Page 11 of 11

PostPosted: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:09 am
by Bears Armed
STATES that the WAESC will work to keep invasive and non indigenous species out of Biodiversity Sanctuaries so that they cannot damage the biodiversity of the sanctuary.

STATES that should a disease causing agent enter a Sanctuary, infected organisms may not be killed to stop the disease, but will be quarenteened and treated by the WAESC, and only put down if deemed necessary by a certified WAESC veterinarian.

STATES that in the case of parasites that are endangered, a living organism that a parasite resides on cannot be in itself a Sanctuary, though it may reside within one, which allows protection to itself and the parasite, unless the parasite threatens the host organisms life, in which case it is not protected, and the protected host organism will be treated by the WAESC to remove the parasite.


I would suggest that these clauses contradict the rights to control hunting within their territories that member nations are recognised as possessing under 'Sensible Limits on Hunting', clause #1.

PostPosted: Tue Jul 07, 2015 8:04 am
by Percussionland
I'm going to take another less extreme run at this.

PostPosted: Wed Jul 08, 2015 5:34 am
by Percussionland
I am open to any new input or advice.

PostPosted: Mon Jul 13, 2015 1:41 pm
by Whovian Tardisia
Percussionland wrote:I am open to any new input or advice.

While an Internationally recognized wildlife reserve may be a major tourist draw, nations shouldn't be forced to create them. The decision to make a wildlife reserve should be a local one.