[Legality Challenge]Protecting Native Prairies and Grassland

[First Nightmare]

Challenged proposal:

The World Assembly,

Recognizing the importance of high-quality habitats in the protection of ecosystems;

Perceiving that tall grass prairies play an important ecological function by filtering pesticides, nutrients, and bacteria from agricultural runoff, as well as preventing soil erosion by establishing deep root systems;

Noticing that tall grass prairies support a wide range of biodiversity, often including plant, insect, large mammal, and prominent keystone species that may not be present in other ecosystems;

Noting that tall grass prairies are often desirable for conversion to agricultural purposes, due to high nutrient levels in the soil, moderate levels of rainfall, and a lack of trees;

Lamenting that only a tiny fraction of tall grass prairies remain today;

Observing that, in many WA member nations, the conversion of land for agriculture has severely decreased the abundance of tall grass prairies, leading to a reduction in biodiversity among pollinators;

Troubled that a lack of biodiversity among pollinators may be detrimental to agriculture by creating, in many cases, an unstable 1 to 1 relationship between crop yield and a single pollinator species, potentially collapsing the agricultural industry of some nations, should the pollinator become extinct; and

Concerned that failing to protect native prairies will lead to the extinction of several currently endangered species, many of which rely heavily on tall grass prairies;

Hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. ‘tall grass prairie’ as a biome featuring the dominance of tall grass species, averaging greater than 1.5 meters in height, moderate levels of annual rainfall, and the presence of periodic wildfires, with period between combustion exceeding 1 year, but not more than 20 years, to prevent the encroachment of saplings and invasive plant species;
      
   2. ‘pollinators’ as species that frequently spread pollen between the male and female components of a plant species, allowing said plants to fertilize the female ovules for reproduction; and
      
   3. ‘land development’ as any sapient activity which alters a landscape from its naturally occurring form and does not allow the landscape to recover to its naturally occurring form within a period of 5 years (e.g. does not include controlled burns);
2. Tasks the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) with the following:
   
   1. researching the historical prevalence of tall grass prairies in all WA member nations;
      
   2. determining the impact that agriculture and land development has had on the decline of tall grass prairies and the loss of pollinators in all WA member nations;
      
   3. performing ecological surveys to assess the feasibility of restoring tall grass prairies in nations with significantly diminished tall grass prairie ranges;
      
   4. researching methods and creating guidelines for maintaining tall grass prairies in areas where periodic controlled burns have the potential to be ecologically damaging;
      
   5. communicating their findings with all WA member nations; and
      
   6. assisting member nations in conducting independent research into native tall grass prairies when adequate resources are lacking;
3. Mandates that all member nations:
   
   1. determine areas where tall grass prairies currently exist within their borders;
      
   2. conduct environmental impact studies to determine the effect of any land development within 5 kilometers of areas recognized as containing tall grass prairies;
      
   3. share raw data on all research pertaining to tall grass prairies with the WASP;
      
   4. maintain current tall grass prairies by:
      
      1. performing periodic controlled burns when it is ecologically in the best interest of the prairie and the surrounding area and unlikely to lead to the development of a wildfire, or else following the guidance set forth by the WASP in clause 2d;
         
      2. preventing land development for any purpose in tall grass prairies;
         
      3. preventing human activities that have been found to be detrimental to the ecosystem, according to clause 3b, in the areas surrounding tall grass prairies; and
   5. record all native multicellular species found to exist within a tall grass prairie, and collect seed samples from all native prairie plants; and
4. Strongly Recommends that member nations:
   
   1. work to restore and maintain tall grass prairies in all ecologically feasible areas, as determined by the findings of the WASP;
      
   2. create economic incentives for private entities to restore and maintain tall grass prairies when direct government action is infeasible; and
      
   3. research methods of reducing land use and pollution associated with agriculture.

Debate Thread:
https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=502254

Rules potentially violated:

Contradiction: From the verb 'to contradict' - to state opposite or deny a concept or idea. Proposals which conflict with explicit clauses within an active resolution will be removed.

Possibly contradicted resolution(s):General Assembly Resolution 499; Access to Abortion
Access to Abortion:

Clinics. WA Choice Plus is established and may construct, per section 5, clinics with funds assessed by the General Accounting Office from members in which there does not exist, in the view of the WACC, adequate access to abortion. Such clinics shall offer free and safe abortions to any recipient bona fide. All members must, however, contribute separately to WA Choice Plus in proportion to expenses incurred within their jurisdiction at such clinics for their upkeep and maintenance.

Members must arrange fully subsidised travel for any recipient bona fide, and one person of their choice, to receive care offered by such a clinic if abortion services are not speedily accessible. No limitation, except to prohibit travel to nations in which there is an on-going armed conflict, may be enforced by a member on a person's ability to exit a member for purposes of travelling to a clinic unless permitted by resolution.

Clinics shall provide free healthcare and counselling for expectant parents as well as free contraceptives and abortifacients to any address serviceable by post within a member.

