[DRAFT]National Preserve proposal

[Exitum]

To keep final draft clean and readable - last updated version is here

[UPDATED DRAFT]
Proposal:
National Preserve
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental

Industry Affected: All Businesses - Mild

Proposed by: Exitum

(1)
By this proposal World Assembly is recognizing the need for clean air for all World assembly Nations. Our forests are our lungs.

(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of uninhabited adjacent forest land from their total forest territory for a National Preserve. If there is no Nation owned territory available it is up to a Nation to find appropriate privately owned land and compensate the owners.
If Nation cannot physically provide 0.5% of uninhabited adjacent forest, it is allowed to combine smaller parts to cumulatively dedicate 0.5%, but Nation has to provide monitoring and protection of each allocated part of the territory.

(3) Indigenous peoples
Land owned by indigenous people is excluded and cannot be used for purpose of National Preserve.

(4) This resolution does not limit Nation in dedicating larger areas then stated in ch.(2) for National Preserve.

(5) All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in National Preserve.

(6) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

(7) Protection of National Preserve
Monitoring and governing of National Preserve is under full jurisdiction of Nation.

[Separatist Peoples]

"World National Park is a contradictory name. Is it national, or is it international? Also, we are concerned that a world park connotes international jurisdiction over the land, creating a significant law enforcement problem. Finally, 5% is an astronomically huge portion to surrender.

"All in all, we are opposed."

[Exitum]

[First DRAFT]World National Park proposal
Postby Exitum » Tue Nov 05, 2019 7:53 am

Ok here is my Idea for proposal that I want to fine tune/ expand and develop with you
All ideas and suggestions are welcomed including ones to avoid illegality.

Questions that come in mind: Is it legal to suggest creation of World registry or new international organisation, is there any way to check if this or similar was already proposed in history

Proposal:
World National Park
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental

Industry Affected: Logging

Proposed by: Exitum

(1)
By this proposal World Assembly is recognizing the need for clean air for all World assembly Nations. Our forests are our lungs.

(2) World National Park is established
To protect World wide forest / nature.
Each nation dedicates 5% of their total forest territory for a World National Park.

(3) Protection of World parks
Monitoring of World National Parks is under International Park Rangers organisation in order to patrol and protect World National Parks.
All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in World National Parks.

(4) Funding
International Park Rangers Fund must be established for the prevention and restoration of damage to forests from forest fire, natural disasters, adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disaster, other adverse climatic events, plant pests and catastrophic events.
[End First Draft]

Ok good and resonable comment
Would this change make it acceptable for you?
(2) World National Park is established
To protect World wide forest / nature.
Each nation dedicates 2% of their total forest territory for a World National Park
3) Protection of World National parks
Monitoring and gouverning of World National Park is under full jurisdicton of Nation. National Park Rangers organisation has to be established if non existing to patrol and protect World National Park.
All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in World National Parks.
(4) Funding
National Park Rangers Fund must be established for the prevention and restoration of damage to forests from forest fire, natural disasters, adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disaster, other adverse climatic events, plant pests and catastrophic events.

[Grays Harbor]

National Park Rangers Fund must be established for the prevention and restoration of damage to forests from forest fire, natural disasters, adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disaster, other adverse climatic events, plant pests and catastrophic events.

Ummm ... Forest Rangers are not gardeners.

[Separatist Peoples]

Ok good and resonable comment
Would this change make it acceptable for you?
(2) World National Park is established
To protect World wide forest / nature.
Each nation dedicates 2% of their total forest territory for a World National Park
3) Protection of World National parks
Monitoring and gouverning of World National Park is under full jurisdicton of Nation. National Park Rangers organisation has to be established if non existing to patrol and protect World National Park.
All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in World National Parks.
(4) Funding
National Park Rangers Fund must be established for the prevention and restoration of damage to forests from forest fire, natural disasters, adverse climatic events which can be assimilated to natural disaster, other adverse climatic events, plant pests and catastrophic events.

"You haven't addressed the nomenclature issue in this edit. Further, 2% is still obscenely huge. For reference, Switzerland's singular national park takes up only .4% of its overall land. I can admit, ambassador, that forested land is ot the same as overall land, but you still see the problem of scale? You're an order of magnitude beyond even somewhat reasonable measures.

