NationStates Jolt Archive

==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. 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: Hey, how should one go about getting support for this?)

OOC: Ask someone who's been here a while for a list of delegates who voted on a recent resolution, unless you already have such a list. Telegram them.

IC:

Krioval is currently withholding approval pending the debate.

(OOC: Yeah, i had a list of those who supported it the first time and telegrammed them... but 20 isn't gonna cut it. LOL.)

IC:Krioval is currently withholding approval pending the debate.Does the representative from Krioval have any specific qualms regarding such a proposal?

In truth, Krioval doesn't much go in for environmental proposals, barring some critical need for them. Most of our "environment" is urban, and we'd probably end up spending a lot of money out-of-pocket to cover a policy that barely affects Krioval in the first place. More likely still, economic growth would slow. So we're waiting to see whether this is critical for us or whether we can safely pass this one by.

are there really no plants nor animals on which krioval's economy depends on? for food, medicine, anything? if there were to be some lethal disease sweeping across the NS world, and the plant which contained the cure was nearing extinction, surely you would want the plant preserved in case the disease were to show up in the future, right? and if all plants and animals were to go extinct, what would there be to eat?

"Seeks to" means "doesn't actually do anything". A bit stronger language would be called for.

We would support this, as it does not unduly infringe with any basic requirement, and we do not hold environmental resolutions in disfavor.

We also would give justice to the idea of medicinal herbs and the like - often in strange locations, such as the superior antipyretic which can be distilled from the venom of a centipede which is found only in our cities upon Manium. As such, we would wonder if Krioval has completely considered its ecosystem, and the possible business opportunities found... underfoot?

We attempt to maintain the ecosystems in and around any new colonies we establish, but Krioval-on-Earth consists of a small land area and tons of people who aren't willing to go off into space. We have 200 million people in Torokara alone. There wasn't much going on in terms of environmental balance since the industrialization started over sixty years ago, and while we're not thrilled at some of the acts committed in the name of progress, we're left with a massive population and little habitable land. A good deal of agriculture is done either off-world, in Earth orbit, or underground/underwater. When we annex another island (about every two or three years, and through non-violent means), we attempt to preserve most of what we find there.

Still, Krioval doesn't worry all that much about endangered species, given our abilities in biology and other technologies, as well as our commitment to industry.

This is a damn good proposal, Myxx. I wish you luck. :)

This is a damn good proposal, Myxx. I wish you luck. :)Thanx... I'll need it. I'm going through TG'ing delegates... seems like the most efficient way to go about it. Did a bunch at random... got through about one-tenth of the list. TG'd maybe... 50-70 tonight.

==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. 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: Hey, how should one go about getting support for this?)

First, I must inform you that indigenous peoples living elsewhere may have to rely on eating and hunting such species, and I strongly support their right to self-subsistance.

While it isn't mentioned, I suspect this bill may also limit our economic expansion and manufacturing, as well as agriculture.

For these reasons, I oppose your legislation.

--Welsh

The UN delegacy for Kreitzmoorland has submitted its approval of this legislation. We wish to thank Myxx for solidfying this important regulation.

OOC: If you need help TGing delegates, send me a list and the letter, and I can do some.

This proposal is a threat to jobs, stability and economic growth.

For that reason, i have no doubt whatsoever it will passed! :confused:

First, I must inform you that indigenous peoples living elsewhere may have to rely on eating and hunting such species, and I strongly support their right to self-subsistance.And it is for this reason that protecting such species is a plus. Should these indigenous peoples eliminate the species, then they too would be eliminated. This isn't totally preventing people from killing said species. Rather, it is regulating and limiting their death so that the species may flourish in the future so it may be hunted without fear of its extinction.

While it isn't mentioned, I suspect this bill may also limit our economic expansion and manufacturing, as well as agriculture.On what grounds do you base these suspicions? It's a given that in order to gain something, we must sacrifice something else—that comes with EVERY resolution. But the price here cannot be that great.

For these reasons, I oppose your legislation. I'm sorry to hear. Hopefully you will reconsider, but I can't force you to.

This proposal is a threat to jobs, stability and economic growth.On what grounds do you base these accusations?

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.
That would be costly and time-consuming. A comitee would have to check animal numbers for several years to set standards and make sure that no nation is evading the law.

* There is a demand by an intelligent people to preserve said species.
What defines an intelligent person? Does that include the mentally disabled, and how many must demand the preservation of the species?

* Said species is NOT a threat to the existence of another species, especially those intelligent species with basic rights.
Not a threat to other species? This is the animal kingdom, and plenty of endangered species will have to eat others to survive. Sadly, animals introduced into MLSR (the giant brown rat) have begun to kill off many species of mouse and fowl. The world ecology is not stable, and thousands of animals are at risk from not only humans.

I agree on the principals of this proposal, but i will only vote for it if you patch up the gaps.

I approved it the first time while I was still a delagate, sadly, I left that region today and can't approve anymore. I'll still vote for it though. Good luck.

"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."

That would be costly and time-consuming. A comitee would have to check animal numbers for several years to set standards and make sure that no nation is evading the law.Why yes, they would. The only way to ensure that a law be enforced is to check that people aren't going against it. I can't just say "okay, we trust everyone to keep their species alive". I suppose it should have been mentioned, but yeah, that seems like that's what would need to be done; I can think of no better way at the moment."There is a demand by an intelligent people to preserve said species."

What defines an intelligent person? Does that include the mentally disabled, and how many must demand the preservation of the species?I said "a demand". Assuming that there is someone who would wish for every animal to be kept alive—some animal/plant activist or something—then I see no problem in keeping EVERY species from going extinct (assuming they have a legit reason as to why it should be preserved; then again, one could argue, what right do we have to kill it off?). Now, this doesn't mean that no plants/animals may be killed (because most civilizations rely on them for survival, right?). This just means that steps must be taken to protect the species as a whole and to make sure that the species doesn't go extinct. And as for a definition of "intelligent people"... I believe I stated it as "intelligent peoples with basic rights"; I couldn't say "human rights" because not every nation in the NS world is human. This was the best I could say it. Those who are mentally disabled have a 'distorted' (for lack of a better word) view of reality and their opinions really cannot be taken as seriously, HOWEVER, if they are capable of making a legit claim as to why a species should be preserved, then by all means, preserve it."Said species is NOT a threat to the existence of another species, especially those intelligent species with basic rights."

Not a threat to other species? This is the animal kingdom, and plenty of endangered species will have to eat others to survive. Sadly, animals introduced into MLSR (the giant brown rat) have begun to kill off many species of mouse and fowl. The world ecology is not stable, and thousands of animals are at risk from not only humans.If a species is a threat to the existence of another species, then it is not covered by said resolution. And if the citizens of MLSR are reliant upon the animals being killed, then they too are endangered by the existence of the giant brown rats. Therefore, this resolution would not prevent the giant brown rat from being exterminated from MLSR (and I'm now seeing why people argued that something about an animal/plant being non-native to a region should have been factored in) unless some species relied on it to survive. Now, you could get all into detail saying "well, if species 1 is a threat to the existence species 2 (as a whole), and we kill off species 1, then while species 2 flourishes, species 3 dies off because it relied upon species 1". That's getting really technical and nit-picky; someone would have to decide which species is more important.I agree on the principals of this proposal, but i will only vote for it if you patch up the gaps.Hope this cleared some things up, for better or worse.