KARKUM CONSERVATION DEED

Sample of the Karkum Conservation Deed

1. Date of Deed

This Deed is hereby made on the 17th day of November 2008 and we declare that this
Deed binds members of UGERKEN, NENENG, GORKOM and NIWAP/KIRKUR Clans
from Karkum Village in the _SUMKAR__District of the Madang Province.

2. Parties to the Contract
2.1 It is acknowledged that only three (3) individuals (men or women) whom the
clan has chosen as their leader or spokesperson shall be signatories for and on
behalf of the Clan on this Conservation Deed.
2.2 We declare that the _ UGERKEN, NENENG, GORKOM and NIWAP/KIRKUR
Clans control those areas of land described and marked on the map attached to
this Deed.

3. Term of the Contract
3.1 We recognize that this Deed is a legal document which binds the parties to
their promises and can be enforced in the National court of Justice.
3.2 We agree that this Deed shall take effect commencing on and from the date of
execution of this Deed and shall remain in effect for a period of five (5) years,
that we the people shall conserve our land and sea, including the forests, waterresources,
native plants and the animals in their current state.
3.3 We agree that this Deed shall take effect over the land and sea area as
designated in the Map attached and marked as Schedule D.

4. Conservation Area Management Rules
4.1 We agree that we will not kill and eat or kill and dump all turtle species from the
open ocean and river within the conservation area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged a fine of K200.00 and or 6
months community service.
4.2 We agree that we will not dig and remove eggs for all turtle species that come
and lay eggs on the sand dunes.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K200.00 and or
6 months community service.
4.3 We agree that we will not use poison ropes, dynamite, fishing nets, diving at
night using spear guns and any other modern or traditional fishing methods
within the conservation area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K200.00 and or
6 month community service.
2
4.4 We agree that we will not cut trees, shrubs and vines near the beach within the
conservation area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K100.00 and or 4 months
community service.
4.5 We agree that we will not make any fire or roam with torch and lamp within the
Conservation Area. Only the Sea Turtle Restoration Project Committee has the
power to authorise anyone with interest or concerns to do such things within the
Conservation Area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K100.00 and or 4 months
community service.
4.6 We agree that we will not throw all kinds of rubbish or garbage such as plastic,
bottle, tin, iron, laplap, battery, oil, and paper within the conservation area that
will disturb people’s minds to clean and keep safe our environment.
Penalty: Village offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K100.00 and or 4
months community service. Corporations will be charged to pay a fine of
K1000.00
4.7 We agree that we will not collect or destroy other wildlife in the sea such as
echinoderms, molluscs, sea grasses, etc. within the conservation area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K100.00 and or 4 months
community service.
4.8 We agree that we will not remove or disturb reefs in the sea or on the beach
within the conservation area.
Penalty: Offenders will be charged to pay a fine of K100.00 and or 4 months
community service.

5. Clan Rights and Obligations
5.1 We acknowledge and accept that this Deed is subject to the Laws of the
Independent State of Papua New Guinea and is guided by the Common Law
Principles of Contract.
5.2 We acknowledge and accept that this Deed binds all who identify themselves
with the Clans mentioned herein, and can be upheld in any Court of Law in PNG.
5.3 All mature natural persons found to be in violation of any of the rules of
Management under Section 4, will be penalized accordingly upon reasonable
proof being shown and determined on a balance of probabilities.
5.4 We acknowledge and accept that all monetary fines collected will be paid to the
designated Environment Sub-Committee of the Duargo Community Development
3
Association and shall be managed and used for community projects as approved
by all the Clans.
5.5 We acknowledge and accept the need for cooperation to find, develop and
manage developments occurring on the land, beneath the land and under the
sea.
5.6 We acknowledge and accept that this Deed constitutes the entire Agreement
between the four (4) Clans.

6. General Provisions
6.1 This Agreement shall remain in effect and shall not be affected;
(a) in event of death,
(b) in event of unsoundness of mind,
(c) in event of a conviction in a court of law,
(d) in event of being declared bankrupt,
any or all of the Clan representatives who have endorsed this Agreement for and
on behalf of their Clan.
6.2 Where a situation under Section 6.1.1(a)-(d) occurs, the Clans shall;
(a) immediately appoint a date to meet,
(b) they will take steps to nominate and appoint a new
representative,
(c) the successful party will be nominated by a two
thirds majority of voting age member of the clan
present.
6.3 The new representative shall take immediate steps to;
(a) within 7 days to notify the other three (3) Clans in
writing, and
(b) shall accompany the Notice with a Minute of the
Meeting, and
(c) The minute shall be endorsed by three (3) most
elder clans men or women as nominated by the Clan during the
same meeting.

Verification of Signatures
We the undersigned hereby endorse our signature on this Conservation Deed as contained
under Schedules A, B and C for and on behalf of the Government, respective community
Association and Clans and undertake that we have done so after fully reading and
understanding the purpose of this document during this launching ceremony at Karkum
village on the 17th of November 2008:

4 SCHEDULE A
Chairman – Tokain-Sarang Village Court
Name Address Signature
Tamol Dalek Mathew P.O.Box 788, Madang ____________________
President – Sumgilbar Local Level Government
Name Address Signature
John Sekum P.O.Box 788, Madang ____________________
Ward 7 Member – Sumgilbar Local Level Government
Name Address Signature
Peter Nambon P.O.Box 788, Madang ____________________
SCHEDULE B
These following men and women who represent the four clans have signed:
UGERKEN CLAN
Name Signature
1. Willie Mulom _____________________
2. Larry Yapen _____________________
3. Danip Yaiam _____________________
NINENG CLAN
Name Signature
1. Mathew Dalek ____________________
2. Francis Nabuai ___________________

5
3. Dominic Nambon ____________________
NIVAP/KIRKUR CLAN
Name Signature
1. Willie Mayang ____________________
2. Willie Karem ____________________
3. Vincent Nanai ____________________
GORKOM CLAN
Name Signature
1. John Pakang ____________________
2. Joseph Labi ____________________
3. Wong Toles ____________________
SCHEDULE C
Sea Turtle Restoration Project Committee Members’ Names (DUARGO COMMUNITY DEV.
ASSOCIATION)
Name Signature Clan
1. Francis Nanai ____________________ ____________________
2. Lennon Mulom ____________________ ____________________
3. Vero Aimos ____________________ ____________________
4. Dick Akaski ____________________ ____________________
6
SCHEDULE D 7
I, hereby certify this to be a true reflection of the communities desires to conserve and manage
their land and sea as identified with by the accompanied map with the accompanied rules
herein. This Deed shall be binding on all parties that have jointly and or severally endorsed their
respective signatures on this document.
Dated: day of 2008.

Karkum's 2010 Turtle Tagging Data

On the 05th of September 2010 Wence (Wenceslaus Magun) boarded Air Niugini and travelled to Madang. Whilst waiting to board his plane he had a quick chat with Jeff Kinch from SPREP who was already in Madang to find out if Lui was going to accompany him on his trip to Karkum. Jeff informed Wence that Lui could not make it but that there is a possibility for some members of SPREP deligation in Madang to visit the project site and invited Wence to go visit them at the Madang Resort Hotel to confirm this plan.