"Finally, what is the point of a park managed by the WA if it is under national authority? It seems that obligating nations to preserve and conserve land would be more efficient."

[Araraukar]

IC: "Over seventy percent of all forest areas of Araraukar are protected wilderness, and we will not see any of them downgraded to national parks. The rest of the forested wilderness areas are available to visitors under strict restrictions, but will not be downgraded to national parks. Wildlife parks are reserved to Araraukarian nationals and their personal foreign guests, and will not be available to idi- to foreigners in general."

OOC: Araraukar's approach to wilderness management is basically "hands off". So no putting out forest fires or "restoration of damage" from them, etc. Basically limiting human interaction. It helps that 95% of the population lives in major metropolitan cities and all the rest in work-related settlements mostly in the agricultural production areas. The "national park" (the way understood in USA) system does not exist in Araraukar - human interaction is encouraged (with lodgings and such services being available) only in "wildlife parks", which are designated vacation areas for citizens living in the major cities. None of the other wilderness areas have any services (or even roads or human-made paths); you go in at your own risk, and what you're allowed to take in with you is a very strict and limited list, and if something happens to you, no-one's coming in after you. The protected wilderness is off-limits to anyone but parties taken in by wilderness guides, and the same "no help from outside and very limited list of allowed supplies" applies.

And they won't budge from their standards.

[Exitum]

@Arararkar
This is exactly the aim of this proposal, maybe just naming is sticking in everyones eye. The aim of proposal is to have dedicated protected wildlife areas in ALL Nations. No visiting or human activity what so ever allowed. Exception is reparing the demage in case of extraordinary catastrophic events.
This suggestion is not limiting National wilderness / parks or whatever called natural resorts future or allready existing
Maybe someone could help me to put this in proposal language to be fully transparent.

[Separatist Peoples]

@Arararkar
This is exactly the aim of this proposal, maybe just naming is sticking in everyones eye. The aim of proposal is to have dedicated protected wildlife areas in ALL Nations. No visiting or human activity what so ever allowed. Exception is reparing the demage in case of extraordinary catastrophic events.
This suggestion is not limiting National wilderness / parks or whatever called natural resorts future or allready existing
Maybe someone could help me to put this in proposal language to be fully transparent.

OOC: The issue here is that a park is generally available to the public. You're thinking of a preserve.

[Exitum]

Here is updated version
Proposal:
National Preserve
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.

Category: Environmental

Industry Affected: Logging

Proposed by: Exitum

(1)
By this proposal World Assembly is recognizing the need for clean air for all World assembly Nations. Our forests are our lungs.

(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of their total forest territory for a National Preserve

(3) This resolution does not limit Nation in dedicating larger areas then stated in ch.(2) for National Preserve.

(4) All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in National Preserve.

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

(6) Protection of National Preserve
Monitoring and governing of National Preserve is under full jurisdiction of Nation. National

[Araraukar]

OOC: Post the current draft in the first post, spoiler the old draft. Better yet, move the spoilered old draft to another post of yours in this thread to keep the first post clean of extras.

Also, given what all you list in the text, your selected Area of Effect (industry affected) is wrong.

[Exitum]

OOC: Post the current draft in the first post, spoiler the old draft. Better yet, move the spoilered old draft to another post of yours in this thread to keep the first post clean of extras.

Also, given what all you list in the text, your selected Area of Effect (industry affected) is wrong.

Updated Draft in first post as suggested.
Can you suggest better area of Effect - if I remember correctly there is limited selection list when creating proposal - Maybe: All Bussineses - Strong would be better?

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: Post the current draft in the first post, spoiler the old draft. Better yet, move the spoilered old draft to another post of yours in this thread to keep the first post clean of extras.

Also, given what all you list in the text, your selected Area of Effect (industry affected) is wrong.

Updated Draft in first post as suggested.
Can you suggest better area of Effect - if I remember correctly there is limited selection list when creating proposal - Maybe: All Bussineses - Strong would be better?

OOC: It is always recommended to chose the category first, then write to the category. That is easier, and generally more successful, than writing a draft first then trying to shoehorn that draft into a category it may only tenuously fit.

[Exitum]

Updated Draft in first post as suggested.
Can you suggest better area of Effect - if I remember correctly there is limited selection list when creating proposal - Maybe: All Bussineses - Strong would be better?

