[DRAFT] - Illicit Bushmeat

[Hirota]

Back in the old days, I drafted and submitted a propsal addressing the need for regulation of bushmeat. Alas, it did not go far, mainly because I did not have the time to actually campaign for it. However, I managed to get it to a state which at the time seemed worthy of the old UN's consideration.

I am now keen to begin a new process to see this reviewed by the general assembly, and thus I am submitting this draft for general consideration and improvement.

Since drafting this resolution I have reviewed the following resolutions and cannot see a duplication.

I am currently reviewing this draft to see if it conflicts or duplicates with mutliple resolutions:
Sustainable Fishing Act
Animal Protection Act
Food welfare Act
Food and Drug Standards
Endangered Species Protection
Cultural Heritage Protection
And I presently perceive this to be the largest stumbling block in this drafts way.

Category is likely to be Enviromental > All Businesses - but I am considering Moral Decency (Mild) as suggested by the ambassador for Bears Armed.

This is the second draft following the excellent suggestions from Bears Armed and Corporation de Apple.

The General Assembly,
DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is not traditionally regarded to be an edible animal which is considered a staple within a particular nation, which is considered an endangered species, and/or not subject to any government implemented health standards;

COGNIZANT of the international trade in illicit Bushmeat;

CONCERNED at the impact the illicit Bushmeat trade has on ecology;

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife in some parts of the world, especially endangered wildlife;

MINDFUL of the possibilities of diseases being transmitted to people via Bushmeat, and therefore concerned by the threat to public health;

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat especially when that involves meat from endangered species, should be eradicated;

MINDFUL however of the reliance some people have on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence;

AWARE of the need for controlled culls of certain species in certain situations;

NOTING certain indigenous cultural practices regarding the consumption of Bushmeat, and expressing an intent to respect those practices, subject to the observations made above;

PROHIBITS the sale, export and consumption of illicit Bushmeat;

ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Bushmeat Committee, with a focus on combating the international Bushmeat trade of illegal meats and on preventing the consumption of Bushmeat extranationally,

URGES member states to implement educational programs to highlight to their local populace the threats posed by the Bushmeat trade to health and ecology;

PROPOSES member states strongly consider implementing legislative action to tighten controls for the purposes of monitoring the standards of meat imported into their state, Bushmeat or otherwise;

ENDORSES memberstates rights to perform and allow animal culls of non-endangered, non-sapient species, subject to international law.

CONCERNED at the impact the unregulated Bushmeat trade has on ecology,

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife in some parts of the world, especially endangered wildlife

MINDFUL of the possibilities of diseases being passed to humans via Bushmeat, and concerned by the threat to public health

WELCOMING the local efforts to prevent hunting of non-game animals on a regional basis,

AWARE of the international trade in illicit Bushmeat

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat should be eradicated, especially of endangered species.

MINDFUL of the reliance some have on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence.

MINDFUL of the need for controlled culls of certain species in certain situations.

AWARE of the broad cultural practices present within the membership of the United Nations, and expressing an intent to respect those practices as far as is possible

§ DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is not traditionally regarded to be a game animal (but is nonetheless edible) which is considered an endangered species, or not subject to any government implemented health standards.

§ INVITES member states to collaborate with one another to bring the major benefactors of the illicit international Bushmeat industry to justice through legal means, and to work in collaboration to implement food standards for legitimate bushmeat imported or exported to other nations.

§ URGES member states to implement legislation to make the practice of supplying illicit Bushmeat illegal, especially Bushmeat associated with endangered species.

§ URGES international co-operation to monitor and improve food standards over borders, especially focusing on combating the international Bushmeat trade of illegal meats and providing continuous improvements of legal bushmeat food standards

§ URGES member states to implement educational programs to highlight to their local populace the threats posed by Bushmeat to health and ecology

§ PROPOSES member states strongly consider implementing legislative action to tighten controls for the purposes of monitoring the standards of meat imported into their state, Bushmeat or otherwise.

§ ENDORSES member states rights to perform animal culls of non-endangered species.

Feedback is of course more than welcome.

What is BUSHMEAT? (source)
In Africa (yeah I know - RL Reference), forest is often referred to as 'the bush', thus wildlife and the meat derived from it is referred to as 'bushmeat'. This term applies to all wildlife species, including threatened and endangered, used for meat including: elephant; gorilla; chimpanzee and other primates; forest antelope (duikers); crocodile; porcupine; bush pig; cane rat; pangolin; monitor lizard; guinea fowl; etc.