The meeting with Jeff and Sima at the Madang Resort a day later confirmed this plan thus seeing Wence travel the following day to Karkum village to make arrangements for the visit of the SPREP delegation.

At Karkum Wence reviewed the turtle data information that was given to him whilst he was in Madang town before meeting Jeff to hand him those information with the latest data information the beach rangers had and updated the data which he had delivered to Jeff at the Madang Resort Hotel.

In his assessment, Wence noted that due to lack of proper supervision and lack of stipend to beach rangers, some of the data they have collected was NOT effectively, efficiently and accurately gathered. The views Wence gauged from the majority of the village beach rangers and elders and the Karkum Conservation team leaders is that there is a eminent need for another Turtle Training; that must cover both the theory and the practical aspects of turtle tagging, and monitoring. He also noted that an experienced para-biologist must be engaged to supervise the beach rangers during the turtle tagging and monitoring exercise. The beach rangers also expressed concerns that they needed proper measuring tapes, weighing machines and other turtle tagging and monitoring devices to help them do a proper job. Unless these needs are addressed, the current information may not be reliable for the purpose of keeping a proper turtle data information at the SPREP office. The edited turtle data information are hereby enclosed:

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 1
Date: 16th February 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Max Magal Andrew
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter 8:00pm Activity: crawling back to sea; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA

# of eggs laid: Not counted
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet -2
Date: 18th March 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Cathy Nambon and Martin Nambon
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long basis klostu long haus win blong Bill – klostu long Mangas
TURTLE
Time of encounter 6:00am Activity: crawling back to sea; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA

# of eggs laid: Not counted
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Eggs successfully hatched and hatchlings returned to sea but no records were taken.

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 3
Date: 30th March 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long basis klostu long haus blong Danib Yaiam
TURTLE
Time of encounter 6:00am Activity: crawling back to sea; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Not counted
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 4
Date: 05th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long Yek Kanak (Marmar)
TURTLE
Time of encounter 6:30am Activity: Not seen, just the nest area was sighted; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Eggs eaten by dogs (feral animals on the same day).
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 5
Date: 16th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long Idung Ken (Yek-kanak)
TURTLE
Time of encounter 10:00am Activity: Mother not sighted but sighted eggs after water changed direction and washed up the nest sight; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded

EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Eggs had formed turtle hatchlings. One premature hatchling removed from an egg. Hard and black colour inside egg shells. Other eggs were dug out and relocated by Andrew).
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well
Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 6
Date: 17th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long Idung Ken (Yek-kanak). On sandy beach between Idung and Iser rivers
TURTLE
Time of encounter 07:00am Activity: Turtle not sighted but nest was sighted and marked by Andrew (beach ranger); Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa

Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Eggs were dug out by a poacher (thief) causing argument and conflict between villagers from Gorkom and Mirap and the beach ranger.
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well
Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 7
Date: 20th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long Tallelwap (klostu long put)
TURTLE
Time of encounter 07:00am Activity: Mother turtle not sighted but the nest was seen and marked. Bamboo fencing made to keep feral animals away; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left

Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Eggs were dug out by a poacher (thief) causing argument and conflict between villagers from Gorkom and Mirap and the beach ranger.
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 8
Date: 19th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) long Tallelwap (klostu long put)
TURTLE
Time of encounter 07:00am Activity: Mother turtle not sighted but the nest was seen and marked. Bamboo fencing made to keep feral animals away; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded

EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Eggs were dug out by a poacher (thief) causing argument and conflict between villagers from Gorkom and Mirap and the beach ranger.
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well
Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 9
Date: 25th April 2010
Turtle Species: Green turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) Yek kanak (Namel long Idung na Iser)
TURTLE
Time of encounter Not recorded Activity: Mother turtle not sighted but the nest was seen and marked. Bamboo fencing made to keep feral animals away; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number:Not tagged Flipper: Right; Not tagged Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa

Curved carapace length: Not recorded Curved carapace width: Not recorded
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: Nests was not seen until previous nest (eggs) started hatching – accidently sighted by Andrew Magal (Beach ranger).
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Not monitored well

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 10
Date: 31st January 2010
Turtle Species: Leatherback
Name of observer: Gideon Mutindep
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 18.5m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) klostu long haus bilong Danib Yaiam
TURTLE
Time of encounter10:12 am or pm?; Activity: crawing up and laying eggs; Zone: black sand
Primary tag number: R5150? Flipper: Right; R45104 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: P.O. Box 240 SPREP, Apia, Samoa
Curved carapace length: 157 cm?; Curved carapace width: 112 cm?
EGG AND NEST DATA

# of eggs laid: 125
Egg data: 125 a) diameter 16cm b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:__43 cm_____ Depth of bottom: _75.5cm________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. Fifteen successful hatchlings seen going down to the sea.
2. Photos taken with the Association’s camera (Wence could not find them)


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 11
Date: 21thJanuary 2010
Turtle Species: Leatherback Turtle
Name of observers: Andrew, Kenneth and Rex
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: ________; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human:110; b) sand mining____ c) lighting:____; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter:5:30am; Activity:Covering eggs Zone: _________
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type:Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length:160 cm Curved carapace width:120 cm

EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: DID NOT LAY ANY EGGS
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:______ ; Depth of bottom: _____
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. The turtle was closely watched by the rangers digging its nest and laying its eggs before returning to sea but no photos were taken.
2. Beach ranger John Maguya saw feral animals (dogs/pigs) dig the nesting site
3. He chased the dogs and pigs and saved one hatchling. (See video footage)
4. Twenty one (hatchlings) died in the nest only one survived. Total of 22 hatchlings.
5. King tidal waves had washed sand onto the nesting site causing hatchlings to die.

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 12
Date: 20thJanuary 2010
Turtle Species: NOT SEEN
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: ________; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human:____; b) sand mining____ c) lighting:____; d) industry; e) other___

Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) klostu long gest haus
TURTLE
Time of encounter:12:43pm; Activity:laying eggs Zone: Vegetation edge
Primary tag number: NIL Flipper: Right; NIL Flipper: Left
Tag type: ___________Address: ___________
Curved carapace length: ___________; Curved carapace width: _________
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: DID NOT LAY ANY EGGS
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:______ ; Depth of bottom: _____
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Did not see the turtle but identified footprint and nest to be of Green Turtle

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet -13
Date: 19thJanuary 2010
Turtle Species: Leatherback Turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Magal
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: ________; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human:____; b) sand mining____ c) lighting:____; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter:3:30am; Activity: __________; Zone: _______________
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type: ___________Address: ___________
Curved carapace length: ___________; Curved carapace width: _________

EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: DID NOT LAY ANY EGGS
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg: 20cm; Depth of bottom: 30cm
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Same leatherback turtle returned but did not lay any eggs.
Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 14
Date: 9th January 2010
Turtle Species: Leatherback Turtle
Name of observer: Beach Ranger Team Leader and Mark Khon
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Vegetation; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) stret long maus rot long haus bilong Mr. Danib Yaiam
TURTLE
Time of encounter:_______; Activity: _Laid eggs_________; Zone: _______________
Primary tag number: _Not done_______ Flipper: Right; _________ Flipper: Left
Tag type: ___________Address: ___________
Curved carapace length: ___________; Curved carapace width: _________

EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: 186 (102=Big Eggs & 84=Small Eggs)
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg: 20cm; Depth of bottom: 30cm
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
The team of beach rangers dug this nest to count the eggs. It was filmed.
1. Twelve (hatchlings) returned to sea in the morning (video taken), many at night (footage not taken).
2. Number of spoilt eggs not counted
3. Video footage taken with community camera.
4. Leatherback laying eggs at full moon time witnessed by many villagers


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 15
Date: 30th December 2009
Turtle Species: Leatherback Turtle
Name of observer: Danip Yaiyem
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc) Long Talewap klostu long bikpela kalapulim.
TURTLE
Time of encounter: 5:30am; Activity: Covering eggs; Zone: _______________
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length: 160 cm; Curved carapace width: 120 cm
EGG AND NEST DATA

# of eggs laid: 108
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. Same leatherback turtle that was sighted and tagged on the 06th of December 2009.
2. Video footage taken;
3. King tidal waves destroyed all the eggs when the waves washed up more sand dunes onto the nesting site.
4. Number of eggs not counted.
5. Ranger who recorded the information on the destruction of the nests did not write his/her name.

Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 16
Date: 29th December 2009
Turtle Species: Loggerhead or Green Turtle not sure
Name of observer: Andrew Ungai
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 105 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE

Time of encounter:4:30am; Activity: crawling back to sea; Zone: High Sand
Primary tag number: Flipper: Right; Flipper: Left (not tagged)
Tag type: Address:_____________________
Curved carapace length: _________Curved carapace width: _______
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: 98
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. Turtle Not Tagged; 2. Beach Ranger Andrew Magal dug up the eggs to find that all the eggs were destroyed due to rising sea adding more sand dunes onto the previous layer. 3. No dates indicating when the eggs were dug up and the number of eggs recorded, nor the depth of the nest was taken.


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 17
Date: 18th December 2009
Turtle Species: Leatherback
Name of observer: Larry Yapen
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 105 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter: 5:30am; Activity: covering nest; Zone: High Sand
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length: 160 cm; Curved carapace width: 120 cm
EGG AND NEST DATA

# of eggs laid: Not Counted
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. Same turtle that was seen on the 17th of December 2009 without laying eggs returned and layed its eggs this morning. 2. No dates indicating when the eggs were dug up and the number of eggs recorded, nor the depth of the nest taken and the name of the person/s who dug up the nest.


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet -18
Date: 17th December 2009

Turtle Species: Leatherback Turtle
Name of observer: Andrew Ungai and Damian Unung
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 105 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: ; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter: 3:00am; Activity: crawling up; Zone: ___________
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length:1 60 cm; Curved carapace width: 1 20 cm
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: NIL
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. Did not find suitable nesting site?? Made attempts to dig but returned to sea without laying eggs. 2. A Beach Ranger dug up the eggs to find that all the eggs were destroyed due to rising sea adding more sand dunes onto the previous layer. 3.No dates indicating when eggs were dug up and who did it and the number of eggs recorded.


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 19
Date: 06th December 2009
Turtle Species: Leatherback
Name of observer: Willie Mayang
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter: 2:00am; Activity: laying eggs; Zone: Vegetation Edge
Primary tag number: R45074 Flipper: Right; R45087 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length: 160 cm; Curved carapace width: 120 cm
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: 128

Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:
In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Second of the third leatherback that was laying its eggs when photographed since this project was launched in November 2008.
1. Tried moving eggs to save them from king (tidal) waves;
2. Nest was dug by feral animals (pig). Andrew saw the pig digging and chased it away;
3. Made bamboo fencing
4. Checked and saw two (2) dead hatchlings on day # 53.
5. Rest of the eggs were spoilt (number not recorded)
6. Four empty egg shells indicated that four hatchlings went down to the sea.


Turtle Encounter and Nesting Turtle Data Sheet - 20
Date: 06th December 2009
Turtle Species: Green Turtle
Name of observer: Ambo Nigida
Institution: Karkum Sea Turtle Restoration Project
BEACH CHARACTERISTICS
Length: 3 Kms Width: 46 m of Black Sandy Beach
Beach backed by: a) vegetation, type: Forest; b) road___; c) village/town: Karkum d) other______
Distance: a) human: 100 m; b) sand mining____ c) lighting: 200 m; d) industry; e) other___
Offshore: (rocky, sandy, etc)
TURTLE
Time of encounter: 12:43pm; Activity: laying eggs; Zone: Vegetation Edge
Primary tag number: Flipper: Right; R45086 Flipper: Left
Tag type: Titanium; Address: SPREP, Samoa
Curved carapace length: 63 cm; Curved carapace width: 60 cm
EGG AND NEST DATA
# of eggs laid: 68
Egg data: a) diameter b) weight___________
Position of clutch:

In danger of Fate of clutch
Inundation relocated
Vegetation predated
Rocks poached
Trunks insitu
Erosion don’t know
Good position
Nest dimensions
Depth of top egg:_______ Depth of bottom: _________
GENETIC SAMPLE COLLECTION
Blood:_______ Tissue: __________
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
1. King (tidal waves disturbed all the eggs. Dug out and removed 2. No dates indicating when the eggs were dug up and the number of eggs recorded, nor the depth of the nest taken and the name of the person/s who dug up the nest.

