NationStates Jolt Archive

ENDANGERED ARCTIC WILDLIFE PROTECTION ACT

The United Nations,

NOTING the destruction of arctic icecaps, such as has happened over the course of the last several decades, especially citing the years of 2004 through present day

ADMITTING that no amount of argument over whether or not this trend is a natural process or triggered by artificial processes will solve the problems at hand

REALIZING the value of the worlds arctic wildlife, for both zoological science, and the enjoyment of future generations

RECOGNIZING that all arctic wildlife, especially the Polar Bear, is in danger of vanishing from the world, due to widespread habitat loss, whether this loss is through natural or artificial means

FURTHER RECOGNIZING the rights of Native Indigenous Peoples to continue their present hunting practices as a continuation of a traditional way of life.

DEFINES for the purpose of this Act, “Endangered Arctic Wildlife” as any wildlife living in either the Arctic or Antarctic regions which is in real danger of becoming extinct within the next 75 (seventy-five) years, if there is no improvement of the current Birth/Death Ratio

FURTHER DEFINES Improvement of Birth/Death Ratio as a trend in the ratio towards either increasing or maintaining the current population of a species. This entails a ratio of either Greater Than or Equal to 1 (one) Birth Per Death.

HEREBY RESOLVES that Endangered Arctic Wildlife, now more than ever, needs protecting. This is to be implemented by banning, and further penalizing, the hunting for sport of Endangered Arctic Wildlife, except as needed for sustenance by Native Indigenous Peoples of Arctic areas for the continuation of their traditional way of life.

FURTHER RESOLVES to assist Nations housing arctic wildlife in their zoos or zoological research facilities, by databasing the known lineages of protected captive arctic wildlife, and promoting a "breeding exchange" program, so as to ensure the genetic stability of the protected species as best as is possible. This program would use the said database as a guide for transferring animals from facility to facility; where their breeding will best serve the genetic stability of the species.

PROMOTES the building of humane facilities in nations which choose to participate, that these facilities must resemble the natural habitat of the captive animal as best as is possible, and provide for the physiological and psychological well being of the captive animals, and to be staffed by trained zoological professionals

SO THAT the future generations of the world may see and experience arctic wildlife, in all it's beauty, for many generations to come.


_____________________________________

Also, what industry should it affect?
Thank you for your time and support.
--MacDraiocht

Keep your filthy hands off our exploding penguins!

Respectfully,
Sheik Nadnerb bin Cluich
Cluichstani Ambassador to the UN

(Sadly perhaps,) The NS Polar regions are heavily populated by nations, and thus it is difficult to make a convincing case for any sort of protection above and beyond that found in other regions.

(Sadly perhaps,) The NS Polar regions are heavily populated by nations, and thus it is difficult to make a convincing case for any sort of protection above and beyond that found in other regions.

Though I must applaud the fairly well-laid out attempt.

Though I must applaud the fairly well-laid out attempt.Absolutely, and I hope MacDraiocht will contribute in the future :)

I appreciate your Help, your Honesty, and your Support.

I also am flattered at your praise. As this was my first ever draft, I was deeply afraid of getting it COMPLETELY wrong. :eek:

Anyways, I look forward to further serving the UN in any way that I can.

--Sir Michael McCullough
--The People and Church of MacDraiocht

I Corrected and Clarified the proposal, to make it clear that the proposal only protects endangered arctic wildlife, and as such, doesn't affect the thriving populations, such as the Antarctic Oasis's exploding penguin at all.

So, I added Some definitions, and a few words here and there were corrected, added, or changed (there was a typo).

Tell me if it would now be more acceptable.

I Edited the original post, the new parts are in BOLD.

Again, thank you for all your support and time!

--MacDraiocht

This appears to address a REAL LIFE situation that may or may not exist in NationStates.

I see nothing in the resolution that tells me if any of the situations addressed in the resolution even exist in NationStates.

What NS wildlife is threatened and what NS Nations are responsible? What actions have they taken to address this?

I Corrected and Clarified the proposal, to make it clear that the proposal only protects endangered arctic wildlife, and as such, doesn't affect the thriving populations, such as the Antarctic Oasis's exploding penguin at all.

