[DEFEATED] Fertile Farmland Protection Act

[Louisistan]

Anyway, I think this ruling is further evidence of how NEF is a totally useless resolution that should be repealed

/sign

[Frustrated Franciscans]

Re the legality challenges based on National Economic Freedoms: the player met the technical requirements of that Resolution by describing the hazards of soil depletion. Whether he met the GA's requirements is a call for the GA to make (which you appear to be doing rather emphatically).

OOC: Honestly, I don't see how the only real operative clause: "RESTRICTS professional farmers from planting the same crop in the same field in back-to-back growing seasons so that fertile farmland might be preserved," effectively meets the strength level of a Category: Environmental - Industry Affected: Agriculture resolution. But that's just me. (And no, the last section of Strongly Encourages is window dressing.) But other than starting a rant about how the system is fundamentally flawed and needs to be changed because, well frankly, it's fun to balance yourself on a soapbox, I really don't care.

The Organic Vegan Commune of Frustrated Franciscans
Official Delegation to the World Assembly
“We praise You, Lord, for Sister Death!”
Friar John Sanders, OFM Ambassador and WA representative
Friar Tuck Ferguson, OFM Assistant Ambassador
Brother Maynard, TOR Keeper of the Holy Hand-grenade

After giving this resolution careful consideration, we are voting against this resolution. While we believe in the necessity of good crop rotation, we feel that this is not an international issue. There are many things that are common sense that does not need to be put into WA law (like washing hands before leaving the restroom). We also think the definition of "professional farmer" is stupid. Really a professional farmer is one whose profession is farming?

[Araraukar]

OOC: I still stand by my IC commentary, but OOCly on the illegalities, I'd have to point out that soil depletion would be a good reason to fit NEF's requirements, considering where it can eventually lead (like having to import all your food).

But as this proposal would still make things like orchards or vinyards impossible, I'm fairly confident it'll die a natural death. Maybe then the author will look at feedback provided and ignore Chester long enough to improve on the draft.

[Luxembourgers]

Dear all,

I wish to tell you that I realize the impending fate of my resolution. It will be defeated. I know, and if it isn't it will be repealed. I submitted it too early and I admit that. After the proposal is defeated, I plan to write another draft to solve the numerous problems that have arisen over the elapsed time post-ceding the early submission. I apologize for the mistake I made, and from now on I will take these forums more seriously.

Yours,
Luxembourgers

[Araraukar]

and from now on I will take these forums more seriously.

OOC: Don't take them entirely seriously - taking Chester seriously led you to submitting too early - but do take into account the fact that the in-character multiverse is a much more varied place than the little ball of iron and mud we call Earth.

Also, drop your ambassador into the Strangers' Bar at some point; the only thing taken seriously there, are the drinks.

[Wrapper]

Also, drop your ambassador into the Strangers' Bar at some point; the only thing taken seriously there, are the drinks.

And the karaoke of course!

[Annadelle]

"Although we applaud the respected Ambassador's attempt to protect farmers, we believe such regulation will have particularly devastating effects upon the farming economies of smaller nations and that some nations may live in alternate environments where this is not an issue. Thus, I vote NAY for this resolution."
~Kritoffer Bjorkman

[The Eternal Kawaii]

Dear all,

I wish to tell you that I realize the impending fate of my resolution. It will be defeated. I know, and if it isn't it will be repealed. I submitted it too early and I admit that. After the proposal is defeated, I plan to write another draft to solve the numerous problems that have arisen over the elapsed time post-ceding the early submission. I apologize for the mistake I made, and from now on I will take these forums more seriously.

Yours,
Luxembourgers

We applaud the honesty of the representative from Luxembourgers, and wish them success in their second try here.

[Chester Pearson]

and from now on I will take these forums more seriously.

OOC: Don't take them entirely seriously - taking Chester seriously led you to submitting too early - but do take into account the fact that the in-character multiverse is a much more varied place than the little ball of iron and mud we call Earth.

Also, drop your ambassador into the Strangers' Bar at some point; the only thing taken seriously there, are the drinks.

I'm sorry.... Did I miss the part of the conversation, where I told the author to submit this? I distinctly remember telling the author NOT to submit it, and to use a can of lighter fluid and a match on it. If authors are arrogant enough to submit, and ignore my advice, then they deserve to have their resolution trounced....

[Ardchoille]

It doesn't wipe out an entire category, like UNSA didn't wipe out the Global Disarmament category.

Of course. My comment was about players trying to stretch it that far. But, I concur, /threadjack.

EDIT: @ the Franciscans: strength was discussed, but we are generally reluctant to remove a proposal on strength alone except in extreme disjunction. While discussing it, the mods noted that we don't actually have anything in the category description that conveys the common theory that this category's effects are Significant to Strong. The admins fiddled with some of the stats slightly at the same time as they gave us the new Health category, so we're currently checking details, and one of us will write it up when we confirm. (The proposal argues that soil degradation is happening throughout the Multiverse, and that crop rotation will fix it, so the author's stance would presumably be that the strength fits. This is the sort of thing that should have been sorted out in drafting.)

