DOCSLIB.ORG

Introduction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Introduction Dhirubhai Ambani International Model United Nations 2019 Forum: International Court of Justice Issue: Arbitral Award of 3rd October 1899 Student Officer: Vibhav Amarbabu Position: Deputy President Introduction The conflict up for contention at the International Court of Justice this year has been passed around through every form of resolution over the 210 years of its history. The matter of the legality of the Arbitral Award of the 3rd of October 1899 has evolved into a global issue, encompassing world powers and developing nations alike, as well as the booming oil industry. The parties mainly involved in the conflict are the Cooperative Republic of Guyana and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, with Guyana being the institutor of the proceedings of the case in the ICJ. Other parties involved subliminally include the United States of America, Great Britain and Russia. This dispute regarding the Guyanese-Venezuelan boundary has its origins in the early 16th century, to when the land was under the jurisdiction of the Dutch and Spanish empires. There was no clear boundary defined between the two colonies, which led to a lot of border breaches by both empires on one another’s territory. Following a series of wars, the land that would come to be known as the British, making it the first British colony on the northern coast of South America, captured Guiana. To prevent any further boundary infringement, the British government decided to officially define the boundary of their colony and entrusted the job to Robert Schomburgk, an explorer under the aegis of the Royal Geographical Society, in 1835. The Schomburgk Line was officially declared to the public in 1840 and encompassed area near the mouth of the Orinoco River, far past the boundary previously assumed. Venezuela disputed the border markers being placed at the mouth of the Orinoco and claimed that all Guianese land West of the Essequibo River was a part of their territory. In response to this, Britain offered a proposal regarding a modification of the border by Venezuela but there was no agreement between the two nations except to not colonize the disputed territory (1850). Research Report | Page 1 of 14 Dhirubhai Ambani International Model United Nations 2019 Figure 1: Region as divided by the Schomburgk Line Come 1876, Venezuela began to claim two-thirds of British Guiana to be a part of their territory. The timing was detrimental for Guiana as the British Guiana Mining Company had just been setup to explore and mine the newly discovered rich gold deposits in the area. Acting for Guiana, Britain counter-claimed both the area claimed by Venezuela and the upper Cuyuni basin and a swath of the land in the Amakura and Barima basins up the right bank of the Orinoco River. Venezuela proposed a frontier line in 1881, but this proposal was rejected, as it would have given the entire Barima district to Venezuela. In response to this, Britain declared the Schomburgk Line the provisional frontier of British Guiana in 1886 and the situation reached a high-tension status, which needed to be defused. Venezuela appealed to the United States to intervene under the Monroe Doctrine, a US policy of opposing European colonialism from 1823 onwards. Unwilling to become a major part of this issue, the US put forth the notion of arbitration between the nations. Following arbitral talks between the two nations, the Washington Treaty was signed in February 1897. The Arbitral Award of the 3rd of October 1899 was a signifier of a settlement between the two nations with regards to any issues that may have arisen relating to the boundary line between them. As per the Award, Venezuela would receive 5000 square miles of British Guiana territory, including Barima Point at the mouth of the Orinoco (control over the Orinoco River Basin) and a fair amount of territory to the east of the line. After the Award, an Anglo-Venezuelan Boundary commission identified, demarcated and permanently fixed the boundary established within the Award between 1900 and 1904. The representatives of the two nations signed a joint declaration and began the production of maps with the updated boundary line (1905 Agreement). Page 2 of 14 | Research Report Dhirubhai Ambani International Model United Nations 2019 A relatively peaceful period took place from 1899 to 1962. British Guiana (under the United Kingdom) accepted that the Award and following Agreement settled any territorial claims and disputes and demarcated the border between the two nations. Venezuela consistently reiterated their stance regarding legal validity and binding force of the 1899 Award and 1905 Agreement, and respected the boundary it shared with British Guiana. Severo Mallet-Prevost was a Venezuelan advocate who took part in the arbitral talks as a part of the US delegation. Posthumously, he had a memorandum released in which he stated that the Award was biased, and provided details for a meeting between Britain and Russia, making an ex-parte contract. Venezuela formally raised the issue again at an international level before the United Nations in 1962. Venezuela threatened to not recognize the newly formed state of Guyana or its boundaries unless the United Kingdom set aside the 1899 Award and the 1905 Agreement and ceded to Venezuela all of its territories west of the Essequibo River (Guyana’s part of the Award), citing the Russia-UK deal noted within the memorandum as an offence of collusion. On the 15th of May 1962, the American Ambassador in Caracas, C. Stewart, wrote to the USDOS a telegram in which he stipulated that “President Betancourt of Venezuela, through a series of conferences with the British