What is the BUSHMEAT CRISIS? (source)
Though habitat loss is often cited as the primary threat to wildlife, commercial hunting for the meat of wild animals has become the most significant immediate threat to the future of wildlife in Africa and around the world; it has already resulted in widespread local extinctions in Asia and West Africa. This threat to wildlife is a crisis because it is rapidly expanding to countries and species which were previously not at risk, largely due to an increase in commercial logging, with an infrastructure of roads and trucks that links forests and hunters to cities and consumers. The bushmeat crisis is a human tragedy as well: the loss of wildlife threatens the livelihoods and food security of indigenous and rural populations most depend on wildlife as a staple or supplement to their diet, and bushmeat consumption is increasingly linked to deadly diseases like HIV/AIDS, Ebola, and Foot and Mouth disease.

[The Untied States]

I am actually in favor of this. It would help to restrict and stop the illict trade of endangered species - living or otherwise.

[Araraukar]

Before I comment further, am I going to find this text at an online source that concerns real-world bushmeat trade? As in, did you copy this (or most of it) from somewhere?

[Landenburg]

I'm in favor of this.

[Corporation de Apple]

Why don't we cite where we get stuff from?

I like the idea, but what about nations that rely on the export of meats as a major part of their economy? I see you mention 'game animal' but a definition for that can vary greatly depending on the nation in question.

§ URGES member states to implement legislation to make the practice of supplying illicit Bushmeat illegal, especially Bushmeat associated with endangered species.

Isn't that the intent of this proposal, thus rendering that clause null? Also, 95% of this suggests something but fails to actually do it.

[Hirota]

Before I comment further, am I going to find this text at an online source that concerns real-world bushmeat trade? As in, did you copy this (or most of it) from somewhere?

My typical Modus Operandi is to use existing RL legislation as a starting point for my own drafts. It would not shock me if single clauses are found which are similar, but no this is my own work.

If it helps, you can see some of the drafting process from back in 2006 on a now-defunct drafting board. I wish one of those old NS members were still about to get co-authoriship credit. Think Eco might be.

Why don't we cite where we get stuff from?

Because: A) Like I said, this was written a very long time ago - although that does look like a resource I used when drafting.
B) Citations are not required in legislation

Will cite the source in the FAQ's though.

I like the idea, but what about nations that rely on the export of meats as a major part of their economy? I see you mention 'game animal' but a definition for that can vary greatly depending on the nation in question.

Hence the "margin of discretion." It's effectively impossible to list every type of game animal - I could include a definition of what a game animal is (or rather isn't in the case of this proposal), but I know that would lead to objections where nations would say "my nation regularly harvests owls as game animals - this proposal would outlaw that!!!!111oneoneoneone"

Isn't that the intent of this proposal, thus rendering that clause null? Also, 95% of this suggests something but fails to actually do it.

Just because that's the purpose of this draft does not mean it is unworthy of further emphasis.

As for your observation about it suggesting lots but actually doing very little - thats a throw back to the old days where some nations (mainly just me actually) were actually civil enough to suggest things and expect other member states to act in good faith (naive I know).You are quite right that the language needs strengthening.

[Point Breeze]

Being a staunch advocate for conservation and defense of natural resources, I strongly support this proposal in its present form. However, I have a couple of concerns.

First, this is a major issue, and clearly an international one. Thus, this legislation can and deserves to be much stronger. Creation of an international investigative and conservation effort, declaring bushmeat as illegal contraband, prohibiting its passage over international borders, etc. etc. are all measures I would support.

Second, many nations have an indigenous population (or are of an indigenous culture themselves) who may rely on hunter-gatherer lifestyles. Such a society is more likely to engage in unauthorized hunting than others. I would despair to see this resolution become a tool of oppression towards indigenous populations.

[Wheeled States of Bifid]

I am inclined to agree with Mr. Carnegie that stronger wording in regards to international trade and transport of bushmeat would not only be acceptable but preferable.

[Corporation de Apple]

*snip*

The fact that you took the time to address each and every one of my comments in turn actually impresses me. Like I said before, I like it, but it needs quite a bit of strengthening.

THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY,

CONCERNED at the impact the unregulated Bushmeat trade has on ecology,

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife in some parts of the world, especially endangered wildlife

MINDFUL of the possibilities of diseases being passed to humans via Bushmeat, and concerned by the threat to public health

WELCOMING the local efforts to prevent hunting of non-game animals on a regional basis,

AWARE of the international trade in illicit Bushmeat

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat should be eradicated, especially of endangered species.