OOC: It is always recommended to chose the category first, then write to the category. That is easier, and generally more successful, than writing a draft first then trying to shoehorn that draft into a category it may only tenuously fit.

@Grays Harbor - I did it in that way imho Industry Affected: Logging was fitting the Proposal best as there is limited possibility to chose from a list when submiting proposal. As Araraukar suggested it is not best fit I am ready for suggestions what would be a better fit? (Possibilities to chose: All Businesses - Strong / All Businesses - Mild / Automotive / Mining / Logging / Manufacturing / Agriculture / Fishing )

[Grays Harbor]

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

IC: Just curious, but what exactly are you hoping will be accomplished by banning any and all recreational activities in these preserves?

[Araraukar]

Logging was fitting the Proposal best as there is limited possibility to chose from a list when submiting proposal. As Araraukar suggested it is not best fit I am ready for suggestions what would be a better fit? (Possibilities to chose: All Businesses - Strong / All Businesses - Mild / Automotive / Mining / Logging / Manufacturing / Agriculture / Fishing )

OOC: Pay attention to what you post as the draft:

(4) All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in National Preserve.

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

Thus it can't be only logging.

[Exitum]

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

IC: Just curious, but what exactly are you hoping will be accomplished by banning any and all recreational activities in these preserves?

As soon as you allow people in you have to accommodate their needs provide - infrastructure, parking's, toilets, collect garbage etc. When people arrive to this area they arrive with some kind of vehicle - this pollutes the air, there is also potential of accidental fire etc....Intention is for the area to stay intact.

OOC: Pay attention to what you post as the draft:
Exitum wrote:
(4) All logging, mining and other industrial activities are prohibited in National Preserve.

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

Thus it can't be only logging.

I will change to All Businesses - Strong

[Grays Harbor]

OOC: Not seeing this as “strong”, Mild at best, significant if you squint real hard while looking at it sideways.

[Aclion]

(5) Fishing, hunting, camping, and all other sports or recreational activities are prohibited in National Preserve

IC: Just curious, but what exactly are you hoping will be accomplished by banning any and all recreational activities in these preserves?

"I expect he is hoping to make a preserve, and not a park. This would explain why the title of the proposal is World National Preserve, and not World National Park"

[Araraukar]

"I expect he is hoping to make a preserve, and not a park. This would explain why the title of the proposal is World National Preserve, and not World National Park"

OOC: It was actually exactly that at first. Though the current mandate doesn't fit the reason for preserves as is, given that there's no mention of how the protected area is to be located. Protecting 5 cm^2 out of every square metre of forestland would fill the mandate, but not the point of a preserve. Requiring adjacentness would be good, but on the other hand you might have a more urgent need for green corridors. And what if all forestland is privately owned? Who compensates landowners? If it was easy, we wouldn't be struggling with passing similar legislation in RL.

[Exitum]

"I expect he is hoping to make a preserve, and not a park. This would explain why the title of the proposal is World National Preserve, and not World National Park"

OOC: It was actually exactly that at first. Though the current mandate doesn't fit the reason for preserves as is, given that there's no mention of how the protected area is to be located. Protecting 5 cm^2 out of every square metre of forestland would fill the mandate, but not the point of a preserve. Requiring adjacentness would be good, but on the other hand you might have a more urgent need for green corridors. And what if all forestland is privately owned? Who compensates landowners? If it was easy, we wouldn't be struggling with passing similar legislation in RL.

You got really good point there for requiring adjacent otherwise it would live room for misinterpretation.
In regards of compensation as sovereignty and jurisdiction is still at Nation - compensation also must be done by nation. Changing paragraph 2
From
(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of their total forest territory for a National Preserve
To
(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of adjacent forest land from their total forest territory for a National Preserve. If there is no Nation owned territory available it is up to a Nation to find appropriate privately owned land and compensate the owners.

[Liberimery]

OOC: It was actually exactly that at first. Though the current mandate doesn't fit the reason for preserves as is, given that there's no mention of how the protected area is to be located. Protecting 5 cm^2 out of every square metre of forestland would fill the mandate, but not the point of a preserve. Requiring adjacentness would be good, but on the other hand you might have a more urgent need for green corridors. And what if all forestland is privately owned? Who compensates landowners? If it was easy, we wouldn't be struggling with passing similar legislation in RL.

