, we are having something of a problem with polar bears, brought to our region by the same meddler who gave us a soil bacteria able to go dormant and survive our four-month long winter-with-no-sun.

As of the last report we have, these bears are responsible - directly responsible, mind you - of the vanishing of twenty-four nations, with a sum population of over twenty-six billion.

We would agree the bears are rather well fed at this point.

We would also point out this particular vermin are growing more intelligent then is safe, and they are resistant to any form of domestication or control.

So, you would give us the option of, say, moving them enmasse to Myxx? We would be most happy to start moving as many as possible, though we would point out the impact on your population would be rather... depopulating.

There are no endangered species within the borders of Krioval. The gold dragons manage to sustain their current population levels. Beyond that, most of Krioval has been turned into cities. Forget sprawl - Torokara is 1 km high and consists of six distinct levels.

message to Vastiva: do you mind if some of our hunters fly down on Kiaonese Dragons to have a go at reducing the polar bear population?

If animals are dangerous they could be exterminated to a point and keep about 30 in enclosed eninvironments. (zoos)

If animals are dangerous they could be exterminated to a point and keep about 30 in enclosed eninvironments. (zoos)

Mmmhmmm. And what if that particular animal can chew on a tank and understands the concept of "door"?

message to Vastiva: do you mind if some of our hunters fly down on Kiaonese Dragons to have a go at reducing the polar bear population?

We shall have to discuss this in more depth.

Currently, we will inform you, we are having something of a problem with polar bears, brought to our region by the same meddler who gave us a soil bacteria able to go dormant and survive our four-month long winter-with-no-sun.

As of the last report we have, these bears are responsible - directly responsible, mind you - of the vanishing of twenty-four nations, with a sum population of over twenty-six billion.I have taken note of it and will consider a revision to my proposal.

It is my understanding that three polar bears are responsible for devouring 26,000,000,000 people. As ungodly farfetched as that sounds, I have taken note of it and will consider a revision to my proposal. A question though: do you claim those three polar bears to be the only polar bears in the world?
it says these polar bears, Myxx, not three

It is my understanding that three polar bears are responsible for devouring 26,000,000,000 people. As ungodly farfetched as that sounds, I have taken note of it and will consider a revision to my proposal. A question though: do you claim those three polar bears to be the only polar bears in the world?

Our OVERSIGHT satellite system has the bear population currently at approximately one-half million, though local winter may thin these ranks some.

Then again, they might just winter in what used to be someone else's home and gnaw on the larder.

it says these polar bears, Myxx, not threewhoops... :D

Our OVERSIGHT satellite system has the bear population currently at approximately one-half million, though local winter may thin these ranks some.Despite my misreading, it still seems like a farfetched statistic... though still a good point. At the same time, it could be argued that such a species is in no danger of becoming extinct and therefore is not protected by this resolution. Nevertheless, I am revising this as we speak.

Mmmhmmm. And what if that particular animal can chew on a tank and understands the concept of "door"?

I'd imagine if they can understand the concept of a door, then they might be considered sentient - thus outside of this proposal.

I also imagine you must be relieved that the right to arm bears proposal never reached quorum.

I'd imagine if they can understand the concept of a door, then they might be considered sentient - thus outside of this proposal.

I also imagine you must be relieved that the right to arm bears proposal never reached quorum.
that is subject to debate. if that is true, some from the ape and monkey family could be concidered sentient. but we believe that the working of tools doesnt guarentee sentience. until the Kiaonese tamed their dragons, there used to be big problems with them, but now they freely cross into the other provinces of TLA

Despite my misreading, it still seems like a farfetched statistic... though still a good point.

*buries your desk in documentation*


At the same time, it could be argued that such a species is in no danger of becoming extinct and therefore is not protected by this resolution. Nevertheless, I am revising this as we speak.

We are most certainly working on making them extinct. They were not here as part of the natural heritage of this continent, and with luck, they will not be part of the ecosystem for much longer.

that is subject to debate. if that is true, some from the ape and monkey family could be concidered sentient. but we believe that the working of tools doesnt guarentee sentience. until the Kiaonese tamed their dragons, there used to be big problems with them, but now they freely cross into the other provinces of TLA

Are you volunteering to find out? From what I understand they are quite....hostile.

Lets just pretend they are sentient, for the sake of those who have not been eaten, and nuke their a**. ;)

IC: Hang on... you're going to put in protections for guivres? Animals that can paralyse with a glance, then settle down to a good feast of flesh? Forgive me if the Triumvirate refuses to support this.