before Guiana’s Independence, a cordon sanitaire would be set up between the present boundary line and one mutually agreed upon by Venezuela and Britain.” The ensuing negotiations between the United Kingdom and Venezuela led to an Agreement to Resolve the Controversy Between Venezuela and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland over the Frontier between Venezuela and British Guiana, signed at Geneva on the 17th of February 1966 (“Geneva Agreement”). It provided for recourse to a series of dispute settlement mechanisms to finally resolve the controversy caused by Venezuela’s reversal of position on the validity of the Award and its refusal to continue acceptance of the boundary demarcated in 1905 (more information in the historical background). Since the forced entry of the United Kingdom and Guyana into the Geneva Agreement, the controversy has not been resolved as per the means of settlement as had been specified in the Agreement. Venezuela has sustained its contention for over two-thirds of Guyanese territory for over fifty years now, and this controversy has led to a slower growth of both the nations. Secretary General Guterres declared following the failure of the UN Good Offices Process as in January of 2018, Guyana filed a case in the International Court of Justice. Research Report | Page 3 of 14 Dhirubhai Ambani International Model United Nations 2019 Definition of Key Terms: Arbitration The use of an independent person or body officially appointed to settle a dispute. Imperialism The policy of extending a country’s power and influence through colonization, use of military force or other means. Boundaries: The lines defining the exact area contained within a kingdom or nation, used to distinguish between two nations bordering nations. Historical Background British Guiana British Guiana was the name of the British colony, part of the British West Indies, on the northern coast of South America, now known as the independent nation of Guyana. The first part of the region to be colonized was the Essequibo and Berbice regions, taken by the Dutch in the early 17th century. Britain took over these two colonies and Demerara in 1796, in the midst of hostilities with the French that had gone and occupied the Netherlands. The British returned control to the Batavian Republic but captured the colonies again a year later during the Napoleonic Wars. The colonies were consolidated into a single colony in 1831, and the capital was made at Georgetown. The colony was initially developed for sugarcane plantations and was built exploiting both human resources (African slaves) and the natural resources. Arbitration: Following the Treaty of Washington on February 2, 1897, Venezuela and Great Britain agreed to place their contending claims to a tribunal consisting of five judges: two appointed by the British, two appointed by Venezuela and a fifth judge, the president of the tribunal, chosen by the other four judges. The tribunal was set up in 1898, and began proceedings by receiving written submissions from Venezuela and Great Britain. The Award was announced after the legal teams from each side made their oral presentations between June and September 1899; it upheld Great Britain’s ownership to the territory west of the Essequibo but denied British Page 4 of 14 | Research Report Dhirubhai Ambani International Model United Nations 2019 entitlement to the upper Cuyuni basin and an area of land on the eastern bank near the mouth of the Orinoco River. The territory awarded to the British included a 4000 square-mile block south of the Pakaraima Mountains, bordered by the Cotinga River on the west, the Takutu River in the south and the Ireng River in the East and the North. Following acceptance of the award of the tribunal, Great Britain and Venezuela appointed a mixed commission that carried out surveys and demarcated, between 1901 and 1905, the boundary as stipulated by the award. Mallet-Prevost Memorandum: The Arbitral tribunal consisted of two American Judges on behalf of Venezuela, two British Judges on behalf of British Guiana and a Russian Judge that acted as the President.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Featured Itinerary a River Runs Through Us Video Of
    Subscribe to our email list GETTING TO AND AROUND GUYANA FACTS ON GUYANA MAP OF GUYANA ORDER BROCHURES APPROVED IN-COUNTRY SUPPLIERS CALENDAR OF EVENTS CONTACT US Dear Colleague, The Essequibo ( Ess-see-quib-bow) River is one of Guyana’s national treasures. It runs the length of the entire country, beginning on the southern border with Brazil, and flowing all the way north to where the Atlantic Ocean meets the Caribbean. Like so much of Guyana, the Essequibo is brimming with a mind-boggling array of mammals, birds, fish, and reptiles. Though not nearly so overwhelming, there’s also a bit of evidence of human history on the river. Two centuries-old Dutch forts speak to the strategic importance of the Essequibo during colonial times. The river has an estimated 365 islands, a handful of which are home to river resorts and other accommodation, as well as resident wildlife. There is definitely adventure to be found on the Essequibo, the longest river in South America’s only English-speaking country. Warmly, Jane Behrend Lead Representative, North America PERSON OF THE MONTH MALCOLM RHODIUS “I am a child of the Essequibo,” says Malcolm Rhodus. And today, the 23-year-old native of Bartica is able to share the river of his youth—where he learned to swim and catch fish— with travellers to Guyana. Malcolm is a tour guide with Evergreen Adventures. He’s worked there for two years while he continues to study tourism at the University of Guyana. He truly loves his work: “I love interacting with people,” he says.
