The World Assembly,
Praising General Assembly Resolution #66 "Endangered Species Protection" as a cornerstone of international environmental law and convinced that multitudes of species have been saved from disappearing permanently due to it,
Striving, however, to consistently improve and reduce the ambiguity in existing WA legislation,
Questioning Endangered Species Protection's decision to seemingly only extend protections to animals, as indicated by using the word "animals", "animal species", and "hunting" repeatedly in the proposal when all phylums of life have unique values that would be lost by extinction,
Regretting that the resolution also discuss that protections need not be extended to certain types of bacteria and viruses (neither of which are animals) creating ambiguity and uncertainty in enforcement as to whether only animals or all forms of life are covered by Endangered Species Protections,
Finding other important terms in the proposal to be ambiguous in usage, such as "exhibiting repeated numeric decline" (which WA Endangered Species Committee is responsible for conserving) a phrase the could pertain to both species experiencing natural population fluctuations and those approaching endangerment; and "pollution" which could be interpreted as narrowly as to mean chemical containments found in habitats or as broadly as to include any noise or light impacting the habitat,
While praising the proposal's prohibitions on some actions that are deleterious to endangered species, including further habitat loss, habitat pollution, and hunting of endangered species; also noting the resolution does not specifically prohibit other potentially harmful actions such as non-fatal harassment of endangered organisms, the introduction of harmful invasive organisms, and the intentional or accidental disruption of important species activities,
Aware that the proposal focuses on the prevention of further harm to endangered species, while only mentioning potential actions to actively increases species population numbers in the direst circumstances,
Concerned that without a clear active recovery plan, species population levels can remain low for long periods of time, leaving a no-win situation of species at continued risk for extinction and the economically deleterious impact of endangered species protections become long term,
Anxious that the binary regulation choice provided for in Endangered Species Protection of species either being endangered and therefore receiving the full protections or being fully unprotected may create perverse incentives to forcibly remove species from property before they are found to be endangered so as to avoid future regulations,
Confident that replacement legislation which builds upon the positive legacy of Endangered Species Protection will be put in place rapidly;
Hereby repeals GAR 66: Endangered Species Protection.