OOC: I don't mind this draft as it is at the moment. Keep in mind other people's suggestions. However, I would be unlikely to support, for the (IC) reason above.

I would argue that no species deserves to be exterminated. For all we know, they may be crucial to existence in the future. Once extinct, there is absolutely no way the species can be brought back. I believe an attempt to control the species rather than kill it off, would be more appropriate.

The Sea Worms of Terrator are what I am trying to kill. To get an idea, I don't have coastal cities on that world because they have a habit of eating them. In order to control them, we have had to use nuclear torpedos, and then we can only control by killing. Luckily, we've gotten quite adept at cleaning up radiation before it causes damage. Unluckily, we are extremely advanced and far from an example of the common nation.

For my clause idea, I would say that the nation wishing an animal exempt must prove the animal's niche is either unnecessary or can be filled by another creature with no appreciable ecological and environmental damage. They must also prove the animal is actually a danger.

*clears throat*

Or that the animal in question is non-native. We would point to mongooses in Hawaii, or Slerath in Kashamir, or... well... polar bears in Antarctica.

I think it's a good idea, break a leg.

***Revisions in BOLD***
***Omissions in SILVER***

==PURPOSE==

To protect from extinction those species deemed "endangered" by taking the necessary steps to stop the decrease in the species' population.

==ARGUMENT==

RECOGNIZING that there are a number of unintelligent plant and animal species' which are hunted, harmed, and/or killed for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, or some other purpose. ALSO RECOGNIZING that without restricting said hunting, harming, and killing of said species', that certain species' for which there is high demand may decrease in population from one year to the next. TAKING INTO ACCOUNT that a species "in danger" of becoming extinct may be appropriately deemed "endangered". CONVINCED that without restrictions, the populations of said endangered species' may continue to drop until the species has become extinct, eliminating the resource from the world, never to exist again.

In order for an unintelligent plant or animal species to be deemed "endangered", it should meet the following criteria:

It is evident that there has been a continuous, significant drop in the species' population from year to year which, if left alone, would result in the extinction of the species.
There is a demand by an intelligent people to preserve said species.
Said species is NOT a threat to the existence of another species, especially those intelligent species with basic rights.

In time, the United Nations could come to learn which unintelligent plant and animal species' may be deemed "endangered", and restrict the hunting, harming, and killing of said endangered species, thereby helping to regenerate said species' and protect species' from further and/or unnecessary depopulation. By doing so, said species' could be bred not only for purposes of regeneration, but also to fulfill the demand of species for the purpose(s) of food, sport, industry, etc.

==RESOLUTION==

This resolution seeks to:

Illegalize the hunting, injury, and/or killing any member of any species deemed "endangered".
Preserve the remaining population of the species.
Encourage the remaining population to reproduce, so that the species' population will begin to rise again.

(OOC: Also, which category would this resolution fit into? I thought maybe environmental, however I was unsure about the businesses affected... or even if "environmental" would be the best category for this.)

I have no Idea.
Edit:Moral Decency

Vasitva, we could arrange to ahem, "Help" you with your current situation in exchange for some form of reimbursment. We should be able to take care of approximately three quarters of that problem via some of our airbourne military resources. At the rate of $5,000 per individual problem, the total cost would be $1,875,000,000. We can start work the same day the contract is signed and should be finished by the end of the week if you're interested. This is also negotible.

Only a few minor errors, but otherwise okay.

Vasitva, we could arrange to ahem, "Help" you with your current situation in exchange for some form of reimbursment. We should be able to take care of approximately three quarters of that problem via some of our airbourne military resources. At the rate of $5,000 per individual problem, the total cost would be $1,875,000,000. We can start work the same day the contract is signed and should be finished by the end of the week if you're interested. This is also negotible.

We're curious how you plan to do this without destroying our bio-engineered forests, endangering further population, or causing environmental damage.

I think you should add a bit saying that non-native species should not be considered endangered. That clears up Vastiva's polar bear problem.

I think you should add a bit saying that non-native species should not be considered endangered. That clears up Vastiva's polar bear problem.

*nods thanks to the representative from Enn*

I think you should add a bit saying that non-native species should not be considered endangered. That clears up Vastiva's polar bear problem.the killer polar bears would be considered a threat to another species (an intelligent species with basic rights, at that) and, therefore, are not considered "endangered", but rather, are the ones doing the "endangering"

We're curious how you plan to do this without destroying our bio-engineered forests, endangering further population, or causing environmental damage.