If Today You Hear His Voice, Harden Not Your Hearts

Reflection – 23rd Sunday, 4th September, 2011 – De Boismenu College
By Fr. John Aneo, MSC
In 2006, five Amish children in Pennsylvania were murdered at their school by a man who then took his own life. Whilst this tragedy was newsworthy in itself, what followed also hit the news. The Amish community, despite its deep loss and grief, urged forgiveness for the killer. This extraordinary gesture stunned many people around the world. The Amish people’s explanation for their behaviour was reported in USA Today (October 5, 2006): ‘They believe their calling is to accept and absorb hostility without fighting back or falling apart.” The paper also reported that one of the Armish went to the home of the killer’s father embracing him and saying, ‘We all forgive you.’’ Another explained to the media, “We’re really strongly taught to forgive the way Christ forgives us.” We see here that being a Christian isn’t a luck but a serious commitment to a radical new way of life.
We hear a lot about ‘watching out for Number One.’ An Episcopalian priest [USA] who served for many years in Nicaragua always wrote and spoke of his country – USA- as the ‘Me-First World’. Both views here emerge from the egocentric declarations that is; íf you don’t take care of yourself, who will?’
Paul and Mathew divert us in another direction. For them ‘watching out for Number One; can no longer be oneself but is an invitation to look at one another with new eyes, to listen to the other with new ears and to feel for the other with new hearts. Paul calls us to rise above laws that negatively state out responsibilities for one another – not to kill, not to steal, or covet, not to commit adultery – into something positive and proactive. Our debt to one another, our responsibility for one another, can be put into one powerful word: Love. Love reverences and wateches out for the other as Number One. The other readings explain how far love must go in order to be genuine. It must look out for the other so much so that this love will risk pointing out to another where they may be wrong.
Ezekiel presents us with an awesome and often scary responsibility, as does the gospel today: ‘speak to warn the wicked to turn from their ways’. He is not referring merely to personal morality but social responsibility, injustice, and death-dealing. It offers the hope of liberation and the prospect of forgiveness to those who harm others. Even the oppressor has a right to his/her liberation! But as the late poet Audre Lorde said: Óur silence will not protect us’.
Other minorities have felt the burden to educate and challenge others to accept them and embrace differences as assets for community-building and exhibiting an unquenchable passion for justice. This is very clear in ethnic communities, women’s groups, the gay community and indigenous groups. Taking Ezekiel’s words to heart involves calling into question gender, racism, revenge, violence, corruption and damage to the environment etc. For those of us who live in a predominantly religious and Catholic community background, it might also cause us to reflect and to call into question unearned privileges’ which we take for granted: privileges such as our social power whether of gender, race, class, religion or nationality. We must be that ‘watchman/woman’Ezekiel refers to – who speak up for justice on behalf of a just God.
Paul’s view of Christian community is simple: ‘Love does no evil to the neighbour; hence, love is the fulfilment of the law.’ He concretises this by referring to vengeance. How relevant still today as we continue to face the world and society that is torn by violence, corruption, greed and payback.
Recently, in the deaths of about 30 military personnel in Afghanistan, Barack Obama said what has been heard many times: ‘Their deaths are a reminder of the extraordinary sacrifices made by the men and women of our military and their families.’ At unfortunate death of one of our soldiers, we also hear the prime minister, defense minister, chief of the defence forces or the corporate media offering their canned responses and sentiments for military deaths with the ongoing platitudes to justify continuations of shamefully wrong actions. The world mourned the deaths of over 3000 people on September 11, 2001 but aim to perpetuate myths not only to enthuse nationalism, but of extraordinary sacrifice, threats to our way of life and freedom. We cannot know the toll that revenge which we as a nation have participated in on people whose lives, livelihoods and country has been destroyed. A million dead? Two million? Including children.
Our call is to embrace a way of life that is distinct from that of the prevailing culture of revenge, violence, and me-first. Paul is calling us to embrace a way of life distinctly different from the prevailing death-dealing culture where retaliation, grudges, feuds, the évil eye ‘and curses were the order of the day. The love we are called to not only stops violence but tries to be proactive.
The gospel offers a complementary process for avoiding the practise of vengeance. The process is presented in three parts, but ultimately the community of believers has a role in helping to restore broken relationships. ‘I am there among them ‘says Jesus. It is through the power of solidarity with others, however, even just two or three others, that we achieve peace with Justice (Mathew 18:19-20).
John Donne, the Anglican priest and poet reminded us that, ‘no [man] is an island, entire unto himself’. Despite our dense populations, loneliness is a chronic, debilitating, and common condition. As social animals, solidarity experience is contrary to our nature. We have lived our lives in the context of one community or another – some good and others not so good where we recognise that much of human history has been one of war and conflict; of finding it difficult to get on with one another. There is a negative side of community life, but we do not give in to the dark side. We make peace where there is division and isolation because we also realise that our lives in the context of community must be mutually supportive. ‘Where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them.’ We do gather in Jesus’name; re-call him to presence with us which makes him a part of us and what we do. Jesus makes it clear how important we are one to another. Our connectedness gives us a power; gives strength to our values; enables us to be an effective healing force among others. This connectedness was clearly evident in times of tragedy.
The Asian tsunami; Hurricane Katrina, Cyclone Larry, Cylone Mitch; the devastating cyclone in Burma. People reached out to help and in big ways. As Charles Dickens said, Ít was the best of times. It was the worst of times’(from A Tale of Two Cities). And the gospel today calls us to be connected’ everyday to those we would sometimes not choose to be with.
As we come to the 10th anniversary of the tragic events of September 11, 2001, can we ask when will come the time for the vengeance end, when will be the time for reconciliation to take, when will we see that many more people have suffered that the initial casualties, how much more innocent blood will continue to be spilt by people who were not even alive at the time?
The German Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892-1984), who protested Hitler’s anti-Semitic measures which resulted in imprisonment at Sachsenhausen and Dachau (1937-1945), confessed , Ít took me a long time to learn that God is not the enemy of my enemies. He is not even the enemy of His enemies.” On September 11 we might pray that despite the pain and horror experienced we might also learn the lesson of Niemöller and act the way the Amish community responded in one, united voice to both of the families of the victims, the perpetrator and his family.
Reflections on readings....
Though we belong to a community of brothers and sisters, many Christians behave as if Christianity is a private or purely personal affair. The scriptures always call us to be on the lookout for one another. God’s call to Cain, “Where is your brother?” Is constantly before us. Our relationship with Jesus depends on our relationship with other people: family, neighbours and strangers. “By this will all know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another’ (John 13:35) and Ás often as you did/did not do it to me”(Mathew 25:40,45). And clearly, our attitudes and behaviour towards those who are most at risk, most defenceless and most vulnerable must be of utmost concern: the aged, children, people living with mental illness or some disability, asylum seekers.
More often than not it is religion that is exclusive. The Gospel is never exclusive. The gospel today tries to deal with divisions, conflicts, and unacceptable behaviour in the community – yet its primary concern is reconciliation, not punishment. This is relevant at all levels of the church community. It seems rather strong/harsh to suggest that one should be treated like a pagan or tax collector, i.e., an outsider – but it is a matter of last resort. This drastic step is not to be taken lightly or in a spirit of revenge or vindictiveness. It is done out of real concern for the wellbeing of the whole community. Too often it has not been the welfare of the community that has led people to be treated as an outsider but because the power of leaders is threatened when truths all should hear are suppressed. If not treated as an outsider, but certainly dismissed, there are numerous, e.g., Bishop Geoffrey Robinson, Bishop William Morris, Sister Joan Chittister. All have in their own way tried to enhance the mission of the church and witness to the Gospel.
When Jesus says, ‘For where two or three are gathered in my name, I am there among them (Mathew 18:20)’he is reminding us that a handful of people can make a difference but the fact is that ‘where two or more are gathered’ the group also consists of rough diamonds. It does not always mean they are right either! Nevertheless, it can be rather daunting, when the Gospel tells us, that we ought to ‘go and point out the fault when the two of you are alone’ with someone who is causing division in the community. How do we know that one is right and the other is wrong? Individuals can take positions in the community that we may be totally opposed to but who still have the well being of all at heart. Support for gay rights can become divisive within the community. People can express spiteful, belittling and other very rude comments and some may confront these with one’s own superior viewpoint and many premeditated facts and arguments. Even taking the issue to tow or more others is not necessarily of the spirit. Though one knows that one is right. What matters is being open to God’s loving spirit and that we invite a Christ-like presence of humility and tenderness into the conversation. Again, treating someone like an outsider or pagan is a ‘terrible’ thing – and should be last and not used often.
The psalmist has much to offer. Íf today you hear his voice, harden not your heart’. We know that the absence of rain, even on good ground, can mean that the arrival of rain can lead to flooding because the ground has become so hard that it cannot penetrate the soil. This may also be the situation of our hearts. Hard-heartedness can protect us from hearing, feeling, seeing the point of view of, and responding to another’s pain. A stubborn heart or closed heart cuts us off from others and keeps others at a distance. This can be just as present in the group as in an individual. In recent years people in the church, in politics and the media, has disparaged others as bleeding hearts because of their advocacy and support of asylum seekers, respect for people of other ethnic or sexual groups.
The psalmist and the gospel call is to open our hearts to the other, to be open to reconciliation. Íf today you hear his voice, harden not your heart’. Can you hear the voices of the poor who seek to be treated with respect? Can you hear voices of women who seek to be treated with equality? Can you hear the voice of the spirit of God in you when you feel angry and enraged at any injustice? It is truly the voice of God calling us to act. Íf today you hear his voice, harden not your heart’. God’s call to us is to listen to the cries of our sisters and brothers near and far; it is another way of God calling out to us and asking us ‘Where is your brother/sister?’ The psalm and the gospel connect today. It is important that we do not harden our hearts against our sister or brother. This is especially if we remember that where two or three are gathered there Jesus is (am I) in the midst of them.

