Advisory council urged to make visitors center a reality

The Marianas Trench Monument Advisory Council finally adopted its long-awaited bylaws in governing the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument yesterday, even as concerned citizens and even a member of the council urged it to make the promised visitors center a reality.

Department of Land Natural Resources Secretary Arnold Palacios said that since the Saipan and Northern Islands Municipal Council and the Joeten-Kiyu Public Library hosted a forum on the monument, he has received a number of comments criticizing the council for the lack of updates on the visitors center.

Palacios, along with Ben Sablan and Frank Rabauliman, make up the CNMI’s representatives on the council.

Palacios said there’s been a lot of backlash from the community on the slow pace of economic benefits the federal government promised when former President George W. Bush declared the Marianas Trench part of its Blue Legacy.

“There’s been a lot of promises made to the community but so far we’re not able to pull it off…We should do it and, if not, let’s just fold camp and go home,” he said.

NOAA deputy regional administrator Lisa Croft shared Palacios’ sentiments, saying the council should now work together to make sure that the commitments made by the federal government is followed.

She also acknowledged that a lot of promises and commitments made by the federal government have been broken.

The council held its second meeting yesterday at the Hyatt Regency Saipan and among those who attended were Sablan, Rabauliman, Palacios, Department of Defense representative Roy Tsutsui, and representatives from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Coast Guard, and other local and federal agencies.

In the comments portion of the meeting, former representative Rosemond Santos described the designation of the monument in 2011 as “modern day colonialism.”

She said the local community, especially the indigenous people of the CNMI, were not consulted when President Bush placed under federal protection 95,216 square miles of submerged lands and waters in various places in the Mariana archipelago as part of his Blue Legacy.

Cultural historian Genevieve Cabrera, meanwhile, urged the federal government to talk to the community instead of making decisions and policies behind their backs.

“If you show respect then respect will be shown back to you,” she said.

Another former lawmaker, William Torres, also told the council to consider the Northern Marianas College as the location of the monument visitors center.

Attaching the visitors center to the local community college would allow it to apply for federal grants and these will be a much-needed financial boost to NMC, he said.

The CNMI Legislature came out with a joint resolution in April, urging the council to designate Marpi as the site of the visitors center because of its easy access to tourists and residents alike.

Recently, Delegate Gregorio Kilili C. Sablan (Ind-MP) made known his preference for the visitors center to be on Rota, to make the island the ecotourism hub of the Commonwealth.

Architect Herman Cabrera just finished a study that plans to use the old Japanese lighthouse on Navy Hill as the site of the visitors center.

Published in the Saipan Tribune

Yes to Marine Monument on Rota and US troops' relocation to Tinian

From the Saipan Tribune:

Marine Monument on Rota

S.R. 17-16, which expresses the Senate's support to the establishment of the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument visitors center on Rota, also saw the clash of opinions between Crisostimo and all the other senators.

Crisostimo wanted the Marine Monument visitors center to be built on Saipan, or both on Saipan and Rota. He said Saipan is a more economically viable location for the center, because Saipan has direct flights to and from other destinations, and that it would be cheaper for tourists to come to Saipan than Rota.

Ayuyu, co-author of S.R. 17-16 along with Taimanao, said putting the visitors center on Rota is a better option because of the island's eco-tourism industry and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife plans to designate about 400 hectares of land on Rota for fish and wildlife habitat conservation.

“You make me feel that Rota is not part of the Commonwealth. Don't deny us something that is positive for us,” Ayuyu told Crisostimo. Ayuyu is also chairman of the Rota Legislative Delegation.

Senate President Paul A. Manglona (R-Rota) clarified that funding for the Marine Monument visitors center will come from the federal government.

Eight senators voted “yes” on S.R. 17-16, while Crisostimo voted “present.”

Front Page News

The news of the Friends of the Monument winning an EPA Environmental Award was top of the fold front page news in today's Saipan Tribune. Thanks to everyone who sent me in their quotes for the story and I apologize to those who didn't get their's in. I had already sent in the story by the time I got your quote.

Congratulations to everyone involved in our success. I'm hoping that someone can travel to San Francisco to accept the award on behalf of all the people that helped.

