I wish you good luck with undertaking the monetary challenge of turning them into military vessels.
Advertisement
by WayNeacTia » Fri Dec 13, 2019 11:46 pm
RiderSyl wrote:You'd really think that defenders would communicate with each other about this. I know they're not a hivemind, but at least some level of PR skill would keep Quebecshire and Quebecshire from publically contradicting eac
wait
by Ransium » Fri Dec 20, 2019 9:02 am
by Araraukar » Fri Dec 20, 2019 10:02 am
Ransium wrote:This proposal will be at vote in an hour.
Apologies for absences, non-COVID health issues leave me with very little energy at times.Giovenith wrote:And sorry hun, if you were looking for a forum site where nobody argued, you've come to wrong one.
by Bavmorda » Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:54 pm
by Kenmoria » Fri Dec 20, 2019 12:58 pm
Bavmorda wrote:This resolution violates my nations sovereignty by taking away my rights to police and protect my own waters as I see fit. Furthermore it requires me to release potentially dangerous sensitive information about shipping routes to anyone that wants them. My shipping will be forced into an established route that will make it easier for pirates to find targets. Add to this fact that pirates will have access to detailed maps and charts of my entire coastal system. Shipping in many regions stand to be crippled by this short sighted resolution.
Samhain of Bavmorda
by Terttia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:03 pm
Bavmorda wrote:This resolution violates my nations sovereignty by taking away my rights to police and protect my own waters as I see fit. Furthermore it requires me to release potentially dangerous sensitive information about shipping routes to anyone that wants them. My shipping will be forced into an established route that will make it easier for pirates to find targets. Add to this fact that pirates will have access to detailed maps and charts of my entire coastal system. Shipping in many regions stand to be crippled by this short sighted resolution.
Samhain of Bavmorda
by Saturna1ia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:26 pm
by Australian rePublic » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:30 pm
by Bavmorda » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:32 pm
by Verdant Haven » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:42 pm
Saturna1ia wrote:Question:
Is it a fair assessment that this resolution does not apply to personal, recreational vessels? And if so, even if said recreational vessels are large enough to traverse the oceans/seas between territorial waters?
by Bavmorda » Fri Dec 20, 2019 1:57 pm
Verdant Haven wrote:
The resolution provides no size-based definition, but rather applies quite specifically to commercial vessels, which it defines as "non-military vessels that transport cargo and/or passengers for hire." As such, a personal, recreational vessel of any size would not be subject to this resolution's regulation.
by Kenmoria » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:13 pm
Saturna1ia wrote:Question:
Is it a fair assessment that this resolution does not apply to personal, recreational vessels? And if so, even if said recreational vessels are large enough to traverse the oceans/seas between territorial waters?
by Saturna1ia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:14 pm
by Terttia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:25 pm
Saturna1ia wrote:The biggest concern Saturna1ia has with this resolution is the mandate in Clause 4; Section b.
"have their planned route pre-approved by the member states whose waters they will be traversing,"
It is understandable that member states and their respective ports know when, where, and how many commercial vessels are docking and leaving to manage the shipping lanes within their internal and territorial waters. That said, what is the punishment for commercial vessels that enter a port or territorial water without pre-approval? And what of disputed territorial waters? Does the approval of both member states that make a claim to the waters have to be received? None of these issues are addressed, and so leave even more ambiguity in the already ambiguous field known as maritime law.
by Verdant Haven » Fri Dec 20, 2019 2:27 pm
Bavmorda wrote:This is part of my issue right here...Any boat that carries passengers for hire, There is no limit given. So a fishing vessel can carry passengers for hire! As long as they show that they meet this guideline i must provide them with the maps and charts they need with all reliant information contained within. This is a massive breach of security! A boat scuttled in a strategic location could devastate our national shipping lanes. Like wise undersea topographical maps could reveal sensitive information we do not want released to the public.
by Saturna1ia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:07 pm
Terttia wrote:Disputed waters (I haven’t checked any passed resolutions for this subject; could have been already dealt with) could be a resolution all on its own.
by Bavmorda » Fri Dec 20, 2019 3:11 pm
by Terttia » Fri Dec 20, 2019 11:31 pm
Bavmorda wrote:2. Mandates that member states
a. create and frequently update nautical charts of their territorial waters and exclusive economic zone,
b. share their nautical charts with commercial vessels that have the right to enter these areas;
3. Requires that all commercial vessels registered in a member nation carry and utilize up-to-date nautical charts and nautical instrumentation;
4. Mandates that all crews of commercial vessels registered in a member nation
a. acquire the necessary nautical charts before leaving port,
f. carry nautical charts for the areas they intend to pass through.
