Marine monument

Much has been said about the proposed marine monument at the three northernmost islands of the Mariana Islands chain. Individuals who support the proposal has made public claims that;

The monument is economically advantageous for the CNMI;

The monument will help preserve the fish and other marine animals for our future generations;

The monument will bring in fresh three ($3,000,000+) plus dollars to the CNMI;

The monument will help in the restoration of the world’s environments;

The monument will employ many CNMI Residents: and

The CNMI Constitution has identified Asuncion, Maug, and Uracus, as Marine Protected Areas.

I would like to separately comment on each of the above points.

[B]“The monument is economically advantageous for the CNMI.”[/B] Yes, perhaps the notion behind the statement sounds good to form. But, I strongly think that it is not so. First, I have read the “economic benefits” study done by a certain University of Guam professor several times and unfortunately, the professor did not present any economic indicator to substantiate his economic presentation. His economic presentation is all based on “maybe or probably” and therefore, my friends, it is a plan without substance. Please, do not be fooled by his economic plan because it will definitely not provide economic advantage to the CNMI and its people. The Mr. Professor should have presented his economic plan with indicators and other economic factors, perhaps, in numbers that will show or justify the intended economic benefits forthcoming from the monument.

I was the Public School System officer to the Northern Islands from 1984-1990. It took a ship seven days to get there. How many tourists can afford to pay thousands of dollars to see the ocean at the marine monument? There is nothing to see except virgin lands that you cannot get into, unless the tourists are willing to ride the waves and jump and cling onto the cliffline to get on land.

If the Mr. Professor is alluding to tourism as the economic factor to benefit the CNMI, again he is wrong. Here is my reason. Tourism is driven by the number of airlines coming to the CNMI. Airline is driven by the cost of fuel. The proposed marine monument will not be a factor to reduce oil prices and, as such we will not see an increase in the number of airlines coming to the CNMI. Therefore, definitely, the number of tourists coming to the CNMI will not increase and we will be left with nothing. The Friends of the Monument are being fooled by Mr. Professor’s “economic benefits” study. Fortunately, we are not!

The Friends of the Monument have gone as far as comparing the Papahanaumokaukea Marine Monument in Hawaii to the proposed marine monument in the CNMI. This comparison is a fallacy. How can you compare Hawaii who gets over four million tourists every year to the CNMI with less than 400,000 tourists every year? This comparison is outrageous! I am not a businessman, but my goodness, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out. It will not work!

[B]“The monument will help preserve the fish and other marine animals for the future generations.”[/B] Perhaps it makes every sense to be thinking of conservation and preservation of our resources. The question is, isn’t the present MPAs in the CNMI not enough conservation area? The CNMI, by law, have Managaha Island, Forbidden Island, Bird Island, Asuncion Island, Maug Island, Uracus Island, and Pisto Island as Marine Protected Areas. What else do you want from us? Take everything that we have. Enough is enough!

If the fish spillover from all these designated Marine Protected Areas within the CNMI is not enough to give the future generations opportunity to see the fish, then I don’t know what will!

[B]“The Marine Monument will bring $3 million-plus fresh money to the CNMI.”[/B] Are we going to compromise the future well-being of the people of the CNMI for $3 million dollars? I think not! No amount of dollars can replace our subsistence living. The questions to ask are 1.) Is the CNMI going to get $3 million-plus every year? Is the $3 million-plus going to be use to buy ships for tourists? Or is the $3 million-plus for jobs for those registered Friends of the Monument and their families?

Yes, the CNMI Constitution has designated the three islands of Uracus, Maug and Asuncion as Marine Protected Areas. Here is the difference between constitutional MPA designation and the Marianas Marine Monument designation: The CNMI Constitution MPA designation is by the will of the people. The people can always amend the constitutional designation in the future to address their needs. The designation under the proposed Marianas Marine Monument will be for the rest of the lives of the people of the CNMI. The economic opportunity of the CNMI’s future generations will be forever lost. “Give me a fish and I’ll eat for the day. Teach me to fish and I will eat for the rest of my life.”

[B]“The monument will help in restoring the world’s environment.”[/B] Again, I certainly agree that we must take part in the restoration of the world’s natural environment. Pew is funded by a company that is responsible for the world’s environmental dilapidation, they should pay the price but not at the expense of the people of the CNMI. I might sound selfish, but it is the truth that the people of the CNMI is never a beneficiary of the billions of dollars Pew made in destroying the world’s natural environment. Why should we pay for it now?

The people of the CNMI have only two things that are handed down by their ancestors. Those are the land and water. The history of the CNMI will show that its people have lived on the land by farming and the water by fishing. Many would ague that it is not the case anymore. Wrong! We farm our land and we fish our ocean for our daily subsistence. More so now than ever, especially with the bad condition of our economy that perhaps will continue until we see better times.

At present, we the islanders of the CNMI have only one thing left of what have been handed down by our ancestors and that is the land. The federal government, through the Covenant, has taken away our water by mandate of the Covenant. This was affirmed by the federal Circuit of Appeals decision on the submerged lands case. The CNMI lost its argument on the submerge land issue. That should give the people of the CNMI more reasons to protect the taking of our islands of Asuncion, Maug, and Uracus.

[B]“The monument will employ many CNMI residents.”[/B] I don’t think so. The Papahanaumokaukea Marine Monument in Hawaii employs only seven people out of the 1,211,537 population. This is not even 1 percent of the population. How can you convince the people of the CNMI that the Mariana Marine Monument will employ more people than Hawaii? If the monument will employ at least 100 CNMI residents, then I can say that it benefits the employment portion of their argument.

[B]“The three most northern islands, Asuncion, Maug, and Uracus, are protected areas by CNMI Constitution.”[/B] Yes, that is the case with the three islands. As I have stated earlier, the people of the CNMI have included these islands in our Constitution as conservation areas for future needs. We should keep these islands protected for the future of our children. We should give them the opportunity to make a decision in the future whereby they can amend the Constitution to fit their future economic advancement. Once again, I strongly feel that the islands in the CNMI belong to the Carolinians and Chamorros. We should be speaking as to how best we will dispose of our islands. Those who are not of NMI-descent and do not meet the 1/4 blood requirement must refrain from talking as to how they best think they can dispose of our indigenous islands. What is it that you do not understand about what Article 12 has mandated?

On another note, the Friends of the Monument have put out a list of individuals who support the Mariana Marine Monument. Here are some of the things that I find problematic about their list.

The names of some individuals are printed five or six times;

Names of individuals who are not of sound mine are listed; and

Names of students who are in the Special Education program are also listed.

Is this how desperate the proponent of the monument? They would enlist individuals who don’t fully understand what they are signing? Did they concoct this list, thinking that people would not review their list? How shameful. I would recommend that parents of those special kids whose names are listed without their authorization to take immediate action against this group.

Lastly, if you are not an islander, then you will never understand how islanders live. You can pretend to know, but you will never know unless you are an islander!

[B]Juan I. Tenorio[/B] [I]As Matuis, Saipan[/I]