Marianas Trench Visitors Center

Alexie Zotomayor, one of the Friends of the Monument and the author of Boon or Bane, had a letter to the editor appear in the Saipan Tribune today.

Rebranding the CNMI as a destination

With the establishment of the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument the CNMI has the opportunity to rebrand itself as a travel destination.

Although it is not a fully protected marine reserve, the monument is one of the world’s largest protected areas. This in itself is not something that will attract tourists to our shores. We have to give people a reason to want to visit the monument and our islands.

Saipan could sell itself as "The Gateway to the Mariana Trench." The stores in Garapan could sell t-shirts that read, "I dove the Marianas Trench." Maybe one day submersibles could take tourists to the underwater eruptions off the coast of Rota.

This will require a lot of work, and communities, businesses, and the government will have to contribute to the change.

One of the first steps toward this rebranding is for the federal government to build a Marianas Trench Marine National Monument visitors center. Half-museum, half-aquarium, the visitors center could and should be one of the premier tourism destinations in the Pacific.

I hope that our leaders on Capital Hill and in Washington, D.C. are working with the federal government to bring the visitors center to Saipan.

Alexie Villegas Zotomayor
Chinatown, Saipan

There is a concern among certain people that a lot of the benefits of the Marianas Trench Marine National Monument will end up in Guam because the monument boundaries extend into some of the Federal waters close to Guam. The Bush Administration, through his Council of Environmental Quality Chairman James Connaughton, promised the CNMI that they would have a seat at the table (check), untold worldwide media attention (check), a visitors center, a research/enforcement boat, and federal jobs.

The NOAA Sanctuaries people in Hawai'i know about these promises because during the campaign the Friends of the Monument sent them copies of every letter they wrote. Since we assumed that NOAA Sanctuaries would manage the monument, nobody took the time to do any work with anybody at US Fish & Wildlife Service, so they probably have no idea what conversations took place during the process to create the monument. The situation is also complicated by the fact that the key people we worked with in the Bush Administration have since been replaced by the Obama Administration. Some of the key players haven't even been replaced yet, either, like the Secretary of Commerce.

The Friends of the Monument consider themselves the "guardians" of the Marianas Trench and they are going to work hard to ensure that the benefits promised to the CNMI come to fruition.

Supporter from Hawaii

There is a letter in the Saipan Tribute today written by Mr. William J. Aila Jr. from Hawaii.

Aha Moku who?

Much has been said about an Oct. 13, 2008, letter that was written to President Bush by a group of Hawaiians called the Aha Moku Council, asking him to not designate the Northern Marianas National Marine Monument.

This group is a creation of the Western Pacific Fisheries Management Council. The Aha Moku Council is supposed to organize and consult with Native Hawaiians who represent their ahupua'a, a traditional land division system in Hawaii.

The Aha Moku Council has not yet organized, nor have they consulted with any of the Hawaiian groups representing their ahupua'a on Hawaiians taking a position on the creation of the Northern Marianas National Marine Monument and yet, at the urging of WESPAC, sent a letter, purporting to represent the Native Hawaiian's position.

The letter that states, “When you created the Papahanumokuakea National Marine Monument, it was done without the participation of Native Hawaiian people.” It further states the name Papahanaumokuakea “was the name the your administration picked for the Monument.

”This is typical WESPAC misinformation. The name “Papahanaumokuakea” was chosen by the Native Hawaiian working group of the North-Western Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Ecosystem Reserve Advisory Council. This Reserve was the precursor to the Monument.President Clinton in an Executive Order, designated that three members of this Council should be Native Hawaiians, with one seat reserved for a Kupuna or elder. WESPAC, on the other hand, has no such requirement to have a Hawaiian on its Council.

The Native Hawaiian Working group met over the course of more than six months to consider several names for the Monument. The debate amongst Hawaiians was fierce but amiable, ultimately choosing Papahanaumokuakea. Hawaiians were at the forefront of the creation of the Reserve and continue to be consulted and have a place on the Management Board of the Monument.
The largest group of cultural practitioners in Hawaii, Ilio ula o ka lani, has demonstrated its support for the Monument by having representatives fly to Washington on numerous occasions and by attending close to a hundred meetings on the process. On one occasion, organizing a 10,000-person march on Waikiki to show support for the process.

