Obama Calls for Limits on Tourism to Antarctica

[underpants]

Source: Fox News

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration is pushing to protect Antarctica's fragile environment by imposing mandatory limits on the size of cruise ships sailing there and the number of passengers they bring ashore.

At a conference set to begin Monday in Baltimore, U.S. diplomats will propose amending the 50-year-old Antarctic Treaty. The move would seek to mandate, under international law, the current voluntary restrictions on tourism.

A U.S. document provided to The Associated Press by the State Department says the plan would "minimize the likelihood of marine oil spills" in the Antarctic and "ensure that tourism is conducted in a safe and environmentally responsible manner."

The new U.S. proposal contains no specific enforcement mechanism or penalties for limiting tourist operations. But it would require signatories to the pact to ensure that Antarctic tour operators bar ships with more than 500 passengers from landing sites, restrict landings to one vessel at a time per site and limit passengers on shore to 100 at a time.

It would mandate a minimum of one guide for every 20 tourists while ashore, according to the documents.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/first100days/2009/04/05/obama-calls-limits-tourism-antarctica/

[ensho]

1. kick

nt

[razorman]

2. It's just as well. The hotels there suck, anyway.

[On the Road]

3. Geez, I Don't Know About This

It's a whole continent. The few people who actually make it there raise awareness for everyone.

[ensho]

4. its melting and falling apart, becoming dangerous

nt

[Posteritatis]

14. A continent where -90C temperatures happen is only *becoming* dangerous? (nt)

[Spazito]

5. This doesn't affect the scientists that are there...

only the number of tourists visiting at any one time. It is not unlike the limitations on visitors to fragile and endangered places like the Galapagos Islands. I think it is a wise policy.

[On the Road]

7. OK, Maybe It's a Good Thing

I got the idea that Obama was pretty close to banning tourists -- not very good reading comprehension.

The controls sound moderate and sensible.

[No Elephants]

24. They do? No tourist has raised my consciousness about Antartica, only scientists have.

[On the Road]

27. That's Because You Don't Know Anyone

who has been there. For those who do, it becomes a real place, not just a Discovery Channel show.

[LiberalFighter]

6. IMO should only allow approved research expeditions.

[underpants]

11. Commerce man COMMERCE

there is money to be made!!!

[Posteritatis]

15. "Allow" it? It's not exactly US territory (nt)

[Beacool]

16. I thought the same thing.

I think that Argentina, Chile and a few other countries will have something to say about it.

:D

[Posteritatis]

18. It's not theirs either (nt)

[Beacool]

21. Portions of the Antarctica are within their territory.

While we claimed a stake on another section, like the colonial power that we are or used to be.

[Posteritatis]

22. Claims != owns

No nation owns any part of it, with the questionable exception of the specific soil on which a given research station sits.

[Beacool]

28. Well, they are geographically only a few miles away.

The US, as usual, imposing regulations on other nations.

x(

[Posteritatis]

19. (dupe)

[Fearless]

8. Do we just bring destruction everywhere we go?

Seriously, what does it say of mankind that the best chance for the rest of nature is that we stay away from it. :banghead:

[Deja Q]

23. Not all of us litter. More importantly, here is Visual Evidence, exhibit "A":

I mean, look at that. They're all starving and won't even make omelettes. Tsk tsk.

[No Elephants]

25. Litter is the least of it.

[Vidar]

9. Good idea; or we can just wait a few years until there's no shore for tourists to land on.

[Mari333]

10. Id rather go to CUBA anyway nt

[babylonsister]

13. Maybe soon...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5395052&mesg_id=5395052

U.S. Lawmakers Meet Cuban Foreign Minister In Havana

[Gregorian]

12. He gets it.

Too bad I can't say more. The truth would offend just about everyone here.

[JayMusgrove]

17. Look at how Fox News TWISTS AND SPINS the facts, and then

slides a few in to make sure you don't see them or pay much attention.

Here's the Fox News title: "Obama Calls for Limits on Tourism to Antarctica"

NOW, here's the facts that slipped right by, without people bothering to note the DETAILS....

"U.S. diplomats will propose amending the 50-year-old Antarctic Treaty"


First of all, Obama does NOT control Antarctica!

Second, There is a treaty mechanism in place to propose and carry out any changes as to how those many nations manage Antarctica TOGHETHER!

Third, This is a PROPOSED change to the treaty.... and "The treaty says Antarctica can be used only for peaceful purposes and guarantees freedom for scientific investigations. It sets out guidelines under which the continent can be protected. There are 28 member states and 19 observer countries and organizations to the accord."

Geesh, when does Fox EVER give a good headline, and how many people bother to read the factual details before spouting off about Obama over-reaching?

[muriel_volestrangler]

20. "Calls For" = "proposes"

I can't see what your problem with that headline is. I got the right impression from it, right away. It seems a genuinely reported article. Since it sounds like a good idea to me, I think Obama looks good, from it. :shrug:

[-..__...]

26. For those of you that have the adbot turned off...

upper right-hand corner of this thread...

http://googleads.g.doubleclick.net/pagead/imgad?id=CLGGrPLnhL2E5AEQrAIY7wEyCFC4K-Pq2UTO

:eyes: :rofl:

[Lorien]

29. If he wants to protect Antaractica then CURB EMISSIONS that cause

climate change and protect remaining forests! Discourage people from eating so much beef, raise fleet mileage for autos sold in America (didn't he just do that by .03 miles? Yipee). Get those massive solar projects underway. And a National high speed maglev system would do more for our economy than spending another Trillion on BANKS. Tourism is nothing in comparison to coal fired power plants when it comes to destructive impact.