BSSIPC's submission to Mining Warden Hearing on Sea Bed Mining

MINING ACT 1991

MINING WARDEN HEARING

MADANG PROVINCIAL HEADQUARTERS

1000 17th February 2009


SUBMISSIONS


Bismark-Solomon Seas Indigenous Peoples Council


There are five broad objections to allowing any more exploration for deep seabed mining.


1. There is no statutory framework, or an inadequate statutory frame work in Papua New Guinea to address the risks from deep sea bed mining.

2. There are no regulations for safety and environmental management of the engineering associated with deep sea bed mining.


3. There is no framework for the distribution of economic benefits arising from deep sea bed mining.

4. There is no organic law supporting provincial maritime boundaries.


5. It is not rational to grant further exploration licenses to an applicant who cannot bring existing exploration licenses into actual mining


1. No statutory frame work, or an inadequate statutory frame work


Deep seabed mining is new technology with new risks. Papua New Guinea does not have a specific statutory framework, or an inadequate statutory frame work to address the risks that arise from this new technology. The Mining Act and Mining Regulations date from the last decade, and they have not been brought up to date. Similarly there are no regulations under the Environment Act that address any risk from deep sea bed mining.

 The Constitution binds all government officers and officials, including judicial officers, and Mining Wardens through the Third National Goal: National sovereignty & self-reliance para (6): “the State is to take effective measures to control and actively participate in the national economy, and in particular to control major enterprises engaged in the exploitation of natural resources”

Consequently for the State to grant permits or licenses to foreign companies to carry out the exploration of natural resources without having in place “effective measures to control” that exploration, is unconstitutional and unlawful, in itself.

The fact that there is no legal framework for the exploration of deep sea bed resources is a fact that should be taken into account by any officer or body, bound by law to exercise any discretion.

If a licence were to issue, and there were no body of appropriate laws to regulate the exploration permit, then because the act of issuing the license would have been unconstitutional, then a fact (no laws regulating the activity) that should have been taken into account, was not taken into account, and at administrative law, would be an unreasonable act, and unlawful.

This would be so, even if the issuing of the license was otherwise constitutional, because issuing of a license in circumstances were there are risks and no law affecting those risks, is irrational.


2. There are no regulations for safety and environmental management of the engineering associated with deep sea bed mining.

Deep sea bed mining is a new technology. It is being done for the first time in Papua New Guinea.

The Papua New Guinea Government does not have in place appropriate regulations to deal with this new technology.

Government has the responsibility to protect all the stakeholders in deep sea bed mining.

These stakeholders would include

• The mine and ship workers, and their trade unions, who are engaged in the deep sea bed mining operations.

• Provincial governments and local level governments and the communities in the areas adjacent to the mining activity, or likely to be affected by the mining activity.

• Future generations

It follows from the fact that there are no statutes or Acts of Parliament dealing with deep sea bed mining that there are also no regulations.

What this shows is that the government is rushing too quickly in an area where it cannot properly oversee and regulate the activity.

There are no effective controls over the engineering and mining safety associated with deep sea bed mining. There are mine safety regulations in respect of terrestrial mining. But no regulations for sea bed mining.

There are no effective controls over the environmental risks that could arise from sea bed mining. This is of particular concern because of the biodiversity priority of life-forms associated with the mining of active submarine vents.

But regulations are needed to control the effects of sedimentary disturbances caused by mining the sea bed, and the way those sedimentary disturbances may be affected by ocean currents. Here the absence of regulations dealing with altered metal particles is likely to be important in the long-term because of the effect that metal particles carried by ocean currents may have on coral reefs, or fish-breeding grounds, areas in which fish are know to aggregate, or known areas where commercial fishing is prevalent.

In all of these areas there is need for regulation because “the State is to take effective measures to control and actively participate in the national economy, and in particular to control major enterprises engaged in the exploitation of natural resources”. For similar reasons of no constitutional compliance, there should be no exploration that disturbs active vents.


Because there are regulations, it is our submission that deep sea vent chimney miners should only be permitted take the inactive relic deposits, and even then the mining safety regime and the environment regime must be strict.

Papua New Guinea has no regime of rules controlling these activities, and prudence requires that the rules be developed first before legal rights put into private hands.

As we have we said, to do otherwise would be to violate the Constitutional mandate that this process is bound by: the wise use of natural resources in the 4th National Goal

“... conservation and replenishment, for the benefit of ourselves and posterity, of the environment and its sacred, scenic, and historical qualities; and all necessary steps to be taken to give adequate protection to our valued birds, animals, fish, insects, plants and trees.”

There are simply no specific rules or regimes to conserve the particularity of deep seabed life-forms.

Exploration should not be permitted over active vents, which should be declared part of Papua New Guineas natural heritage, for the following reasons:


 These ecosystems should be considered similar to life on the moons of Saturn or Jupiter, a very different ecology from what we know about earth surface ecology.

 Deep sea vent chimney miners should take only the inactive/relict deposits, not the living, smoking, biologically rich vent chimneys.

 Grinding up living chimney communities is like removing the Galapagos Islands before Darwin got there.

 These submissions are well supported by science.