[Kalifati Arab shqiptar]

The following proposal is up for consideration:

Fertile Farmland Protection Act

Council: General Assembly
Category: Environmental
Industry effected: Agriculture

NOTING that most -- if not all -- WA States rely heavily on professional farmers to grow crops through agricultural means, and deeming it necessary for agriculture to remain intact having realized the benefits to the farmers, the economy, and international trade, but

REALIZING that when the same crop is planted in the same field too frequently, it rapidly depletes necessary nutrients from the soil, causing the soil to become infertile and unable to continue to produce enough crops to benefit anyone,

RELUCTANTLY AWARE that whenever a fertile field is destroyed by any means, a portion of similarly sized area of forest must be deforested in order to replace that field,

BELIEVING it is necessary for fertile farmland to be protected, this resolution hereby:

1. DEFINES a "professional farmer" as a person who is a farmer, planter, or gardener by profession, and farms at least one acre of farmland,

2. RESTRICTS professional farmers from planting the same crop in the same field in back-to-back growing seasons so that fertile farmland might be preserved,

3. ADVISES professional farmers to alternate crops so that a perfectly good field does not go unused,

4. ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Agricultural Association (WAAA) to oversee a agricultural communities and enforce the given guidelines, and

5. STRONGLY ENCOURAGES the World Assembly Forest Commission to consider creating restrictions on the number of acres that can be deforested for agricultural purposes in a given area.

NOTING that most -- if not all -- WA States rely heavily on farmers to grow crops through agricultural means, and deeming it necessary for agriculture to remain intact having realized the benefits to the farmers, the economy, and international trade, but

REALIZING that when the same crop is planted in the same field too frequently, it rapidly depletes necessary nutrients from the soil, causing the soil to become infertile and unable to continue to produce enough crops to benefit anyone,

RELUCTANTLY AWARE that whenever a fertile field is destroyed by any means, a portion of similarly sized area of forest must be deforested in order to replace that field,

BELIEVING it is necessary for fertile farmland to be protected, this resolution hereby:

1. RESTRICTS farmers from planting the same crop in the same field in back-to-back growing seasons so that fertile farmland might be preserved,

2. ADVISES farmers to alternate crops so that a perfectly good field does not go unused,

3. ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Agricultural Association (WAAA) to oversee a agricultural communities and enforce the given guidelines, and

4. STRONGLY ENCOURAGES the World Assembly Forest Commission (created by GAR #291) to consider creating restrictions on the number of acres that can be deforested for agricultural purposes in a given area.

Questions? Concerns? Please leave your comments below. Thanks!

If this act passes , would create civil unrest all over the world. This would be worse than the WTO riots. How did this made it even at the General Assembly

[Ilharn]

The Kingdom of Ilharn shall stand with those opposed with this act.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

But as this proposal would still make things like orchards or vinyards impossible, I'm fairly confident it'll die a natural death. Maybe then the author will look at feedback provided and ignore Chester long enough to improve on the draft.

I had looked at the resolution several times before I made my previous post because I wanted to include that complaint as well, but the resolution is subtle in this manner. The resolutions states, "RESTRICTS professional farmers from planting the same crop in the same field" so that since orchards and vineyards don't technically get "replanted" every year, the resolution doesn't restrict the "harvesting" of the same crop in consecutive years.

But hopefully this will die a natural death.

[Polonia Overlordship]

As a WA marshal for The Pacific, I would like to report that our Delegate, as well as roughly 60% of voting Pacificians, are against this proposal.

[Frustrated Franciscans]

EDIT: @ the Franciscans: strength was discussed, but we are generally reluctant to remove a proposal on strength alone except in extreme disjunction. While discussing it, the mods noted that we don't actually have anything in the category description that conveys the common theory that this category's effects are Significant to Strong. The admins fiddled with some of the stats slightly at the same time as they gave us the new Health category, so we're currently checking details, and one of us will write it up when we confirm. (The proposal argues that soil degradation is happening throughout the Multiverse, and that crop rotation will fix it, so the author's stance would presumably be that the strength fits. This is the sort of thing that should have been sorted out in drafting.)

I agree, I don't think this is enough to give a MODLY veto to, but it's a rather disturbing trend that has been going on for ages with regards to writing resolutions to category and strength. Technically the resolution description is "A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry." So the first question that comes up in my mind his, "how is agriculture negatively impacted by this resolution." Well, it's not. This is a win/win for agriculture. So the question is whether the "STRONGLY ENCOURAGES" clause (which is weak at best) even offsets the advantage to the industry by using crop rotation. I don't think it does, so this is still a win/win for the industry.

Except that's not what is going to happen. The industry will be impacted. A little or a lot isn't the issue here, but it will be impacted and impacted negatively. That's what annoys me.

[Nucoclan]

EDIT: @ the Franciscans: strength was discussed, but we are generally reluctant to remove a proposal on strength alone except in extreme disjunction. While discussing it, the mods noted that we don't actually have anything in the category description that conveys the common theory that this category's effects are Significant to Strong. The admins fiddled with some of the stats slightly at the same time as they gave us the new Health category, so we're currently checking details, and one of us will write it up when we confirm. (The proposal argues that soil degradation is happening throughout the Multiverse, and that crop rotation will fix it, so the author's stance would presumably be that the strength fits. This is the sort of thing that should have been sorted out in drafting.)

