The Southern Unica Canal

[short dew]

I am suing Ceelish for the construction of the canal in southern Unica which, I believe, has (1) caused significant and reasonably avoidable damage to nature, (2) is unrealistic in construction, and (3) is partly outside his jurisdiction. I contacted Ceelish privately and directly (in game) in attempt to reach a solution outside of court, but they were not open to discussing the validity of my concerns.

I will present the evidence for each point below. Thank you for your time.

Note: I would like to add that while the some of the concerns I raise lean more heavily on role-played concerns, I only do so as this is an educational game. Clearly, certain game mechanics allow for construction such as this. However, if we are considering the balance between economics and ecology - I believe these are important ideas to consider as well. I am curious how the court will interpret them.

(1) § 3 Environmental Damage, (3) Being responsible for notable and reasonably avoidable damage to nature on either public or private property.

The canal (indicated with a purple highlight in the attached image) bisects an existing river (which, legally, appears indistinguishable from a canal). To accomplish this, significant terrain removal had to take place and effectively created two new islands. While cases in the past have focused on pollution as environmental damage, I would argue that this is another form of environmental damage: habitat destruction; most notably for the coyote of the desert, as well as the trout and salmon that spawn in the river.

When I asked Ceelish about the purpose for this project, he indicated the creation of a dock for culture. However, there is already an area zoned for a Federal Dock that would not have resulted in such significant terrain modification/habitat destruction. No significant gain has been created to justify destroying terrain for an inland dock, rather than building the dock at the oceanside. If one were to justify this new canal using the obstruction posed by the hydromechanic dam (kyokes), I could maybe understand the canal development within the Hosnian Prime influence. However, the southernmost destruction would still entirely unnecessary and avoidable.

Therefore, I assert that this was reasonably avoidable habitat destruction.

Further, there are are now large gaps and air pockets in the river. (photo attached)

(2) § 2 Infrastructure, (2) Infrastructure needs to be built realistically compared to its real-life counterparts.

By diverting the same river / canal twice (in one instance, bisecting it completely), such a canal realistically would have drained the east-most and west-most bends of the river. This would have resulted in the absolute destruction of the natural fish habitats and diverted water away from existing infrastructure reliant on its flow: a hydromechanical dam (kyokes, Hosnian Prime resident), one active waterwheel (ravaan, Doggerland resident), and three other waterwheels placed by currently inactive players (Unica & Doggtertown residents). Affected waterwheels are indicated on the map with pink x's in white circles.

Even ignoring this, the real-life counterpart for a canal such as this would be a raised lateral canal that would allow the existing river to continue its natural flow but allow for more direct access to a point of interest. (I am attaching an example photo for reference.) I don't believe this is outside of the realm of construction within the game.

There are reasons, both functional and environmental, that canals are not constructed this way irl. If we don't allow people to drive across bridges when they are still under construction, I believe the same care for realism should be given to our water traffic.

(3) § 2 Infrastructure, (1)... 5. “Canals”, which are all bodies of water outside of the aforementioned biomes that have been or are intended to be artificially created or expanded to support water traffic. They are managed by the lowest local authority applicable.

While canals are managed by the lowest local authority (which Ceelish is, as Mayor of Hosnian Prime), the southernmost portion of the canal (outlined in red) is not within the jurisdiction of Hosnian Prime and was not approved by the Governor of Unica.

(Just some visual evidence regarding fish habitats.)

[short dew]

Examples of raised, lateral canals

[nimble viper]

hahaha get a hobby but okay lets go, I am interested in this case!

[steep geyser]

Since this case has not been started yet, I will begin by asking some preliminary questions - please limit your reponses to the questions directed at you.

@short dew - Do you have any evidence for a decrease in population for coyotes or salmon, which you mentioned had their habitat destroyed? Did you give any sort of approval, either formal or informal, while acting in your capacity as Governor for such a project, even if such approval was given under a different understanding of the project?

@nimble viper - Before beginning construction on the canal, did you attempt to obtain permission from any government officials, at the town, state, or federation level - or did you consult anyone on the legality or feasibility of such a project? Did you communicate with those living in the area or who have businesses in the area about the impact of the project before beginning?
While building the canal, did you consider habitat destruction to be a factor? Did you take any precautions to limit your impact on the environment? What benefits does the canal bring, and do you believe those benefits justify the environmental impact the canal has caused? Did you consider any alternative solutions?
While building the canal, what methodology did you use for construction? Did you use the aqueduct brick form to assist in the water flow? Did you take precautions to ensure that the flow of the canal left no air pockets or unnatural water flow?