 There has been an explosion of science journal papers on the biology & geochemistry of deep and shallow sea vents in the past two decades, and in vent biology and chemistry.

 Papua New Guinea has no rules or regulations over the sampling of these exotic biodiversity hotspots


 Oceanographers have already expressed concern about the need for some kind of protection, regulation or rules for sampling these exotic biodiversity hot-spots by the science community. Some of the Cascade Margin, Gulf of Mexico, Blake Plateau, and Mediterranean vent chimney communities have already been surveyed, mapped, numbered, marked with steel post signs, and some have long-term benthic lander monitoring devices on the sea floor.

 There are perhaps a dozen or so, large oceanographic institutions that have ships and experienced scientists that have been working on these vent systems since the late 1970s. There are dozens of websites that have videos and photos of chimney ecosystems in action, smokers puffing away.

General submissions on the lack of regulation:

There are major issues with the regulation of existing deep-seabed mining in Papua New Guinea that show new exploration permits should not be granted until a set of regulations are in place.

Because the technology is now available, once the ships are in place, actual mining quickly follows exploration.

Current delays are associated with the world economic down-turn and general drying-up of loan capital.

The following summary of Professor R Steiner, University of Alaska offers expert opinion that should be recorded, in our respectful submission, in any report to the Mining Advisory Board:

1. "...The Solwara 1 project proposes to commercially exploit gold and copper deposits associated with deep-sea hydrothermal vents at a depth of 1,500 in the Bismarck Sea off Papua New Guinea. As the Project would represent the first large-scale, human-induced, site-specific disturbance to the deep ocean basin anywhere in the world, it must be considered with exceptional deliberation and caution.

2. Scientists only first discovered these deep-sea hydrothermal vents and their exotic chemo synthetic ecosystems in 1976,

3. Deep-sea hydrothermal vents, found along mid-ocean ridges and back-arc basins (such as the Manus Basin in the Bismarck Sea), support one of the rarest and most unique ecological communities known to science. Organisms derive their energy from sulphide chemicals in hot (350 C), mineralized vent fluids rather than directly or indirectly from photosynthesis as in other biological communities, and/or from endosymbionts in their tissues.

4. Most species discovered at vents are new to science, and the vents support communities with "extremely high biomass" relative to other deep-sea habitats. Some scientists suggest that such deep-sea hydrothermal vents systems may be where life first evolved on Earth.

The proposed Solwara 1 mining project would destroy an extensive patch of productive vent habitat, including tens of thousands of vent chimneys, killing virtually all of the attached organisms.

5. The Nautilus in its Environmental Impact Statement admits

"The extent of the impacts to vents and other seafloor habitats directly mined will inevitably be severe at the site scale,"

"it may be many years before development of chimneys returns to pre-mining conditions (emphasis added).

"mining is expected to alter venting frequency and characteristics on surrounding seafloor areas as well, thus affecting the ecological communities of a much broader scale than just the mined site.

6. Concerns regarding Project impacts summarized in the EIS include: "loss of habitat and degradation of water quality; loss, regional or wider scale loss, of endemic or rare species; decreased diversity of species or higher taxonomic levels; and loss of knowledge or of future opportunities (i.e., what we do not know)." It is highly likely that all of these will occur.

7. The ecological footprint of normal operation of the project will be significant. An 11-hectare area of the sulphide mound at Solwara 1, all of its associated organisms, and tens of thousands of vent chimneys would be removed and destroyed by the mining process, down to a maximum depth of 220 m below the existing sea floor.

8. It is expected that mining will impact venting frequency, location, and intensity at areas surrounding the mined area, and thus impact these nearby biological communities. Recruitment of vent species at other vent sites downstream from Solwara 1, including Solwara 8 approximately 45 km to the north west, will likely be reduced. The 245,000 tons of waste rock and unconsolidated sediment overburden will be disposed down-slope, and extend 2 km or more from the discharge site. The suspended sediment from mining operations and disposal of waste will settle over an extensive area of seafloor habitat, resulting in the smothering of benthic communities. The discharge plume from the de watered ore with 6,000 mg/L suspended solids, increased metals leached from the ore, and elevated temperatures up to 11 C, will be discharged 25 m - 50 m above the seabed, and will exert detectable impacts 10 km from the site. At the expected discharge rate of 0.3 m3 / sec, over 10 million tons / year of contaminated effluent will be discharged into the deep-sea environment.

9. Underwater noise from the Project is expected to be audible 600 km from the site, and could induce masking effects in cetaceans 15 km from the site, and behavioral response much farther. And 1.44 million m3 (tons) of ballast water from bulk ore carriers, potentially contaminated with exotic invasive species, will be discharged into nearshore waters off New Britain. Project impacts are expected to be regional in extent (extending more than 10 km from site), prolonged in duration (lasting beyond 1 year), and have high degree of severity (severe negative impact on populations, community or ecosystem survival or health). The relative impact of the proposed Project on the globally rare and unique habitat found only at deep-sea hydrothermal vents would be proportionately far greater than, for instance, impacts of terrestrial mines on global forest habitat.

10. Further, the footprint of the Project would be considerably more extensive and severe if accidents occur. The accident scenario of most immediate concern is that of the loss of an ore shuttle barge, with 6,000 tons of toxic ore, fuel, and other hazardous material onboard, or a bulk ore carrier with 25,000 tons of ore and fuel onboard, in the near shore environment off New Ireland or New Britain. ..."



3. There is no framework for the distribution of economic benefits arising from deep sea bed mining

There are no laws that apportion the surpluses to be gained from deep seabed mining.

With deep sea bed mining, once a suitable mining ship has been built, actual mining may well fast upon the completion of an exploration license.

Fiscally, Papua New Guinea does not have an appropriate mining tax regime to deal with deep sea bed mining.

The Solwara 1 Project could gross as much as 1 billion US dollars in a 30 month lifetime.

Taxes under the current laws maybe $US45 million or so.

There are no special tax laws in place to deal with deep sea bed mining.


Again, there are constitutional imperatives set out in the Third and Fourth National Goals of the Constitution, that a Mining Wardens has a duty to implement as far as he or she is able:

 Third National Goal National sovereignty & self-reliance (6): “the State is to take effective measures to control and actively participate in the national economy, and in particular to control major enterprises engaged in the exploitation of natural resources”

 Fourth National Goal Natural resources & environment: “wise use to be made of our natural resources and the environment in and on the land or seabed, in the sea, under the land, and in the air, in the interests of our development and in trust for future generations”

The legal situation is a mess. There is no effective control. There can be no “wise-use”. The projects are clearly unconstitutional because of the lack of control and inadequate provisions to safeguard the rights of future generations through apportionment of the surpluses.



4. There are no constitutional laws on Maritime Provincial boundaries


The Organic Law on Provincial Boundaries deals only terrestrial boundaries.

One of the current applications for exploitation licenses straddles what are generally thought of as Madang Province and Manus Province waters.