Please do not allow the misinformation of the eight people on the Aha Moku Council, created by WESPAC, who have not consulted with Native Hawaiians as described in their organizational documents, to influence the people of the CNMI. Check out the facts, consider your needs and the future legacy that you leave for the children of the CNMI.

WESPAC has a direct state in the matter and that is the reason for the misinformation campaign. Should President Bush and the people of the CNMI approve a Monument, then WESPAC loses jurisdiction over fisheries in the Monument. For WESPAC, it's all about them, and not about you or the resources of CNMI. Don't be fooled!


William J. Aila Jr.
Wai’anae, Hawaii

2 out of 5000

There were two letters in the Saipan Tribune today written by people who had signed the petition in support of the Marine Monument.

The first letter was written by Ben Deleon Guerrero Jr.

Making Myself Clear

I'm writing to you today because I don't know which rumor is true. And I also wanted to make myself clear.

The first I heard was that nonresidents in the CNMI cannot sign the petition. Some say they can. And second, we won't be able to fish in our own waters up there. Some say we still could.

My question is how do people go there? Or do people even go there? What kind of boat do they use?

My cousin is a full supporter of the proposed National Marine Monument. She is also a volunteer. She taught me lots of interesting information about the islands and the animals that live there. She gave me a booklet with tons of cool pictures and facts about the three islands. That booklet is called “Scientific Report.”

Anyway, one day I went to PriceCostco and saw two men standing by the door with petition in their hands. They greeted me and asked me if I have heard about the proposed marine monument. I said yes! I grabbed his pen and gave him my signature.

Yes, I am 17 years old and I am one of the 5,000 people that signed the petition in support of the Marine Monument. I am a local resident of the Commonwealth, and I was educated about the issue before signing the petition. I just wanted to make that clear.

Ben Deleon Guerrero Jr.
Dandan, Saipan

The second letter was written by Maegan Agulto.

No coercion

Oh man, was I excited to see that thousands and thousands of people signed the petition in support of the marine monument.

I'm proud to say that I am one of those who signed, knowing that it would be a great opportunity for my daughter when she gets older.

I support the marine monument because I was taught/educated that it would bring great benefits to both our schools and our tourist industry. Most importantly media attention! That gives people from around the world a chance to learn about our ocean's marine life.

I signed the petition that was circulated by my sister, who is a volunteer and a full supporter. She taught our family a lot about the marine monument. I was educated, not forced, and I completely understood what I was signing.

Maegan Agulto
Chalan Kanoa, Saipan

Saipan Tribune Editorial

Compromise on marine monument plan

Despite its tentative nature, recent reports of Gov. Benigno R. Fitial and legislative leaders being more open to the idea of a national marine monument in the northernmost islands of the Marianas chain is welcome news, at least in so far as advancing the dialog on the issue is concerned.

Dialog, after all, is what should have been happening in the first place. The proposal was intended to draw people to the table so everyone can weigh the relevant issues and make decisions based on the merits of the plan. Instead, the issue has created battlegrounds, pitting people against one another and escalating the whole subject into epic proportions on the scale of a Mahabharata battle between the forces of good and evil.

Worse, people have been content to play along as two-dimensional caricatures of themselves, painting each other in the most unflattering of lights and refusing to listen to each other in the belief that they alone are right, or taking umbrage at imagined slights to their inalienable rights. Lost in all the noise, confusion, and animosity was the ability to imagine that there might be a third or a fourth alternative, a common ground where people can come together in the name of conservation and national patrimony.

The suggestion by White House Council on Environmental Quality chief James Connaughton that further talks about the monument plan may result in an agreement to restore the CNMI’s control over "submerged lands" is the cold dash of water needed to snap everyone out of their hysteria and restore some semblance of calm, and the local leadership’s statement about being more receptive to the monument proposal is exactly what everyone needs to hear.

A compromise on the matter is being offered and this time, it must be evaluated with a level head. The submerged lands issue is no small potatoes and for the CNMI to regain what has been stripped from it would be a great boon to the Commonwealth, not just economically but also historically. The loss of the submerged lands was never imagined nor contemplated by our Covenant negotiators and the fact that we lost our right to those resources because of the Covenant was a bitter pill to swallow. Regaining the submerged lands now would remedy this unintended consequence.

