10 thoughts on the draft #HighSeasTreaty being put forward for approval:
1. It exempts all military action 2. The section on marine genetic resources exempts all fish and fishing 3. Part 3 -- the section on MPAS -- doesn't include the word "fish"
4. The objective of Part 3 opens with "Conserve and sustainably use areas requiring protection" using ABMTs and MPAs 5. The objectives list the following threats to ocean health: " climate change, ocean acidification
and marine pollution." I think something is missing
5. Article 17 goes on to describe how proposals for ABMTs and/or MPAs can be developed and what they must include. A draft management plan must be included. This is a heavy lift, and creates a chicken/egg situation with Article 18.
6. Article 18 describes the consultation process, resulting in a revised proposal submitted to a Scientific and Technical Body, which makes recommendations to the Conference of the Parties
7. Article 19 describes the decision making process.
This is going to be problematic: "In taking decisions under this article, the Conference of the Parties shall respect the competences of and, not undermine, relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional, subregional and sectoral bodies"
8. Decisions will be made by consensus, except in cases where where they can't
If 2/3 of the members present call for a vote, one can be held and it will pass with 3/4 voting yes
9. If an MPA is created, any country can write an objection within 120 days, and the MPA won't apply to them (similar to what countries do at CITES when they don't like the outcomes)
10. The treaty attempts to limit who can take an objection, including forcing the country to renew their objection every three years
You know how in the 1st Lord of the Rings book, Frodo thought all he was going to have to do was get the Ring to Rivendell?
This was an incredible first step towards achieving 30% on the high seas -- but it's just the first step.
There's still a Balrog under Khazad-dûm
I encourage you to read the text
It is made available for all citizens of the Earth to read, criticize or compliment
I'm going to criticize "science-based" conservation in this thread
Might take me a while to get there
Buckle in
2/
Even prior to George Floyd, I've spent a lot of time working on values statements from the work I've done on coalitions -- going all the way back to the founding of Beautify CNMI in 2006 -- I've done this probably a few times per year for 15 years
3/
I always bring two examples from my life and work to these discussions:
1/ In the time of the ancestors, the world must have seemed static and stable. That consistency, over centuries, allowed my people to develop systems using the stars, the winds, and the living Creation to navigate their world.
2/ From father to son, mother to daughter, chants and songs were passed down that told us how to provide for our families on a small island, and how to cross an ocean in an outrigger canoe.
3/ Pacific identity is strongly influenced by the natural world. All aspects of our unique way of life are derived from the ocean and our islands, including songs, dances, myths, stories, economies, world views, and governing systems. taotaotasi.com/2018/01/connec…
Today is #WomenInScience Day, so please allow me to introduce you to some of the #WomenInSTEM who have made an impact in my career.
I hope you'll give them a follow so you can keep up with them every day of the year
It's hard keeping up with @leahmeth
We first worked together in 2012(!) to create @TheSharkStanley, the little character who helped protect sharks at #CITES2013
We later retooled him to create shark sanctuaries.