But there is at least one other application that straddles what are generally thought of as Madang Province and East Sepik Province waters.

There are no laws saying how surpluses are to be shared by adjacent provinces.



5. It is not rational to grant further exploration licenses to an applicant who cannot bring previous licenses into actual mining

On the 18th of December 2008 Mining Magazine, reported Nautilus Minerals Inc, the parent of the Applicant issued a statement to say that the Solwara1 mining system and the timetable for the first ore production at Solwara-1 is expected to be delayed beyond December 2010.

Orders for equipment have been either cancelled or delayed. Up to 30% of the work force has been laid-off.

The reports indicate that the global economic down-turn has affected the Applicants parent cash-flow, and Solwara-1 has been effectively ”mothballed” on a low-level maintenance for at least two years, but the exact date is uncertain, and so the “mothballing” could be longer.

In our submission, it is not rational to grant further new exploration permits to a company that may not have the capital to mine, or access to the capital to mine, particular when the country has no regulatory frame work in place.

To grant additional licences would be imprudent and simply not make sense in the circumstances..

The applications for further exploration permits should not be recommended because the Applicant has not been able to further past grants of exploration licenses into actual mining.

The Applicant should be allowed to prove itself with Solwara-1, only after appropriate laws and regulations have been enacted.

Only then could the authorities be in a position to consider any application for new permits from that Applicant or its associates.







Bibliography


Known bibliography on the ecology of active vents and the dangers of mining


Whole issue of Oceanography Magazine, vol. 20, No. 1, March 2007, on Inter ridge research, including a lot of papers on hydrothermal vents, vent microbes and invertebrates, good photos and diagrams, vent biodiversity & bio geography, vent gases and minerals, some history of the 1977 discovery of the vents offshore from Panama, ROVs and AUV equipment, hard bottom drilling gear, and worries about protecting unusual vent ecosystems from the ravages of ship sampling.

Whole issue of Marine Geology on Sedn & Seafloor Hydrocarbon Emissions on Deep European Continental Margins, edited by M. K. Ivanov, N. H. Kenyon, A. E. Suzyumov, and J. M. Woodside, vol. 195, issues 1-4, 30 March 2003.

Whole issue of Marine Geology on "Geosphere-Biosphere Coupling: Cold Seep Related carbonate mound formation & ecology", vol. 198(1-2), 30 June 03, 2003, Editors T. J. C. E. van Weering, W.-C. Dullo, and J.-P. Henriet. This includes papers on mounds off the coast of Norway, Ireland, and the Gulf of Mexico, mud volcanoes, gas and methane hydrates, some biological DNA taxonomy.

Chemical Geology (Vol. 205, Issue 3-4, May 2004) Geomicrobiology and Biogeochemistry of Gas Hydrates and Hydrocarbon Seeps, Edited by: Chuanlun Zhang and Brian Lanoil.Table of Contents at the end of this file. Abstracts are in the References Folder.

Volume 24 Number 3 (2004) of Geo-Marine Letters is on hydrocarbon seeps in marginal seas, edited by John M. Woodside, Robert E. Garrison, J. Casey Moore, Keith A. Kvenvolden.

Journal: Marine and Petroleum Geology 22(4), 2005, special issue on
Near-Surface Hydrocarbon Migration: Mechanisms and Seepage Rates
AAPG, Edited by: M. A. Abrahams, J.K. Whelan. Table of contents at end of this file.

Chemical Geology Special Issue on Shallow water Hydrothermal Venting, edited by R. M. Prol-Ledesma, P. R. Dando, and C. E. J. de Ronde, vol. 224(1-3):1-182. They focus on vents in <200 m water depth, and find rather different expressions of metal and hydrocarbon tracers on the seafloor.

Environmental Geology vol 46 (8) 2004. Most of this issue is on methane seeps, hydrocarbons, mud volcanoes, Alvin and ABE expedition logs and photos, mostly of deep hydrothermal vents., click on Magic Mountain, and many other video clips showing vent chimneys on the Cascadia Margin at 2000 m water depth.

Marine Geology 227 (3-4), March 06, has a series of articles about mud volcanoes, seeps and vents, bottom reflectors.

"http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/vents/home.html" , submarine vent website for the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory in Seattle. Videos of vent fields from the Juan de Fuca Ridge, off the coast of Oregon/Washington State and BC. Photos of biota, microbial communities. Their "ring of fire" globe shows the ring going through the Timor Sea.

The Ecologist

Some scientists believe deep-sea hydrothermal vents systems may be where life first evolved on earth (Image: Wenceslaus Magun's photos reveals the first Ramu MCC's and Highlands Pacific's deep sea tailings disposal and Nautilus' deep sea bed mining educational awareness conducted on Bagabag Island and at Tokain village, Madang PNG by Professor Richard Steiner, former Executive Director for the Minerals Policy Institute of Australia, Ms Techa and Indigenous New Caledonians (Kanakis.) These awarenesses were conducted a day after Nautilus sent in its deligation to Bagabag Island. 19th August 2007


28th October, 2010

As Papua New Guinea gives go-ahead to a Canadian mining company to dredge its coastal seabed for minerals, critics say environmental assessments have been inadequate, local objections ignored and new species of life could be extinct before they have even been discovered.

Deep-sea hydrothermal vents systems may be where life first evolved on earth

It was perhaps only a matter of time before mining the deep seas took off. Following in the footsteps of deep-sea fishing and drilling for oil it has been lurking in the minds of exploration companies like Nautilus Minerals, which is behind a major project in Papua New Guinea (PNG).

The idea of digging up the seabed one mile beneath the ocean surface to extract mineral-rich deposits such as copper and zinc first emerged in the 1960s. An initial flurry of interest in the 1970s was put off by low metal prices and UN regulations that exist on exploiting resources in international waters.

But with rising demand from China and India for rare earth metals like copper, and deep-sea surveys having now found concentrations of minerals four to five times those on land, it has returned but this time in the ‘unregulated’ territorial waters of PNG, conveniently close to the Asian markets. 


Ecologists say the PNG government is allowing Nautilus to go ahead with the first ever commercial deep-sea mining project without properly considering the environmental impacts or local opposition. Nautilus investors include the mining giant Anglo-American which is ignoring indigenous opposition to a gold and copper mine in Alaska.

‘Cradle of life on earth’

As well as being metal-rich, the volcanogenic hydrothermal deposits which Nautilus plans to mine are home to a unique ecosystem that is still largely unknown to scientists since being discovered in the late 1970s. Initially, the deep sea was thought to be full of soft sediment and little else but the discovery of hydrothermal vents on the seabed, which produce the deposits, revealed a completely novel ecosystem, unreliant on photosynthesis.

‘It’s the cradle of life on earth,’ explains Dr Rod Fujita from the Environmental Defense Fund and author of studies looking into deep-sea mining, ‘and the only one that does not depend on sunlight. There are species there that are found nowhere else on earth. It’s not like any land habitats we are used to; in fact you have to have your perspective altered to appreciate this deep-sea world,’ he says.