At the same time, it would allow the Commonwealth to explore all potential economic benefits these underwater resources may have-natural riches that are currently off limits to the CNMI because they do not belong to our exclusive economic zone. If we regain the right to manage these resources, this will have a more direct-and immediate-impact on the local economy since they are closer to the populated islands and not located hundreds of miles away where the only visitors are illegal fishermen from other countries. (Saipan Tribune)

Law of the Sea

Local attorney, Wes Bogdan, had a letter to the Editor published today:

Law of the sea

Seems like a lot of confusion out there as to some of the legal details and formalities concerning the proposed marine national monument. Unfortunately, keeping the public misinformed is the way many of the opponents to this idea probably want things to stay because controlling people through fear and ignorance is a powerful way to keep the public silent. In any respect, as to submerged land (and all the stuff found in the water) surrounding the Northern Mariana Islands, legally speaking, the U.S. Court of Appeals' decision in CNMI v. USA, 399 F.3d 1057 (2005) makes absolutely clear that the United States already owns all the rights to the submerged lands and other things of value found from the low-water mark on all of our islands out to the 200-mile-limit of the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. All the natural resources such as oil, gas, and all other minerals, and fish, shrimp, oysters, clams, crabs, lobsters, sponges, kelp, and other marine animal and plant life surrounding these islands are already under federal control and ownership.

As categorically explained in CNMI v. USA, the U.S. acquired upon the termination of the Pacific Islands Trusteeship a paramount interest in the seaward submerged lands found off the shores of the CNMI. “Laws passed by the CNMI Legislature to the contrary are inconsistent with the paramountcy doctrine and are preempted by federal law.” To be absolutely clear, the CNMI's Submerged Lands Act and Marine Sovereignty Act have been preempted and are unenforceable. The CNMI Coastal Resources Management's arguments that: (i) we don't no need the feds because everything is already fine and dandy in the waters around the Northern Islands due to the great job CRM is doing; and (ii) that establishing a national monument will take away the rights of the local people how to regulate the local marine environment are absurd or otherwise nonsense.

First, CRM taking credit for the pristine conditions found in the waters around the Northern Islands is like CRM taking credit for the Sun being an efficient source of solar energy. (In all due respect: One has absolutely nothing to do with the other.) Second, the right of the local people to regulate the local marine environment was transferred or passed to the United States the day the people of the Northern Mariana Islands became United States citizens on Nov. 3, 1986. If a marine national park/monument is created, it won't be taking any rights away from the people of the CNMI, but would guarantee that the pristine conditions found in the waters around the Northern Islands will at least have a chance to survive. As for the actual islands of Maug, Uracas and Asuncion, they are already protected and can only “be maintained as uninhabited places used only for the preservation and protection of natural resources, including but not limited to bird, wildlife and plant species.” See CNMI Constitution Article XIV Section 2.

W.M. Bogdan, Esq.
via e-mail

Uncle Karl and Dr. Jack in the Saipan Tribune

The Saipan Tribune carried a story today about the letters that Karl T Reyes and Dr. Jack Tenorio sent to the Senate in support of the proposed Mariana Trench Marine National Monument.

2 ConCon members back monument plan
By Agnes E. Donato
Reporter

Two former members of the Constitutional Convention have called on lawmakers to support the proposal designating the CNMI's northernmost three islands as a marine monument.

Karl T. Reyes and Joaquin Tenorio wrote separate letters to the Legislature stating that the proposed marine monument is in line with the constitutional provision for the protection of the islands of Uracus, Maug, and Asuncion.

The Constitution requires that the three islands, as well as Guguan, be “maintained as uninhabited places and used only for preservation.”

“We believed then, as I still do, that the highest and best use of the northern three islands is preservation of the flora and fauna,” Tenorio said.

For his part, Reyes said, “I urge you to support the proposed Mariana Trench Marine National Monument. It will fulfill the original intent of our Constitution and benefit generations of Chamorros and Carolinians to come.”