Clinic lease terms. Any member may request the construction of section 4 clinics if they can show to the WACC that construction would expand access to abortion in an area where it is inadequate. The clinics will be built on land donated by members where the member doing so grants to the clinic a ten-year renewable lease in which no (a) direct tax or (b) indirect tax in excess of one per cent may be collected, along with the condition, reinforced by private contract, that upon disestablishment of the clinic, the assignee or seizer must remit to WA Choice Plus the fair market value of the improvements to that land.

This resolution would - in member nations exclusively consisting of tall grass prairies - prevent WA Choice Plus from constructing clinics (clinic construction does not allow the land to be back in its original state in 5 years - that's impossible).
It would prevent member nations from requesting the construction of clinics if the areas where access to abortion is inadequate consists solely of not easily accessible
tall grass prairies(lease term 10 years).

[Separatist Peoples]

The challenged resolution prevents member states from such development. Not the WA. WA Choice Plus is the entity constructing these clinics. It's a narrow distinction that saves the target proposal.

[First Nightmare]

The challenged resolution prevents member states from such development. Not the WA. WA Choice Plus is the entity constructing these clinics. It's a narrow distinction that saves the target proposal.

This is false.

Mandates that all member nations:

determine areas where tall grass prairies currently exist within their borders;

conduct environmental impact studies to determine the effect of any land development within 5 kilometers of areas recognized as containing tall grass prairies;

share raw data on all research pertaining to tall grass prairies with the WASP;

maintain current tall grass prairies by:

performing periodic controlled burns when it is ecologically in the best interest of the prairie and the surrounding area and unlikely to lead to the development of a wildfire, or else following the guidance set forth by the WASP in clause 2d;

preventing land development for any purpose in tall grass prairies;

It does not merely prevent member states from developing. It mandates member states to prevent development.

[Island Girl Herby]

Well now, this is a novel argument. And I hate to disagree with CDSP (okay that’s a lie, I love to disagree with CDSP, I just don’t get to do it often), but the mandate says that nations must prevent land development for any purpose in tall grass prairies. Seems like anti-abortion regimes have a legal loophole here to prevent the WA from building any clinics, all they have up do is grow some grass up to a certain length and they can prevent construction.

[Separatist Peoples]

The challenged resolution prevents member states from such development. Not the WA. WA Choice Plus is the entity constructing these clinics. It's a narrow distinction that saves the target proposal.

This is false.

Mandates that all member nations:

determine areas where tall grass prairies currently exist within their borders;

conduct environmental impact studies to determine the effect of any land development within 5 kilometers of areas recognized as containing tall grass prairies;

share raw data on all research pertaining to tall grass prairies with the WASP;

maintain current tall grass prairies by:

performing periodic controlled burns when it is ecologically in the best interest of the prairie and the surrounding area and unlikely to lead to the development of a wildfire, or else following the guidance set forth by the WASP in clause 2d;

preventing land development for any purpose in tall grass prairies;

It does not merely prevent member states from developing. It mandates member states to prevent development.

Donations of land to the WA are not, ipso facto, development. That the WA proceeds to develop is beyond the control of members.

This is a nonviable challenge.

[Sierra Lyricalia]

Challenged proposal:

The World Assembly,

Recognizing the importance of high-quality habitats in the protection of ecosystems;

Perceiving that tall grass prairies play an important ecological function by filtering pesticides, nutrients, and bacteria from agricultural runoff, as well as preventing soil erosion by establishing deep root systems;

Noticing that tall grass prairies support a wide range of biodiversity, often including plant, insect, large mammal, and prominent keystone species that may not be present in other ecosystems;

Noting that tall grass prairies are often desirable for conversion to agricultural purposes, due to high nutrient levels in the soil, moderate levels of rainfall, and a lack of trees;

Lamenting that only a tiny fraction of tall grass prairies remain today;

Observing that, in many WA member nations, the conversion of land for agriculture has severely decreased the abundance of tall grass prairies, leading to a reduction in biodiversity among pollinators;

Troubled that a lack of biodiversity among pollinators may be detrimental to agriculture by creating, in many cases, an unstable 1 to 1 relationship between crop yield and a single pollinator species, potentially collapsing the agricultural industry of some nations, should the pollinator become extinct; and

Concerned that failing to protect native prairies will lead to the extinction of several currently endangered species, many of which rely heavily on tall grass prairies;

Hereby:

1. Defines for the purposes of this resolution:
   
   1. ‘tall grass prairie’ as a biome featuring the dominance of tall grass species, averaging greater than 1.5 meters in height, moderate levels of annual rainfall, and the presence of periodic wildfires, with period between combustion exceeding 1 year, but not more than 20 years, to prevent the encroachment of saplings and invasive plant species;
      
   2. ‘pollinators’ as species that frequently spread pollen between the male and female components of a plant species, allowing said plants to fertilize the female ovules for reproduction; and
      
   3. ‘land development’ as any sapient activity which alters a landscape from its naturally occurring form and does not allow the landscape to recover to its naturally occurring form within a period of 5 years (e.g. does not include controlled burns);
2. Tasks the World Assembly Science Program (WASP) with the following:
   