So, I added Some definitions, and a few words here and there were corrected, added, or changed (there was a typo).

Tell me if it would now be more acceptable.

I Edited the original post, the new parts are in BOLD.

Again, thank you for all your support and time!

--MacDraiocht

And all endangered species are protected under UNCoESB (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9692854&postcount=120), so your proposal is now redundant.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

That's great that you want to do something, but HOW?
How will you protect them? How will you penalize people for hunting arctic animals? How will you enforce laws that you enact? What will your laws require in terms of funding? Will that be a major obstacle?
There are too many questions unanswered for this to be a legitimate proposition.

And all endangered species are protected under UNCoESB (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=9692854&postcount=120), so your proposal is now redundant.

Bob Flibble
UN Representative

Noted, I hadn't noticed the "Breeding and Capture" part of that resolution, which was the main drive behind this one, to form a database to assist in bloodline renewal.

Still, couldn't you have broken it to me a little more gently? :(

As for Harangesthenes' inquires; I haven't the slightest idea about how to go about any of that, I'm afraid, which is part of the reason I posted it here, hoping someone could help.

Humbly Yours,
--MacDraiocht

Still, couldn't you have broken it to me a little more gently? :(

Trust me, for my boss, that was gentle.

Timothy Schmidt
Bob Flibble's PA

http://pic40.picturetrail.com/VOL291/1756382/5512569/t-217619197.jpg The Conch Republic of Retired Werepenguins http://pic40.picturetrail.com/VOL291/1756382/3421442/220386035.jpg

On behalf of the Conch Republic of Retired Werepenguins, in the Antarctic Pardise region I must object to a regional solution to a local problem. Even if the original author cannot tell the difference between the antarctic and the arctic, what about all those lands between the poles? What about the Blue-footed Booby (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Footed_Booby)? Think about the blue-footed boobies!

Thank you.

As for Harangesthenes' inquires; I haven't the slightest idea about how to go about any of that, I'm afraid, which is part of the reason I posted it here, hoping someone could help.

Humbly Yours,
--MacDraiocht

"Going about that" is the whole reason of even drafting a UN resolution.
Simply stating in an official UN resolution that "Arctic wildlife is endangered, here is the definition of Arctic wildlife and endangered, and they are now under our protection" does not do anything. What does that change? In order for a resolution to be effective, you need ways to implement and enforce your resolution. You also need to provide solutions for potential financial problems.

"Going about that" is the whole reason of even drafting a UN resolution.
Simply stating in an official UN resolution that "Arctic wildlife is endangered, here is the definition of Arctic wildlife and endangered, and they are now under our protection" does not do anything. What does that change? In order for a resolution to be effective, you need ways to implement and enforce your resolution. You also need to provide solutions for potential financial problems.


However, posting the current form of a proposal, and clearly labelling it "draft", is an accepted and legitimate way of "going about that". One is inviting helpful contributions from one's fellows.

The representative of Harangesthenes is on the right track in highlighting the faults he sees in the proposal. One would point out, though, that the enforcement of UN resolutions is in the capable and inescapable hands of the UN Gnomes. As the number of words allowed in a proposal is limited, such details are usually taken as understood by the international community.

One might suggest, too, that it is helpful, when discussing the wording of a proposal, to provide alternatives, replacements or additions. Not obligatory, of course, when one is not the writer of the proposal. All the same, if one can rough out one's suggestions in a revised, replacement or additional clause or phrase, it gives other delegates a clearer idea of one's point and helps drafting go faster.

One wishes to add that the representative of MacDraiocht has done a better job of this than one, oneself, has ever done, and after such an auspicious beginning has no reason to sign himself "humbly yours".

Nor is one saying this just because he is, from his name, a fellow Celt.

However, one is getting bloody tired of this affected variation of one's accepted mode of speech, which one adopted in order to avoid giving the offensive impression that one was using the Royal "we", as one is staunchly republican (though not Republican), and ever has been.

Therefore one is going to adjourn to the Strangers' Bar and have one, or two, or maybe even many.
______________________________________
Dicey Reilly, Co-President of Ardchoille.