The mining process in PNG will take the top 20-30m off the seabed at a depth of 1,500m and lift it up to the surface before transferring it by barge to processing sites on land. ‘You will destroy fauna just by lifting the land,’ says deep-sea ecologist Professor Paul Tyler, from the National Oceanography Centre at Southampton University. ‘It is possible you might mine at a distance [from the hydrothermal vents] but by mining close by you will affect the flow and the vents might switch off and then all the animals die – you lose a huge biomass.’

'Flimsy' environmental report

Nautilus has attempted to fend off these criticisms by publishing an environment assessment, co-produced by a respected deep-sea biologist Dr Cindy Van Dover. In it they admit the impact to vents and seafloor habitats will ‘inevitably be severe at the site scale’ and that they will take ‘many years’ to recover. 

However, other ecologists say the assessment is ‘flimsy’ and fails to give a full account of the potential damage mining will cause.

Professor Richard Steiner, from the University of Alaska cites the incompleteness of classification of species found at the sites and an inadequate assessment of the risks associated with sediment and waste rock disposal. He also cites the effects of increased light and noise in the deep ocean environment and the toxicity of the dewatering plume [the process of removing water from the mined deposits] to deep-sea organisms, which will not be able to differentiate between food and junk sediment.

Of particular concern are the hundreds of thousands of tonnes of waste that will be produced by the mining process, which Steiner compares to that of a ‘giant underwater tractor’ and which will be pumped onto deeper seabeds nearby. Dr Fujita said the physics of water as well as weather and currents made it difficult to predict or contain any spill and that deep-sea mining had the capacity to produce pollution that could travel across into international waters.

A smoking hydrothermal vent on the ocean seabed

Exploitation or financial gain?

‘I don’t think the project would be allowed to proceed anywhere else in the world based on such a poor analysis of risks,’ says Steiner. The USA is known to have similar deposits off the coast of Washington as has Canada but mining is not thought to be imminent. Dr Fujita suggests Nautilus is just the latest overseas mining giant to take advantage of lax regulations in the country. ‘In PNG they have a poor record of mining on land resulting in lots of poor conditions and that bad record and lack of oversight is now moving from land to sea,’ he says.

Only this week the PNG government was accused by Greenpeace of allowing rampant logging and failing to respect the rights of indigenous groups who depend on the forests.

Nautilus has reportedly suggested the country would benefit by more than $200 million from the mining but Steiner says the benefits to local people or the economy of PNG were likely to be disproportionately low compared to the scale and risk of the project. ‘While the project could gross almost $1 billion USD in its 30-month lifetime, it expects to provide only $41 million in total taxes and royalties to the government, a $1.5 million development fund and a few dozen jobs at most to PNG nationals,’ he said.

Prof Steiner is also acting as a science advisor to Mas Kagin, a group formed in 2008to give a voice to coastal indigenous people in PNG oppose any commercial mining. The group says it depends on the coastal waters for their ‘livelihood, culture and way of life’ and has a right to oppose the seabed mining. In a campaign video community groups from two provinces expressed their fears.

‘When we first heard that Nautilus was going to mine the seabed using technology that had never been used anywhere else it felt as though we were becoming a science lab…and our very lives part of an experiment to test this new technology,’ it says.

Nautilus conducted workshops with local villages to explain its proposals but rejected calls to set up a permanent citizens advisory council. The company also declined to respond to concerns raised in this article but has previously said it took great pride in ‘leading the mining industry into the deep ocean’.

Opening the floodgates

It has estimated several billions tons of copper could be extracted from seafloor sites around the world. Dr Tyler acknowledges that the deep-sea has ‘not even had its surface scratched with what it might contribute to the economy’ but fears PNG’s decision to approve Nautilus mining plans will ‘open the floodgates’ before proper assessments have been made of the impact. China is known to be seeking to mine similar deposits in the South-West Indian Ocean.

‘Deep-sea fishing is a good example. We can ring alarm bells but there is no regulation of it. If I had my way the whole area of deep-sea would become a protected area and people who want to exploit it would have to apply to a body who can ensure that they were doing a proper environmental analysis before they were allowed to exploit it. At the moment there is no requirement at all and we end up looking at the damage done,’ he says.

Steiner agrees and says there is too much wrong with the PNG project: ‘the way this first deep-sea mine proceeds will set the tone for all others, and this is a very, very bad start’. He argues investment in reusing copper and gold made more sense than continuing to pay mining companies to take bigger risks in an effort to dig up more.

‘The global economy simply does not need the gold or copper that would be recovered at these deep-sea hydrothermal vents. We know how to recycle and reuse much of the copper already up out of the ground, run through the economy, and discarded in waste dumps. It is a unidirectional waste of resources, energy and money. And we know better.’

Some services we can provide

Here are some of the basic services we can provide:

• Conduct Community Awareness
• Conduct Community Mapping and Needs Analysis
• Assist Groups To Develop Plans
• Facilitate Agreement
• Facilitate Implementation (Start-up) of Group Activity
• Monitor Community Activity
• Transfer Skills and Knowledge
• Evaluate Activity Outcomes
• Train Trainers
• Access Community Development Workers

Other technical skills can also be sourced from within our organisation and from technical experts to be engaged in meeting your needs.

Please do not hesitate to contact us on -

Mas Kagin Tapani
P.O. Box 1312
Port Moresby,
National Capital District
Papua New Guinea

Ph: + (675) 719 59665
Email: magun.wences@gmail.com

Our long-term goals

Our goal is to guide indigenous communities to go through a process to understand turtle conservation issue and to develop action plans to move forward.

Our efforts in Madang, PNG are laying the groundwork for the longer-term aim of empowering local communities to manage their own resources and be a strong voice for conservation in the region.

Our aim is to be the vehicle in sustaining the turtle conservation programs in PNG and in the Western Pacific region.

We also intend to provide a direct voice to a growing population of the indigenous people across the region who has shared concerns relevant to their customary connections to the Bismarck Solomon Seas.

It is our desire to extend our turtle conservation efforts to Rai coast, Bogia and to the outer islands of Madang Province to see an increase in the number of live and healthy hatchlings returning to sea. But in order to do that we must first prove successful in implementing this project in our current pilot project sites in north coast of Madang Province (See Project Map).

We also intend to extend our programs over to West New Britain, and Bougainville where leatherbacks come to nest as indicated by the aerial surveys map conducted by NOAA which we have obtained from TNC. And if funding is available we want to explore turtle protection and restoration initiatives through out the coastal areas in PNG.

We also believe that by involving all communities to participate in the protection and restoration of the leatherback turtles and other turtles can we benefit to understand the leatherback turtle population and other turtles trends in our region.

Our efforts in Madang complements past research and monitoring work at Kamiali and other Huon coast sites dating back to the mid 1980s.

We will also address all other related and relevant marine and community livelihood programs that complement the needs, aspirations, desires, visions and missions of all the indigenous inhabitants whom we work with.