MINDFUL of the reliance some have on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence.

MINDFUL of the need for controlled culls of certain species in certain situations.

AWARE of the broad cultural practices present within the membership of the United Nations World Assembly, and expressing an intent to respect those practices as far as is possible

§ DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is not traditionally regarded to be an game animal (but is nonetheless edible) edible animal which is considered a staple within a particular nation, which is considered an endangered species, and/or not subject to any government implemented health standards.

§ INVITES member states to collaborate with one another to bring the major benefactors of the illicit international Bushmeat industry to justice through legal means, and to work in collaboration to implement food standards for legitimate bushmeat imported or exported to other nations.
PROHIBITS the sale, extranational export and consumption of bushmeat,

§ URGES member states to implement legislation to make the practice of supplying illicit Bushmeat illegal, especially Bushmeat associated with endangered species.

§ URGES international co-operation to monitor and improve food standards over borders, especially focusing ESTABLISHES the World Assembly Bushmeat Committee, with a focus on combating the international Bushmeat trade of illegal meats and providing continuous improvements of legal bushmeat food standards and on preventing the consumption of Bushmeat extranationally,

§ URGES member states to implement educational programs to highlight to their local populace the threats posed by Bushmeat to health and ecology

§ PROPOSES member states strongly consider implementing legislative action to tighten controls for the purposes of monitoring the standards of meat imported into their state, Bushmeat or otherwise.
§ ENDORSES member states rights to perform animal culls of non-endangered species.

Just some thoughts.

[Bears Armed]

OOC comment

Category is likely to be Enviromental > All Businesses

That is effectively 'Strong' in effects. Is the trade in illicit bushmeat really significant enough, in enough of the WA's members, to justify this? I'd actually argue for 'Moral Decency (Mild') as a more appropriate classification, although I realise that some people here shun that category in horror...

CONCERNED at the impact the unregulated Bushmeat trade has on ecology,

I'd suggest moving your definition of 'Bushmeat' to before this clause.

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife in some parts of the world, especially endangered wildlife

"DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife, including species that are already endangered, in some parts of the world,"

MINDFUL of the possibilities of diseases being passed to humans via Bushmeat, and concerned by the threat to public health

"people" rather than "humans", please.
Are there some words missing from the end of this clause?

WELCOMING the local efforts to prevent hunting of non-game animals on a regional basis,

What local efforts? This looks as though it's referring to some of which we should all already be aware...
Also, I think that a definition of 'game animals' should have been given somewhere before this: In the definition of 'bushmeat' that I've already suggested should be added before an earlier clause, perhaps?
Incidentally, what makes hunting non-'game" animasl inherently worse than hunting traditional 'game' ones? If it's the fact that some cultures have rules about hunting 'game' animals that might not be applied in the case of non-'game' ones, then what about cultures where such rules are weak or lacking? Shouldn't whether or not there are rules to prevent over-hunting of a species matter more than whether or not the species has traditionally been seen as 'game'?
Also, you might run into trouble about using the word "regional".

AWARE of the international trade in illicit Bushmeat

"AWARE that there is international trade in illicit Bushmeat,"

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat should be eradicated, especially of endangered species.

"DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat, especially when that involves meat from endangered species, should be eradicated,"

MINDFUL of the reliance some have on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence.

"MINDFUL however that some people rely on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence,"

MINDFUL of the need for controlled culls of certain species in certain situations.

"MINDFUL" again? Comma rather than full stop at the end.

AWARE of the broad cultural practices present within the membership of the United Nations, and expressing an intent to respect those practices as far as is possible

"World Assembly" rather than "United Nations", now, of course. Semi-colon at the end.

§ DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is not traditionally regarded to be a game animal (but is nonetheless edible) which is considered an endangered species, or not subject to any government implemented health standards.

As already noted, I think that the definition should be at the beginning of the proposal. Also, it definitely needs work.

§ INVITES member states to collaborate with one another to bring the major benefactors of the illicit international Bushmeat industry to justice through legal means, and to work in collaboration to implement food standards for legitimate bushmeat imported or exported to other nations.

I'm dubious about "benefactors" being the appropriate term in this context. Semi-colon rather than full-stop at the end.