I agree, I don't think this is enough to give a MODLY veto to, but it's a rather disturbing trend that has been going on for ages with regards to writing resolutions to category and strength. Technically the resolution description is "A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry." So the first question that comes up in my mind his, "how is agriculture negatively impacted by this resolution." Well, it's not. This is a win/win for agriculture. So the question is whether the "STRONGLY ENCOURAGES" clause (which is weak at best) even offsets the advantage to the industry by using crop rotation. I don't think it does, so this is still a win/win for the industry.

Except that's not what is going to happen. The industry will be impacted. A little or a lot isn't the issue here, but it will be impacted and impacted negatively. That's what annoys me.

The author did state that he/she will do a re draft and fix the problems.

[Burtonia WA Embassy]

So the first question that comes up in my mind his, "how is agriculture negatively impacted by this resolution." Well, it's not. This is a win/win for agriculture.

It is not a win-win for agriculture. The resolution ignores situations where the soil can be replenished by natural (other ambassadors have mentioned the Nile's annual flooding) or artificial means, as well as situations where its acceptable to plant the more in-demand crop for several years in row and rotate less frequently. This resolution would force many farmers to do things less efficiently and plant less valuable crops more often than necessary.

In situations where the proposal's 1:1 ratio happens to be ideal, farmers and/or their local & national governments have enough incentive to preserve the farmland without WA micromanagement. Agricultural production on that land is, after all, their source of income.

[Mousebumples]

In accordance with a 0-11 vote on our regional forums, I have registered my vote AGAINST on behalf of Europeia.

We feel that the subject of crop rotation is sufficiently covered by the Food Welfare Act and that this proposal fails to add anything substantial to the annals of WA legislation, which would merit its passage. It's possible that this topic could be expanded into a worthwhile resolution; however, the current version is in need of substantial revision to be considered palatable.

[The Shadow Brotherhood]

Agenda 21? How about no.

[The Dark Star Republic]

This doesn't bear any relation to Agenda 21, whose non-binding agricultural policies are much more nuanced.

[Nordenwald]

Of course I am interested in drafting an effective proposal! Maybe you don't like it, but after 1 hour, I already have 1/6 of the approvals I need, so apparently some people do.

Yeah... from the Approve Everything Brigade^TM, a couple raider puppet nations, and Ambassador Pearson, who would love to see this come to vote and fail in record-breaking fashion, no doubt.

-Who is the Approve Everything Brigade^TM?

-And Chester Pearson, while a certainly am not a 'regular' in GA, I feel like I should start using your policy as well (pissing and all).

-Needless to say, FIRMLY AGAINST.

[Normlpeople]

-Who is the Approve Everything Brigade^TM?

OOC: Also known as the rubber stamp brigade, they are a group that approves literally every proposal, without reading it, illegal or not. There is a sub-group of this that will approve any proposal in certain categories without exception.

-And Chester Pearson, while a certainly am not a 'regular' in GA, I feel like I should start using your policy as well (pissing and all).

OOC: Perhaps it was out of frustration. Any regular here has seen this song and dance, a newbie comes in with the greatest proposal ever, rejects any and all advice or reason as to why it is not, rams it to vote, brags about it, and then gets to watch it get destroyed.

In this case, a telegram campaign was used, Chesters endorsement did not matter. Also in this case, the author has posted that they realize the mistake, which shows some maturity not usually seen in these cases. I do await the next draft.

-Needless to say, FIRMLY AGAINST.

[/quote]
IC: Clover stands "While its pointless to say it given the vote count, I agree with your position on this draft"

[Nordenwald]

-Who is the Approve Everything Brigade^TM?

OOC: Also known as the rubber stamp brigade, they are a group that approves literally every proposal, without reading it, illegal or not. There is a sub-group of this that will approve any proposal in certain categories without exception.

But who specifically?

-And Chester Pearson, while a certainly am not a 'regular' in GA, I feel like I should start using your policy as well (pissing and all).

OOC: Perhaps it was out of frustration. Any regular here has seen this song and dance, a newbie comes in with the greatest proposal ever, rejects any and all advice or reason as to why it is not, rams it to vote, brags about it, and then gets to watch it get destroyed.

In this case, a telegram campaign was used, Chester's endorsement did not matter. Also in this case, the author has posted that they realize the mistake, which shows some maturity not usually seen in these cases. I do await the next draft. [/quote]

I actually didn't see the author's post until later. My error.

-Needless to say, FIRMLY AGAINST.

IC: Clover stands "While its pointless to say it given the vote count, I agree with your position on this draft"

Nifty.

[Chester Pearson]

Fertile Farmland Protection" was defeated 6,237 votes to 2,793

[Luxembourgers]

Redraft coming soon! I'll be more patient this time. Also researching some other potential topics as well.