Both Reyes and Tenorio were members of the Constitutional Convention's Personal Rights and Natural Resources Committee, which had recommended that the islands should be set aside as nature reserves.

Uncle Karl's Letter to the Senate

Uncle Karl's letter was published in the Saipan Tribune today:

To Senate President Pete P. Reyes
16th Commonwealth Legislature

Article XIV, Section 2 of the Northern Marianas Constitution addresses two important concepts with respect to “Uninhabited Islands.” First, it restricts the use of Managaha Island for “cultural and recreational” purposes only. Second, it identifies four islands to be “maintained as uninhabited places and used only for preservation,” namely the islands of Maug, Uracas, Asuncion, Guguan.

During the Second Northern Marianas Constitutional Convention of 1985, the Committee on Personal Rights & Natural Resources, of which I was a member, found that the islands of Uracas and Asuncion, two of the three islands in the proposed Mariana Trench Marine National Monument, are volcanically active and are generally unsuitable for permanent habitation. The Committee found that in their “undisturbed state”, these islands have acquired a “unique flora and fauna” and are “well suited for preservation or sanctuary status.”

We also found that “in order to protect and preserve these unique biological characteristics, including the native wildlife and habitats, access to these islands must be controlled.”

Furthermore, we found that these islands warranted protections because they had not sustained “substantial environmental damage caused by feral pigs and goats.”

Finally, we found that “management or protection of fish could be addressed by an appropriate agency of the government if necessary.”

The arguments I have heard in the media against the proposed Mariana Trench Marine National Monument all run counter to the intent of the writers of our beloved Constitution.

You have heard from that the current administration does not support the preservation of these northern islands. They support “sustainable use,” which conflicts with the Constitutional purpose to preserve these islands.

You have heard that if a monument were declared we would have to “ask permission” to go there. Our original intent in protecting those islands was for everyone to “ask permission.” That is the best way to protect and preserve their unique biological characteristics.

You have heard that there is no need to protect these islands because they are “so beautiful, so lush.” That is exactly why we intended to protect those islands in the first place. These islands are undisturbed and they are unique and they can serve as a source of population of wildlife to be used for restocking other islands where certain species, such as fruit bats and coconut crabs, have been depleted. They are also the last vestige of what the Marianas were like before the Spanish arrived.

Finally, you have heard that this is nothing more than another “federal takeover.” While our intent was to protect all the resources in the far north, we do not have jurisdiction or control over any of our surrounding waters. The Federal government has jurisdiction from the mean high water mark out to 200 nautical miles. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is the federal agency focused on the condition of the oceans and NOAA Sanctuaries is the appropriate government agency for preservation of our marine resources, not NOAA Fisheries.

I have attached a copy of the “Report to the Convention by the Committee on Personal Rights & Natural Resources: Committee Recommendation No. 29” for your reference. It will help you understand our constitution better.

In closing, I urge you to support the proposed Mariana Trench Marine National Monument. It will fulfill the original intent of our constitution and benefit generations of Chamorros and Carolinians to come.

Si Yu'use Ma'ase for your time and consideration.

Karl T. Reyes
Friends of the Monument

Andrew Salas Letter to the Editor

Andrew had a letter published in the Saipan Tribune today:

Together let's make monument a reality

The House of Representatives passed another resolution opposing talking with the federal government about the proposed marine monument. They did this without holding a single public hearing about this important issue. They did this despite the fact that everyday, more people are voicing their support for the marine monument.

Our good Senator Felix Mendiola of Rota wrote a letter to President Bush asking him to send an assessment team to the CNMI regarding the proposed marine monument and now we are preempting the discussion with the passage of a second House resolution. Why are we inviting the feds and then passing a resolution with a dialogue?

This proposed monument has the potential to greatly help our island. The proposal could bring over $10 million dollars in federal and tourist spending to our island economy-every year. The proposal has already generated positive press for our islands throughout the world. Seizing this opportunity would only create more positive exposure for our islands.

It is time to work together, the assessment team will be here this week so let's encourage our elected leaders, and the federal government to discuss the possibilities of preserving and protecting our waters. Let us discover what this opportunity holds for the people of the CNMI, and together let us make it a reality.


Andrew Sablan Salas
Chalan Kanoa