§ URGES member states to implement legislation to make the practice of supplying illicit Bushmeat illegal, especially Bushmeat associated with endangered species.

"URGES member states to implement legislation to make the practice of supplying illicit Bushmeat, especially if that meat comes from endangered species, illegal;"
Semi-colon rather than full-stop at the end.

§ URGES international co-operation to monitor and improve food standards over borders, especially focusing on combating the international Bushmeat trade of illegal meats and providing continuous improvements of legal bushmeat food standards

Basically okay, but maybe could be better-worded?
Semi-colon at the end.

§ URGES member states to implement educational programs to highlight to their local populace the threats posed by Bushmeat to health and ecology

"the Bushmeat trade" rather than just "Bushmeat"?
Semi-colon at end.

§ PROPOSES member states strongly consider implementing legislative action to tighten controls for the purposes of monitoring the standards of meat imported into their state, Bushmeat or otherwise.

"PROPOSES that"?
Semi-colon rather than full-stop at the end.

§ ENDORSES member states rights to perform animal culls of non-endangered species.

[/quote]
"ACKNOWLEDGES member states' rights to perform and allow the culling of animals from non-endangered, non-sapient species."
(Even if you don't recognise the RPed existence of any sapients other than Humans,because humans are animals that clause would otherwise endorse their culling...)

[Potted Plants United]

A large potted plant suddenly comes to life, revealing a large leaf curled up to form a cone, from which a somewhat hissing voice can be heard:

"It looks like we need to start acquiring animals specifically for our carnivorous selves, rather than letting them grab any non-sapient one that wanders too close. Incidentally, if you're missing a pet you had with you here in WA headquarters, we have acquired a collar with a name tag on it, further enquiries can be pointed to any speaker plant."

[Hirota]

Ambassadors, thank you for the feedback. I do not have time to address these points at this time, but a cursory scan shows that they appear to be improvements for this draft and I will be spending an appropriate amount of time considering the improvements within the next day.

[Araraukar]

OOC: I'm curious, why did you post a draft that you yourself admit is illegal for contradicting a ton of resolutions? I mean, it's really no use for us to comment on it, when you yourself know it's highly flawed.

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: I'm curious, why did you post a draft that you yourself admit is illegal for contradicting a ton of resolutions? I mean, it's really no use for us to comment on it, when you yourself know it's highly flawed.

OOC: Thats part of the drafting process, as I see it, start with a concept and weeding out the illegal and transforming it into something acceptable. [/response to Araraukar]

(Oh, and by the way, is this where I am supposed to insert my standard GH curmudgeonly objections to anything and everything? at least thats how it appears some here see me)

[Hirota]

OOC: I'm curious, why did you post a draft that you yourself admit is illegal for contradicting a ton of resolutions? I mean, it's really no use for us to comment on it, when you yourself know it's highly flawed.

What I actually said was (including spelling mistake)
"I am currently reviewing this draft to see if it conflicts or duplicates with mutliple resolutions"

I've read through some of the resolutions and cannot see any conflict thus far. However, I felt it important to point out it is a possibility, and it's something I need to look at.

Alternatively, if you've seen a conflict already, please do point it out.

OOC: Thats part of the drafting process, as I see it, start with a concept and weeding out the illegal and transforming it into something acceptable.

This.

(Oh, and by the way, is this where I am supposed to insert my standard GH curmudgeonly objections to anything andf everything? at least thats how it appears some here see me)

But, I was almost looking forward to it!

[Araraukar]

(Oh, and by the way, is this where I am supposed to insert my standard GH curmudgeonly objections to anything and everything? at least thats how it appears some here see me)

(OOC: No, I think that's my job. At least I oppose more things than you. And then they can yell at me for not even being a WA member. )

[Hirota]

Ambassadors, thank you for your patience, draft 2 is up.

[Hirota]

And draft 3 (no changelog - it was simply a couple of changes in grammar apart from as noted below), is up.

Also finished reading through those existing resolutions - I've not seen any resolutions to directly conflict this draft, but to cover any possibility I have added "ENDORSES memberstates rights to perform and allow animal culls of non-endangered, non-sapient species, subject to international law." just to avoid any collision with endangered species protection.