The issue with what you say is located right here. You claim I only have to provide simple navigational information. Nothing sensitive, Yet article 2a clearly lays out that I must "Create and frequently update nautical charts of their territorial waters and exclusive economic zone". Article 2b lays out that I must make those charts available to the vessels that have the rights to go there. Article 4a and 4f states that the vessels must acquire the charts before leaving and carry them for areas they intend to pass thru.
So any vessel traveling thru my waters has to have access to this per this resolution. Furthermore I must make this information available to incoming ships that plan to come into my waters as well. That means multiple detailed copies of various areas of my coastal waters floating around the ocean and you want me to take your word that this is not a possible breach in my security? This all must be done because somehow the system we currently employ of GPS, buoys, and water pilots is not sufficient. There are too many areas of this resolution that are not clearly addressed. It needs to be removed and rewritten.
by Weed » Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:55 am
by Waffia » Sat Dec 21, 2019 2:51 am
Weed wrote:"4. Mandates that all crews of commercial vessels registered in a member nation
...
obey the local authorities when it comes to additional temporary regulations applied to all commercial vessels in that area,"
I voted AGAINST as I question the decision not to limit the above line to the regulations of WA Member States or at the very least regulations in compliance with existing WA law. My reading here would seem to indicate that if a Weedian vessel were to sail into a non-member's waters that requires racial segregation, the ship would need to quickly racially segregate for instance. Should have left some room for Member States to require or encourage non-compliance while in non-member's waters. It seems less than ideal for me to ever pass a WA resolution that would seem to protect non-members from member states.
by Sierra Lyricalia » Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:34 am
Bavmorda wrote:2. Mandates that member states
a. create and frequently update nautical charts of their territorial waters and exclusive economic zone,
b. share their nautical charts with commercial vessels that have the right to enter these areas;
3. Requires that all commercial vessels registered in a member nation carry and utilize up-to-date nautical charts and nautical instrumentation;
4. Mandates that all crews of commercial vessels registered in a member nation
a. acquire the necessary nautical charts before leaving port,
f. carry nautical charts for the areas they intend to pass through.
The issue with what you say is located right here. You claim I only have to provide simple navigational information. Nothing sensitive, Yet article 2a clearly lays out that I must "Create and frequently update nautical charts of their territorial waters and exclusive economic zone". Article 2b lays out that I must make those charts available to the vessels that have the rights to go there. Article 4a and 4f states that the vessels must acquire the charts before leaving and carry them for areas they intend to pass thru.
So any vessel traveling thru my waters has to have access to this per this resolution. Furthermore I must make this information available to incoming ships that plan to come into my waters as well. That means multiple detailed copies of various areas of my coastal waters floating around the ocean and you want me to take your word that this is not a possible breach in my security? This all must be done because somehow the system we currently employ of GPS, buoys, and water pilots is not sufficient. There are too many areas of this resolution that are not clearly addressed. It needs to be removed and rewritten.
by New Jaedonstan » Sat Dec 21, 2019 7:56 am
by Bavmorda » Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:09 am
by Terttia » Sat Dec 21, 2019 9:54 am
Bavmorda wrote:I was not aware that G.P.S. was some ancient technology that needed to be bypassed. I am not sure if the august ambassador is aware but there is no chart on earth and no amount of computer assistance that can replace an experienced water pilot. A person trained to handle the challenges and the dangers of his home waters. There are few things in this world more treacherous than the sea and you expect these ships to sail into multiple ports guided by charts that are out of date as soon as they are printed.
You can not update a chart like you can a resume. Every major storm can have an affect as can major flooding of a river system. This resolution locks our nation into an endless cycle of trying to play catch up on something can can never be caught. We might as well be trying to catch the water in our hands. It takes years to make a chart. Our licensed pilots are more reliable as they are more familiar with the waters they travel. No ship captain can do this no matter how many charts he collects.
So to sum up this Resolution, it will do the following:
1. Violate our national sovereignty by directing us to make available charts that may contain sensitive data to any entities requesting it
2. Fail to adequately define what size ship can request this data
3. Force older ships to upgrade constantly or be in breach of legislation
4. Lock member nations into a costly never ending cycle of constantly updating charts that can be out of date before they are printed
5. Place unnecessary burden on small developing nations that can not afford the most up to date equipment
6. Completely ignore the existing laws and procedures currently in place to govern waterborne commerce
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: No registered users
Advertisement