You got really good point there for requiring adjacent otherwise it would live room for misinterpretation.
In regards of compensation as sovereignty and jurisdiction is still at Nation - compensation also must be done by nation. Changing paragraph 2
From
(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of their total forest territory for a National Preserve
To
(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of adjacent forest land from their total forest territory for a National Preserve. If there is no Nation owned territory available it is up to a Nation to find appropriate privately owned land and compensate the owners.

Our government is legally barred from eminent domain. We can no more evict a landowner from private property than we can restrict them from accessing public land. And considering that our tax laws only allow for income tax based on land ownership we are not about to steal taxable land for purposes of unprofitable use.

[Araraukar]

Our government is legally barred from eminent domain.

OOC: Valid IC argument, but WA law trumps national law, so if a resolution required use of eminent domain, the nation would have to change its laws to fit.

To author: you might still want to consider some way of enticing rather than enforcing landowner compliance. Just remember you can't touch nations' internal taxation directly.

Also, the new wording is equally problematic, because you might not have 0.5% of all forested areas adjacent, especially in more industrialized nations, where the forest areas are cut into smaller bits by roads and railways and rivers and mountains and whatnot.

[Exitum]

Our government is legally barred from eminent domain.

OOC: Valid IC argument, but WA law trumps national law, so if a resolution required use of eminent domain, the nation would have to change its laws to fit.

To author: you might still want to consider some way of enticing rather than enforcing landowner compliance. Just remember you can't touch nations' internal taxation directly.

Also, the new wording is equally problematic, because you might not have 0.5% of all forested areas adjacent, especially in more industrialized nations, where the forest areas are cut into smaller bits by roads and railways and rivers and mountains and whatnot.

Par (2) changed to cover such instances

(2) National Preserve is established in every Nation
To protect world wide forest / nature. Each nation is obligated to dedicate 0.5% of adjacent forest land from their total forest territory for a National Preserve. If there is no Nation owned territory available it is up to a Nation to find appropriate privately owned land and compensate the owners.
If Nation cannot physically provide 0.5% of adjacent forest, it is allowed to combine smaller parts to cumulatively dedicate 0.5%, but Nation has to provide monitoring and protection of each allocated part of the territory.

[Araraukar]

OOC: Okay, you're inching towards the solution for quantity, quality comes next.

What counts as a forest? How old must the oldest trees be? How varied must the tree species be? Do you only count unbroken canopy as forest?

And the much more difficult aspect of quality, what kinds of biomes should be represented? Rare? Common? Unique? To the region? Nation? The WA? What should the state of the ecosystem be?

What about the hands-off approach when we're talking about invasive species?

I've had to deal with this kind of thing in official capacity in RL (EU regulations were involved in the process, so I also know the ways landowners can thwart the whole point out of spite for the top-down decision making) so I have some inkling of how difficult it all can be.

[Liberimery]

If we cannot use eminent domain how do you propose we appropriate from others land required to meet the mandate. Additionally we have concerns about the ban on all human activity in these mandated preserves. What is the purpose of making a preserve if not for the enjoyment of this and future generations? And what if the preserve is in territory with uncontacted indigenous peoples? I can understand the bans on commercial exploitation of resources but banning people from entering protect preserves seems like it ignores the fact man is part of nature and not alien to it. Not to mention that camping and other outdoor activities can raise funds for continued maintenance of the parks.

Furthermore this mandate would negatively impact city-states members by requiring a tearing down of significant territory infrastructure and displace untold numbers of people.

Edit: OOC: I misread the proposed 0.5% and the scale is outrageous! For a nation the size of the U.S. (5th largest nation in the world) this is larger than the State of Maryland by almost 15,000 square kilometers! This is more than 10 times the average size of a U.S. national park and one quarter of the total landmass the U.S. devotes to national parks. That scales to every nation. And 4 of those parks are in Alaska which is insanely huge and insanely not developed.

Even then, the US can do this because most non-coastal interior has a fairly low population density compared to Europe, which is much more dense or to nations that don’t have much in the way of forests such a as Savannas or small islands where space is at a premium. Even then, may sites are preserved not just for conservation but for historical significance. The U.S. parks service includes almost every battlefield from the civil war (making it overall one of the best preserved wars in the world with every major battle field being largely the same today as it was when the North and South fought there.). And other parks include sites with significantly important cultural artifacts.