[short dew]

I unfortunately cannot present evidence of a decline in population for the Salmon or Trout, as Eco heatmaps seem to believe fish spawn just as well on land as they do in water. However, the habitat destruction closely ties to the argument of realism as trout and salmon need pebbles / gravel in riverbeds in order to spawn (references below). In the previous pictures provided, Ceelish's canal is clearly absent of such material.

"Gravel bed spawning grounds are essential for the reproduction of salmonids."
"Both gravel addition and gravel cleaning proved to be suitable for creating spawning grounds for brown trout."

• https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/rra.1594 (referencing a habitat restoration study of the Moosach River in southern Germany)

"Trout lay their eggs in nests in the river gravels, known as redds."

• https://www.wildtrout.org/content/trout-lifecycle

For the coyote, on the other hand, I present the heatmaps of their Habitability zone vs. their Population zone - showing that while the habitable zone clearly covers the canal, the population zone is significantly reduced where the southernmost portion of the canal has been dug.

As to whether or not I gave approval for this project in my capacity as Governor, I did not. I didn't even realize it was happening until the land was gone. Ceelish did not contact me regarding this project, and further asserted that he had no need to when I reached out to him about my concerns.

[nimble viper]

Before beginning construction on the canal, did you attempt to obtain permission from any government officials, at the town, state, or federation level - or did you consult anyone on the legality or feasibility of such a project?

Yes I was reading the law multiple times as the mayor of the area as well in my position of MP to be aware of what lies within legal borders and what does not.

Did you communicate with those living in the area or who have businesses in the area about the impact of the project before beginning?

Yes I have, the ones directly affected asked to have a further spaces dug out for a nice little harbor place directly next to their shops, the other one beautified the bridge.
Another one seem to have rebuilt a street to the enterprise disconnected and beeing inactive for 10 days minimum.

While building the canal, did you consider habitat destruction to be a factor?

Yes I did. While erasing the habitat for some terrestrial animals I added habitat for aquatical animals.

Did you take any precautions to limit your impact on the environment?
I made the water only as wide as needed to make the biggest ship able pass it. It could've been constructed wider, but that was not my intention. For beautify reasons it couldve been an idea though.

What benefits does the canal bring, and do you believe those benefits justify the environmental impact the canal has caused?

The from you called "canal" brings the benefit of moving huge amounts of goods directly inside the prosperous, prestigeous tradehub Unica. The federal port has not been built from government side so the official harbor built by hosnian prime should be a huge advantage of this region. Besides that the state theoretically does not need to invest into another harbor anymore.
Another benefit I was thinking of is the fact to build a prestigeous and beautiful harbor directly in the heart of our great capital. I did not expect this to be such a huge problem.

Did you consider any alternative solutions?
Yes, but nothing seemed ambitionous or worth it for me to build it in my spare time.

While building the canal, what methodology did you use for construction? Did you use the aqueduct brick form to assist in the water flow?
Yes I did.

Did you take precautions to ensure that the flow of the canal left no air pockets or unnatural water flow?
Yes I did. Regarding air pockets: most of those were eliminated by me, there is only one major one left I did not have time to remove yet. Out of roleplaying view this is actually a problem I agree.
Out of RL view this is a huge project and a lot of time to invest. [...] and other RL duties I have to take care of and I was and am investing as much time as possible into this project and agree on deleting them asap.

To speed this here up I am directly giving my feedback on the following stated by PirateBug:
As to whether or not I gave approval for this project in my capacity as Governor, I did not.
I am not aware I have to tell the governor of the state what of all things are built within the local town and its authority. Would this be a thing it would be a mad amount of things there would be needed to discuss in future between the leaders of the world.

I didn't even realize it was happening until the land was gone. Ceelish did not contact me regarding this project, and further asserted that he had no need to when I reached out to him about my concerns.
I do not agree to those concerns.

What I do have to add here is the fact that the lower water"canal" is actually not within influence of Hosnian Prime. This was never mentioned by PirateBug but shouldve been the main concern of his authority, and that is, what I dont understand here.
In case you want to sue me for anything illegal here it is. With this one I had cut off a 10days inactive business barely out of reach from HP, but the infrastructure was restored, no harms were done.

To PirateBug I would suggest to introduce a Union for Nature Preservation with its own funds into the federation in case he cares so much about wildlife and nature. Posting questionable reallife literature in a roleplaying fictive world and trying to make it relevant here should be an act only the government could do. But this needs to be accepted by a lot of other authority parties beforehand.
I would also add that I have removed terrestial area on which the saguaro cactus and joshua tree could have grown, this was not mentioned by PirateBug. Was it on purpose - or not, i dont know.

[nimble viper]

It is remarkable how this topic here lost track. The points mentioned by Dennis were easily to be resolved.
The oil pumps for example existed to tackle the harsh oil shortage and the high prices in the beginning of plastic and epoxy century.