[Icamera]

"Ambassador, I could not fail to disagree with you less regarding your plans to legislate bushmeat. While you have one of your diplomatic assistants try to decipher what on earth I actually said, feel free to peruse my annotated copy of the latest draft:"

DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is not traditionally regarded to be an edible animal which is considered a staple within a particular nation, which is considered an endangered species, and/or not subject to any government implemented health standards;

First things first, I suggest using a bulleted list format for the definition in its current state. For a second there, I was a bit lost as to what exactly was considered "bushmeat"; we don't want voters to be confused at all about what they are supporting. Example:

DEFINES illicit Bushmeat as the hunting of any animal which is:

• Not traditionally regarded to be an edible animal which is a staple within a particular nation
• Considered an endangered species
• Not subject to government implemented health standards

Beyond that, I've got two suggestions for revising this. First, twist the words around a bit so "Bushmeat" is defined as a product rather than an action (necessary because of later clauses talking about sale and export, which wouldn't work if it were defined as "hunting"). Second, the letter of the law doesn't match the spirit of this definition. There's not much of an issue for the first part aside from possible loopholing over "traditionally regarded"; for the other two qualifiers, however, it's important to clarify who or what considers a species endangered and... well, the third is simply too broad (don't forget about laissez-faire, libertarian, and anarchist-leaning nations).

Sorry for the nitpicking, but having an accurate definition is crucial when ensuring that your proposal will have the impact you want it to.

COGNIZANT of the international trade in illicit Bushmeat;

How about throwing in a barb somewhere here to convey the message "Bushmeat = bad" as early in the proposal as possible? You know, something along the lines of "COGNIZANT of the abomination to wildlife that is the international illicit Bushmeat trade" (using different language, of course).

Just an idea to help garner more votes. It's completely fine as is.

DEEPLY CONCERNED that the Bushmeat trade is one of the greatest threats to wildlife in some parts of the world, especially endangered wildlife;

"Deeply concerned" seems like it should replaced with some other phrase. "Noting" or something similar would fit in better with the text of the clause.

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat, especially when that involves meat from endangered species, should be eradicated;

My apologies for the grammar Nazism. Also, this clause overall comes across as a bit choppy... maybe you could look it over again once or twice.

MINDFUL however of the reliance some people have on the Bushmeat trade for subsistence;

AWARE of the need for controlled culls of certain species in certain situations;

NOTING certain indigenous cultural practices regarding the consumption of Bushmeat, and expressing an intent to respect those practices, subject to the observations made above;

Even with those first three acknowledgements, we're still allowing cultural suppression of such peoples. Don't worry, it'll be easy to fix; all you need is a short operative clause.

Feel free to ignore this bit if you deliberately did so to sweeten the deal for NatSovs.

PROPOSES member states strongly consider implementing legislative action to tighten controls for the purposes of monitoring the standards of meat imported into their state, Bushmeat or otherwise;

Not a bad idea, but slightly off-topic.

---

In case you haven't picked up on it, I'm all for the idea behind this proposal -- it's just the technicalities and professionalism that could use tweaking. I'd say you're very close to having this ready for submission.

[Araraukar]

I'd say you're very close to having this ready for submission.[/spoiler]

Would suggest you to wait a week or two to give time to people to comment, once the anti-abortion/anti-gay marriage threads have died down a bit.

[Abacathea]

I'd say you're very close to having this ready for submission.[/spoiler]

Would suggest you to wait a week or two to give time to people to comment, once the anti-abortion/anti-gay marriage threads have died down a bit.

A week? lol that one's only starting to flare up!

[Icamera]

I'd say you're very close to having this ready for submission.

Would suggest you to wait a week or two to give time to people to comment, once the anti-abortion/anti-gay marriage threads have died down a bit.

Exactly. That's the general timescale I'd have in mind for "very close to submitting". There's no such thing as too much feedback, and quorum will be much easier to reach once things die down a bit in the GA.

[Corporation de Apple]

DETERMINED that the international trade in illicit Bushmeat especially when that when such trade involves meat poached, hunted or harvested meat from endangered species, should be eradicated outlawed and punishable by international law;

EDIT: Aaand I forgot a body.
I like the draft two, especially Bears' editss

[Araraukar]

Exactly. That's the general timescale I'd have in mind for "very close to submitting". There's no such thing as too much feedback, and quorum will be much easier to reach once things die down a bit in the GA.

Well actually I would suggest 1-2 months, but I know newish peeps are impatient. That's probably why we have so many repeals.

[Bears Armed]

(OOC: I plan to comment on the current draft, but the NS World Cup will probably keep me too busy to do so for at least a week... and for another week or so after that too, hopefully, if the Bears' team does well...)