Post by Asairia on Apr 29, 2019 14:57:07 GMT
WORLD ASSEMBLY GENERAL ASSEMBLY
REPEAL: "ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTION"
DELEGATE IS VOTING: AGAINST ☒
FINAL RESULTS:
13,539 (82.6%) FOR
2,859 (17.4%) AGAINST
Overview
Repeal: "Endangered Species Protection" seeks to repeal GAR#66, introduced by Burninati0n of The Internationale, primarily due to its inflexibility and ambiguity.
About the Proposal
The author, Ransium of Forest, has submitted the following repeal:
The World Assembly,
Praising the spirit of General Assembly Resolution #66 "Endangered Species Protection” and convinced that multitudes of species have been saved from extinction due to it,
Striving, however, to consistently improve and reduce the ambiguity in existing World Assembly legislation,
Strongly questioning the fact that Endangered Species Protection seemingly only extends most protections to animals, as indicated by "animals", "animal species", and "hunting" being used repeatedly in the resolution, when all biological kingdoms have unique values that would be lost by extinction,
Regretting that the resolution also states that protections need not be extended to certain types of bacteria and viruses (neither of which are animals) creating ambiguity and uncertainty in enforcement as to what forms of life are covered by Endangered Species Protections,
Finding other important terms in the resolution to be used ambiguously, such as the resolution stating that species that WA Endangered Species Committee is responsible for conserving could be "exhibiting repeated numeric decline" a phrase the could pertain to both species experiencing natural population fluctuations and those approaching endangerment; and "pollution" which could be interpreted as narrowly as to mean chemical contaminants found in habitats or as broadly as to include any noise or light impacting the habitat,
While praising the resolution's prohibitions on some actions that are deleterious to endangered species, specifically further habitat loss, habitat pollution, and hunting of endangered species; also noting the resolution does not specifically prohibit other potentially harmful actions such as non-fatal harassment of endangered organisms, the introduction of harmful invasive organisms, and the intentional or accidental disruption of important species activities,
Aware that the resolution focuses on the prevention of further harm to endangered species, while only mentioning potential actions to actively increases species population numbers in the direst circumstances,
Concerned that without a clear active recovery plan, species population levels can remain low indefinitely, leaving a no-win situation of species being at continued risk for extinction and the economically deleterious impact of endangered species protections becoming long term,
Anxious that the binary regulation choice provided for in Endangered Species Protection of species either being endangered and therefore receiving full protection or being fully unprotected lacks flexibility and may create the perverse incentive to forcibly remove species from property before they are found to be endangered so as to avoid future stringent regulations,
Confident that replacement legislation which builds upon the positive legacy of Endangered Species Protection will be put in place rapidly;
Hereby repeals GAR 66: Endangered Species Protection.
Praising the spirit of General Assembly Resolution #66 "Endangered Species Protection” and convinced that multitudes of species have been saved from extinction due to it,
Striving, however, to consistently improve and reduce the ambiguity in existing World Assembly legislation,
Strongly questioning the fact that Endangered Species Protection seemingly only extends most protections to animals, as indicated by "animals", "animal species", and "hunting" being used repeatedly in the resolution, when all biological kingdoms have unique values that would be lost by extinction,
Regretting that the resolution also states that protections need not be extended to certain types of bacteria and viruses (neither of which are animals) creating ambiguity and uncertainty in enforcement as to what forms of life are covered by Endangered Species Protections,
Finding other important terms in the resolution to be used ambiguously, such as the resolution stating that species that WA Endangered Species Committee is responsible for conserving could be "exhibiting repeated numeric decline" a phrase the could pertain to both species experiencing natural population fluctuations and those approaching endangerment; and "pollution" which could be interpreted as narrowly as to mean chemical contaminants found in habitats or as broadly as to include any noise or light impacting the habitat,
While praising the resolution's prohibitions on some actions that are deleterious to endangered species, specifically further habitat loss, habitat pollution, and hunting of endangered species; also noting the resolution does not specifically prohibit other potentially harmful actions such as non-fatal harassment of endangered organisms, the introduction of harmful invasive organisms, and the intentional or accidental disruption of important species activities,
Aware that the resolution focuses on the prevention of further harm to endangered species, while only mentioning potential actions to actively increases species population numbers in the direst circumstances,
Concerned that without a clear active recovery plan, species population levels can remain low indefinitely, leaving a no-win situation of species being at continued risk for extinction and the economically deleterious impact of endangered species protections becoming long term,
Anxious that the binary regulation choice provided for in Endangered Species Protection of species either being endangered and therefore receiving full protection or being fully unprotected lacks flexibility and may create the perverse incentive to forcibly remove species from property before they are found to be endangered so as to avoid future stringent regulations,
Confident that replacement legislation which builds upon the positive legacy of Endangered Species Protection will be put in place rapidly;
Hereby repeals GAR 66: Endangered Species Protection.
My Decision
While I realize I am part of a very, very small crowd voting against this repeal, I am doing so out of my conviction that partial protection is better than no protection, and when it comes to the World Assembly, repeal and replace efforts rarely get passed the repeal stage.
While it is true that the author of this repeal has also drafted a replacement, it's lack of substantial response concerns me. Sure, there are two reasons why this may be so: the first being the repeal hasn't succeeded yet and the second being it may have behind-the-scenes support, but that's not reassuring. Without enough visible support for me to believe there's a strong chance the replacement will survive a vote, let alone gain enough approvals to get there, I simply cannot gamble away the fates of endangered species.
Should this repeal pass, which I fully expect it to, I certainly hope a viable replacement is adopted as soon as possible. In the meantime, I have cast my vote against this resolution.
Current Delegate support at time of publication.