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

Please Support the Monument--Vote in Poll

Please support the proposed Marianas Trench Marine National Monument: vote in the current on-line poll at The Marianas Variety . Just scroll down a bit--it's on the right-hand side.

Thanks.

Will It Hurt Our Economy?

The LA Times carried a report that First Lady Laura Bush supports the creation of a marine national monument here, but Vice President Dick Cheney opposes it because it "will hurt our economy."

There are some important considerations when assessing the economic impact of creating a marine national monument here.



1. Right now, we have little to no economic activity in the proposed protected area going on. The waters around Uracas, Maug, and Asuncion are not being fished. An earlier report from WESPAC suggested that the area is not a feasible or viable fishery. There is no mining going on in the proposed monument area. So stopping economic activity there now causes no change to what we have at present, and certainly no harm to our economy.

2. The future is speculative. For gamblers, the possibility that there may be some potential mining is "economic harm." For conservationists, the possibility of future damage to our marine life and eco-system is not only biological and geological harm, but economic harm. No one can prove the future, but we can look to the past to see what is likely.

* We know that the rest of the world's oceans have been harmed, that marine diversity is dwindling at an alarming rate, that pollution does not stay in one area. There is reason to want to take measures now to conserve what we have.

* We know that any minerals that may be desirable for mining would be at the southern part of the protected area, and not in the same place as some of the deep water, most unusual and unique life; we know that we can have different zones for the protected areas, so that mining could be allowable in some part of the protected area.

* We know that "no take" zones help marine life recover. While the protected area right now does not have the kind of marine life desireable or economically advantageous to fishermen, as the rest of the world's oceans are fished out, the last and least likely places will be tapped for whatever can be taken from them. If we don't protect some area, we'll have nothing left.

3. There are potential economic benefits that far outweigh any possible harm. We will get free world-wide press coverage, which will help our sagging tourism economy. We will get more scientists coming to study, and they will spend money here while present in the CNMI, and will help at our schools and college. We will get a Visitor Center, which will provide for some jobs, as well as giving tourists more to do while here and possibly extending their visits another day. We will get a boat that can be used for transportation to the northern islands, on the way to the marine protected area.

There are likely many more advantages that I have not mentioned. While economists can always argue with each other over specific assumptions made in their studies, it is clear that their are economic gains to be made from the designation, and few if any economic losses to be sustained.


If we do nothing, what economic benefit will we gain?
None. Nothing now. Only a gamble that sometime in the future there may be something that we can exploit and further ruin, changing our natural world to dollars.

If we have a marine national monument designated, we will get
* free worldwide press
* an improved chance for more visitors
* a Visitors Center, which adds a few jobs and entices longer visits by tourists
* greater educational opporutnities for students here
* and a portion of our world saved and conserved for our future generations.

If you're here looking for information...

We have our public service announcement on the radio and television inviting people to stop by this blog for information. If you are one of the people responding to those PSAs, please look around the blog. There are many posts with lots of information.

I'd also encourage everyone to check out the post on Lil Hammerhead's blog that discusses some of the important scientific evidence about the need for marine "no take" zones.

At the public meeting with federal officials, one of the things I heard from people questioning the idea of a marine sanctuary/monument here is that our waters are in good shape, our marine environment hasn't been deleteriously effected, our marine resources are being adequately managed.

The reality is different, though. If you talk with people who've been here a long time, people who spend time in the water, they can tell you that fishing was better in the past--the fish were bigger, there were more of them, they were closer to us. Now it's getting hard to find some species, and the fishermen are going further out to do it.

We don't live in isolation from the rest of the world. Our ocean touches Asia, Australia, North America and South America. The marine animals we see here, especially the large marine mammals, may have traveled from those places. We are not immune from the pollution and over-fishing that is depleting our ocean resources at an alarming rate.

We need this marine national monument to protect our marine life while we still have it.

Virgin Islands Buck Island Reef National Monument

This is a video about a monument in the Virgin Islands. This monument is managed by NOAA and the National Park Service.