SENATE BILL: The Atlasian Clean National Park Initiative (Law'd)

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Nay

[Sbane]

Nay

Parks already have the right to set up shuttle services during busy times and some already do. Why do we need to set that up in parks that are not as busy or during less busy days of the year?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

NAY


Vote on Amendment 55:32 by Αverroës Nix:

Aye (1): Αverroës Nix
Nay (7): Gass3268, Kalwejt, MaxQue, Napoleon, NC Yankee, sbane and Snowstalker
Abstain (0):

Didn't Vote (2): Ben and HagridoftheDeep

With seven votes in the negative the amendment has been rejected.

[Napoleon]

Hostile. It sounds nice but obviously will have the same material effect as your previous amendmnt. Creative but I won't support it.

[MaxQue]

I'm opposed to the Article 1 of the proposed amendment.
Off-road tracks often go through national parks and I don't see the problem with motorized boats.

In my area, fishing is autorized under certain conditions in national parks.
And we didn't talked yet about the attack it is on Natives' right on huting and fishing on their traditionnal land.

Naturally, the human is at the summit of the food chain and that amendment wants to deny that.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I also object.

Natural parks are a part of this country's culture. Making it more difficult for families to experience them is something I just won't entertain. What about people who'd like to bring their canoes? They've got to carry them into the park? They've got to use a "public trailer?" What about RVs? They'll be banned? I also echo Senator MaxQue's statement: What's so bad about motorized boats?

Nix, you mention protecting "wildlife viewing opportunities," but are you aware that roads actually attract many species of animal? In northern areas, salty runoff water makes roadside ditches prime places to see moose. Automobiles aren't going to ruin the opportunity to see wildlife. And, if they do, I think it's a fair trade-off to get more people visiting our national parks.

I just don't really get it. I guess my perception of our national parks system is pretty different from yours, Nix. They're there for us. They'll never be a great picture of true "wilderness," whether we adopt these strange prohibitions or not. So let's get people experiencing what this country has to offer.

[Napoleon]

I miss the Nix that had a sense of humor and wasn't trying to ban whatever popped into his head that morning.

Anyway people who are bothered by the noise of a motorboat should probably find another place to stay. Airplane noise can be annoying- lets make the whole country a no fly zone. All that pollution and it can hurt the birds...

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
Status: Vote pending completion of minimum debate times.

[MaxQue]

The Effects of Motorized Watercraft on Aquatic Ecosystems (pdf)

Let's note two things.

1. The last pages, the conculsions. Nowhere they suggest a blanket ban of motorized boats.

2. Page 2, just under what you quoted.  They give different factors to consider about that issue, that aren't related to the effect on water.

The problems is than your proposals are focused only on one factor, excluding all other ones.

[MaxQue]

Oh, I have no problem with a park deciding to take the decision of banning motoring boats or even human activities.

You even bolded the key words. In some cases. So, it doesn't approve or suggest a blanket bill. Each situation must be evaluated by each park.

A blanket ban at national level is a very wrong idea. Each park (and even subsections of parks) has a different and unique setting and situation. What is a good idea in park may be a bad idea in another one.

Not even all parks have the same goals. Some are for absolute preservation, some are now touristic assets, some are even used for hunting and fishing (which sounds wierd, but the food chain must go on, to not destabilise the whole ecosystem).

[MaxQue]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not sure whether the same principles govern its Canadian counterpart. But it certainly seems inconsistent with allowing the use of motorized watercraft anywhere on this class of public land.

One could say than access is primordial in that purpose. One can suppose than they have to be accessible for the future generations to enjoy them.

As for my search, I did search about Atlasian National Parks. Not about Canadian ones (or Quebec National Parks).

And sure, we need a common goal, but the ways to reach that goal may be different in different parks. Altasia is an huge country, let's not fool ourselves in thinking than a forest in Maine and a desert-like area in Arizona is the same.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

Nix, my comments were on the new amendment. Section 2 still represents a ban on vehicles that I don't think is justified, even if the ban only occurs under certain circumstances.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I'm conflicted about a total smoking prohibition. If possible, there should be areas where one could have a smoke.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

What is next here then?

[Napoleon]

What is next here then?

My amendment

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

After reviewing the thread and the previous tracker, there are no amendments offered by the Senator at this time.

[Napoleon]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sorry Yankee I wanted to rewrite the bill first.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

No where in that post or in the reposting of it, is an amendment being offered, Nappy.


We fix one problem and go back to another man. I don't recognize randomly posted texts as amendments. They have to say "amendment offered"..."amendment proposed" or some form thereoff. Otherwise it is just a text to be considered outside the procedural bs so that we don't get stuck in a potentially five day vote when a minor change everyone supports could avoid the vote, or turn the vote into a passing vote and avoid a prior failing one to get to that stage.

[Napoleon]

consider it an amendment

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Origination
Status: Senators have 24 hours to object.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The amendment has been adopted.


What now?

[HagridOfTheDeep]

We're in deficit territory and we're about to pass a stimulus. Is this something we really need? How much do we think it will cost?

To be honest, I'm happy to assume our parks are relatively litter-free at the moment. Is that something we really need to commission a report on right now?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill is now at final vote, Senators please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[MaxQue]

Aye