1. Is funding guaranteed from the federal government for the programs that you speak of once the monument is designated?
2. If we are to have rights to the land, will we be allowed at least a buffer zone to fish for livelihood or will we need to just raise land animals for food?
The answer to the first question is “Yes.” Every marine area managed under this federal program has funding and staff — including Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument in Hawaii and Fagatelle Bay National Marine Sanctuary in American Samoa.
The 14 sanctuaries/monuments in the United States currently receive annual funding of more than $40 million. A recent economic analysis of this issue by Professor Tom Iverson at the University of Guam estimated funding for the proposed monument in CNMI of $1.5 million to $2 million annually — not counting funding for boats, a visitor center and other facilities.
The second question implies that the three northern islands could be suitable places to live. In fact, all three islands are volcanic, tiny in size and lacking fresh water. Saipan is 10 times larger than the combined area of all three.
According to Article XIV, Section 2 of the CNMI constitution, the islands of Asuncion, Maug, and Uracas are sanctuaries that “shall be maintained as uninhabited places and used only for the preservation and protection of natural resources….”
No one is allowed to live on these islands, a permit is required to visit, and nothing can be removed from them — not even ayuyu or fanihi. Furthermore, these islands are located more than 300 miles north of Saipan so the cost involved in traveling there to commercially fish is likely to be prohibitive.
The Mariana Trench Marine Monument proposal would restrict commercial extraction, but would be sensitive to the need to continue allowing traditional cultural practices in this area. Pew understands that we are culturally bound to the ocean and that this is an important issue for the residents of the CNMI.
ANGELO VILLAGOMEZ
Ocean Legacy
Saipan Coordinator