Bridge construction in a bad situation and beautifying the area were no problems you can not tackle, but all of this were not the critics which were appointed in this sue case here which amongst others lead to my quit 2 weeks ago.
This constant terror ingame chat was no fun for me worth continuing to play. And it was not only @short dew but also others who love to terrorize out of nowhere just for the sake of fun and making cheap propaganda for popcorn and entertainment. You guys got me.

Live and let live. And be nice to each other.

[thorny badge]

I wasn't involved in this, my opinion in regard to culture has nothing to do with this, i only check this now.
Given you left the cycle, there was no point in continuing a lawsuit that was directly addressed towards you (criminal case, not a administrative one), so that explains why nothing else happened.

Just to summarize a few facts, as this will no longer be decided:

1. If parts of a planned canal are outside of a town, it is indeed not in their jurisdiction to build it there, but they require approval from whatever covers that, be it state or federation, as they are the lowest authority there. It is upon the town to not trespass their jurisdiction, a reminder by the applicable government is not necessary. (FL III. § 2 (5))
2. In general, with big landscaping projects that alter the world notably, it is always advisable if every settlement affected in the surrounding gets to voice concerns, no matter if they are agreed with or not. Insofar no permission is given where it is required, the project cannot be done where it would go into influence not covered by the town. That may automatically lead to the whole project failing, as building a half canal without use is obviously nothing of use.
3. The state of things in this specific case was indeed horrible aesthetically (and stayed like that until the very end) and that could be grounds for significant and reasonably avoidable damage to nature, if it wasn't for a government project. The correct request would have been to order the canal to be removed where no permission was granted, which would automatically have led to the mayor needing to remove the canal on their grounds as well, as it is of no use. If a canal is made, it should be thought out to not cause major disruptance to the world state (which is a check that needs to be done before, it is expected that the benefit of a canal outweighs its impact on nature) and aesthetic issues caused by big terraforming projects can be considered damage to nature outside of the typical tropes of pollution, especially if things are left in a weird state like this. (And as such it could be argued that after the departure of Ceelish, the next mayor / higher ups would had to rectify the problem)
4. Insofar a mayor does build canals where they have no jurisdiction and no permit, they are acting in malfeasance. The state would have been able to take measures to prevent that.
5. Acting in malfeasance to make a canal without permit and at the same time damaging nature with that is something that would be sufficiently severe to order a removal from office and a temporary ban on holding office.

A correct administrative decision could have gone this way:

1. Is the canal required and will bring sufficient benefit compared to the impact it causes on the world?
2. Do I have full jurisdiction to do it or does the canal cross my borders and do I hence need approval from other involved settlements?
3. If 1 and 2 have been correctly decided: Make a plan on how the canal is to be built and how the surrounding area is affected and ensure bridges and other facilities fit the design.

Note that the departure mid-game does not allow to see into the future how things would have evolved. The only things that were realistic to be done at the point of filing of this suit is the trespassing of permission, which would have been an administrative case. Outcome could have been the removal of the canal with subsequent removal of the parts within jurisdiction at the cost of the town. The court would likely have suggested to make a deal with the governor to be able to keep the canal, with respective requirements on what to change. A criminal case for a canal still in building has little effect, as it is not clear if the canal was to stay in a way it damages nature. The only fixed point of trespassing was the jurisdiction. The chosen form of request was hence wrong.

The correct one would have been "Mayor of X built a canal outside of their jurisdiction and we, as applicable government, request it to be ordered to removed."
Additional to that, depending on what was talked about between the two parties so far a request for removal from office could have been made, if there was doubts on the mayor fulfilling their duties faithfully.

The case also would have been State vs Town, not a personal one. A criminal conviction for a governmental building project that was not yet finished is not a suitable application of the law and other requirements are to be set when a violation would caused by government action, taking into account if the government action was legal as well. In general, office holders enjoy a degree of protection on decisions they make in their office, not as private people. There is no criminal law that would punish a trespassing of jurisdiction, it is a solely administrative matter. That is on purpose, as this otherwise could lead to a personal liability for mistakes that is not intended for office holders.

The interesting part would have been on if due to the trespassing of jurisdiction the criminal law could have applied, but requirements towards that I would put rather high and the variables to take into account then get very complex and not possible to judge in this case, as the project was never finished.
Note that if this canal was made as not a government project, but by some private person - the criminal law would have applied and the chances for it to succeed would have been rather high.

Insofar people treated you bad in the chat, Ceelish, I'm sorry about that. The case being formulated as it was I attribute to inexperience, not ill will.
But the actual request insofar jurisdiction was affected seemed very valid. And if it wasn't a government project or in very specific other circumstances due to the jurisdiction trespassing, a criminal case could have had standing.