Slightly off-topic: That reminds me. We still haven't found either of the ships dispatched to help you with that problem. Have you by chance seen them?

On topic:

Myxx, I wish you the best of luck with this proposal.

We're curious how you plan to do this without destroying our bio-engineered forests, endangering further population, or causing environmental damage.

Small one person fighters that use a realitively fine beam directed enegry weapon and can hover. Unless the forests are very thick, they should be able to do sweeps and kill any offending animals they find without any danger to themselves. Their prmary weapon has no adverse effects on life not directly in it's path and short burts won't give significant ground penetration.
They can fly at high speeds scanning for large sources of heat and then investigate each source they find. If it's a bear, they fry it and move on. Ten thousand should be sufficient I belive.

Small one person fighters that use a realitively fine beam directed enegry weapon and can hover. Unless the forests are very thick, they should be able to do sweeps and kill any offending animals they find without any danger to themselves. Their prmary weapon has no adverse effects on life not directly in it's path and short burts won't give significant ground penetration.
They can fly at high speeds scanning for large sources of heat and then investigate each source they find. If it's a bear, they fry it and move on. Ten thousand should be sufficient I belive.

Well, that sounds simply wonderful... except for one thing. Polar bears are invisible to IR and IIR and even ImIR sensors. They give off absolutely no heat.

We also do not relish the idea of a forest fire because of a trigger-happy fighter jock.

There is a demand by an intelligent people to preserve said species.


I don't really like this part. I'm really not sure why, but I just don't. Other than that, it seems fine. Great work.

I don't really like this part. I'm really not sure why, but I just don't. Other than that, it seems fine. Great work.What's not to like? I figure that there will always be someone who believes that EVERY plant and animal deserves to live. And with the stipulation after that one stating that an endangered species may not be "a threat to the existence of another species, especially those intelligent species with basic rights", the only species which may be killed off are those who a threat to one or more intelligent people(s).

How can they not give off heat? In an area that cold, any mamal should stand out like a large neon light. From what I understand, they are well insulated, but I've never heard of any natural insolation that effiecient, especially on Earth. They can still search by sight, they don't blend in that well. You have my personal assurance that there will be no forest fires. To prove this, if it does happen, our services will be free of charge and we will repair any damage done to the best of our ability.

How can they not give off heat? In an area that cold, any mamal should stand out like a large neon light. From what I understand, they are well insulated, but I've never heard of any natural insolation that effiecient, especially on Earth. They can still search by sight, they don't blend in that well. You have my personal assurance that there will be no forest fires. To prove this, if it does happen, our services will be free of charge and we will repair any damage done to the best of our ability.

Simple: They're not natural animals.

How can they not give off heat? In an area that cold, any mamal should stand out like a large neon light. From what I understand, they are well insulated, but I've never heard of any natural insolation that effiecient, especially on Earth.

There are many arctic animals that have heat signatures so minimal that they're completely lost in the heat noise of a forest (tree trunks radiate heat as well). In fact, the best modern human-devised insulation doesn't work as well as polar bear fur.

They can still search by sight, they don't blend in that well.

In a snowy forest? They're practically invisible, sir.

At any rate, flying around with fighters and zapping with ray guns sounds expensive and unnecessary. Experienced rangers, baits and traps will get the job done just as well.

hey, all. is there anyone who knows for sure which category my "endangered species protection" proposal fits under? i think that's why it was deleted last time :(

How can they not give off heat? In an area that cold, any mamal should stand out like a large neon light. From what I understand, they are well insulated, but I've never heard of any natural insolation that effiecient, especially on Earth. They can still search by sight, they don't blend in that well. You have my personal assurance that there will be no forest fires. To prove this, if it does happen, our services will be free of charge and we will repair any damage done to the best of our ability.

OOC: Hate to tell you, but this is one of those "weird but true" facts. A researcher looking at polar bears in Alaska took photos of one using IR film. He got mostly blank film with one having a slight puff on it - the bear exhaled.

Polar bears do not show up on IR sensors.

hey, all. is there anyone who knows for sure which category my "endangered species protection" proposal fits under? i think that's why it was deleted last time :(

Moral Decency? As its a restriction of rights?

Moral Decency? As its a restriction of rights?that's what i put it under... but i think it was deleted before it got through its full run... i might try again later...