   1. researching the historical prevalence of tall grass prairies in all WA member nations;
      
   2. determining the impact that agriculture and land development has had on the decline of tall grass prairies and the loss of pollinators in all WA member nations;
      
   3. performing ecological surveys to assess the feasibility of restoring tall grass prairies in nations with significantly diminished tall grass prairie ranges;
      
   4. researching methods and creating guidelines for maintaining tall grass prairies in areas where periodic controlled burns have the potential to be ecologically damaging;
      
   5. communicating their findings with all WA member nations; and
      
   6. assisting member nations in conducting independent research into native tall grass prairies when adequate resources are lacking;
3. Mandates that all member nations:
   
   1. determine areas where tall grass prairies currently exist within their borders;
      
   2. conduct environmental impact studies to determine the effect of any land development within 5 kilometers of areas recognized as containing tall grass prairies;
      
   3. share raw data on all research pertaining to tall grass prairies with the WASP;
      
   4. maintain current tall grass prairies by:
      
      1. performing periodic controlled burns when it is ecologically in the best interest of the prairie and the surrounding area and unlikely to lead to the development of a wildfire, or else following the guidance set forth by the WASP in clause 2d;
         
      2. preventing land development for any purpose in tall grass prairies;
         
      3. preventing human activities that have been found to be detrimental to the ecosystem, according to clause 3b, in the areas surrounding tall grass prairies; and
   5. record all native multicellular species found to exist within a tall grass prairie, and collect seed samples from all native prairie plants; and
4. Strongly Recommends that member nations:
   
   1. work to restore and maintain tall grass prairies in all ecologically feasible areas, as determined by the findings of the WASP;
      
   2. create economic incentives for private entities to restore and maintain tall grass prairies when direct government action is infeasible; and
      
   3. research methods of reducing land use and pollution associated with agriculture.

Debate Thread:
https://forum.nationstates.net/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=502254

Rules potentially violated:

Contradiction: From the verb 'to contradict' - to state opposite or deny a concept or idea. Proposals which conflict with explicit clauses within an active resolution will be removed.

Possibly contradicted resolution(s):General Assembly Resolution 499; Access to Abortion
Access to Abortion:

Clinics. WA Choice Plus is established and may construct, per section 5, clinics with funds assessed by the General Accounting Office from members in which there does not exist, in the view of the WACC, adequate access to abortion. Such clinics shall offer free and safe abortions to any recipient bona fide. All members must, however, contribute separately to WA Choice Plus in proportion to expenses incurred within their jurisdiction at such clinics for their upkeep and maintenance.

Members must arrange fully subsidised travel for any recipient bona fide, and one person of their choice, to receive care offered by such a clinic if abortion services are not speedily accessible. No limitation, except to prohibit travel to nations in which there is an on-going armed conflict, may be enforced by a member on a person's ability to exit a member for purposes of travelling to a clinic unless permitted by resolution.

Clinics shall provide free healthcare and counselling for expectant parents as well as free contraceptives and abortifacients to any address serviceable by post within a member.

Clinic lease terms. Any member may request the construction of section 4 clinics if they can show to the WACC that construction would expand access to abortion in an area where it is inadequate. The clinics will be built on land donated by members where the member doing so grants to the clinic a ten-year renewable lease in which no (a) direct tax or (b) indirect tax in excess of one per cent may be collected, along with the condition, reinforced by private contract, that upon disestablishment of the clinic, the assignee or seizer must remit to WA Choice Plus the fair market value of the improvements to that land.

This resolution would - in member nations exclusively consisting of tall grass prairies - prevent WA Choice Plus from constructing clinics (clinic construction does not allow the land to be back in its original state in 5 years - that's impossible).
It would prevent member nations from requesting the construction of clinics if the areas where access to abortion is inadequate consists solely of not easily accessible
tall grass prairies(lease term 10 years).

What a novel argument, at least!

But no. Even if we accept the ludicrous statement that the Omicron Convenience Separatist Confederacy only consists of tall grass prairie land inhabited by sapient ruminants (since otherwise there would be pre-existing farmland and buildings on/in which to construct clinics) and just now joined the WA so hasn't yet gotten around to building the structures necessary to comply with other existing resolutions (for example, you would've been much better off using GAR #344 as your stalking horse here: that one mandates affordable, minimally comfortable housing - plus locally appropriate sanitation and utilities - for all!) - even if all that were the case, it is still true that in a nation of this type, tents must constitute adequate shelter (otherwise, again, there would be pre-existing permanent structures or their non-prairie sites). Since tents are adequate shelter in this absurd country, a clinic may be "built" on the same basis as, say, a military field hospital, whose footprint can return to a grassy state within five years.

But I reject the biome-wank to begin with. This argument is akin to saying "My nation consists of people who eat nuclear waste as a nutritious part of this complete breakfast, so WA standards on controlling such waste are mandating starvation, again in violation of GA Res. #344!"

While the absolute pronouncement makes the proposal a poor one, poor does not equate to illegal.