    [Show full text]
  • Catalogue of the Amphibians of Venezuela: Illustrated and Annotated Species List, Distribution, and Conservation 1,2César L
    Mannophryne vulcano, Male carrying tadpoles. El Ávila (Parque Nacional Guairarepano), Distrito Federal. Photo: Jose Vieira. We want to dedicate this work to some outstanding individuals who encouraged us, directly or indirectly, and are no longer with us. They were colleagues and close friends, and their friendship will remain for years to come. César Molina Rodríguez (1960–2015) Erik Arrieta Márquez (1978–2008) Jose Ayarzagüena Sanz (1952–2011) Saúl Gutiérrez Eljuri (1960–2012) Juan Rivero (1923–2014) Luis Scott (1948–2011) Marco Natera Mumaw (1972–2010) Official journal website: Amphibian & Reptile Conservation amphibian-reptile-conservation.org 13(1) [Special Section]: 1–198 (e180). Catalogue of the amphibians of Venezuela: Illustrated and annotated species list, distribution, and conservation 1,2César L. Barrio-Amorós, 3,4Fernando J. M. Rojas-Runjaic, and 5J. Celsa Señaris 1Fundación AndígenA, Apartado Postal 210, Mérida, VENEZUELA 2Current address: Doc Frog Expeditions, Uvita de Osa, COSTA RICA 3Fundación La Salle de Ciencias Naturales, Museo de Historia Natural La Salle, Apartado Postal 1930, Caracas 1010-A, VENEZUELA 4Current address: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Río Grande do Sul (PUCRS), Laboratório de Sistemática de Vertebrados, Av. Ipiranga 6681, Porto Alegre, RS 90619–900, BRAZIL 5Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, Altos de Pipe, apartado 20632, Caracas 1020, VENEZUELA Abstract.—Presented is an annotated checklist of the amphibians of Venezuela, current as of December 2018. The last comprehensive list (Barrio-Amorós 2009c) included a total of 333 species, while the current catalogue lists 387 species (370 anurans, 10 caecilians, and seven salamanders), including 28 species not yet described or properly identified. Fifty species and four genera are added to the previous list, 25 species are deleted, and 47 experienced nomenclatural changes.
    [Show full text]
  • Judgment of 18 December 2020
    18 DECEMBER 2020 JUDGMENT ARBITRAL AWARD OF 3 OCTOBER 1899 (GUYANA v. VENEZUELA) ___________ SENTENCE ARBITRALE DU 3 OCTOBRE 1899 (GUYANA c. VENEZUELA) 18 DÉCEMBRE 2020 ARRÊT TABLE OF CONTENTS Paragraphs CHRONOLOGY OF THE PROCEDURE 1-22 I. INTRODUCTION 23-28 II. HISTORICAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND 29-60 A. The Washington Treaty and the 1899 Award 31-34 B. Venezuela’s repudiation of the 1899 Award and the search for a settlement of the dispute 35-39 C. The signing of the 1966 Geneva Agreement 40-44 D. The implementation of the Geneva Agreement 45-60 1. The Mixed Commission (1966-1970) 45-47 2. The 1970 Protocol of Port of Spain and the moratorium put in place 48-53 3. From the good offices process (1990-2014 and 2017) to the seisin of the Court 54-60 III. INTERPRETATION OF THE GENEVA AGREEMENT 61-101 A. The “controversy” under the Geneva Agreement 64-66 B. Whether the Parties gave their consent to the judicial settlement of the controversy under Article IV, paragraph 2, of the Geneva Agreement 67-88 1. Whether the decision of the Secretary-General has a binding character 68-78 2. Whether the Parties consented to the choice by the Secretary-General of judicial settlement 79-88 C. Whether the consent given by the Parties to the judicial settlement of their controversy under Article IV, paragraph 2, of the Geneva Agreement is subject to any conditions 89-100 IV. JURISDICTION OF THE COURT 102-115 A. The conformity of the decision of the Secretary-General of 30 January 2018 with Article IV, paragraph 2, of the Geneva Agreement 103-109 B.
    [Show full text]
  • Written Reply of Guyana to the Question Put by Judge Bennouna
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE GUYANA v. VENEZUELA HEARING ON THE QUESTION OF THE COURT'S JURISDICTION Response of the Co-operative Republic of Guyana to the question posed by Judge Bennouna on 30 June 2020 6 July 2020 Question: "In paragraph 2 of article 4 of the Geneva Accord of the 17th of February 1966 concludes in an alternative according to which either the controversy has been resolved or indeed that all the means of peaceful settlement stipulated in Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations have been exhausted. Now my question is as follows: Would it be possible to think of a situation in which all of the peaceful means for settlement have been exhausted without the controversy having been resolved?" Response: 1. Guyana's answer to Judge Bennouna's question is "No". 2. The 1966 Geneva Agreement established a procedure to ensure that the controversy would be finally and completely resolved. This is clear from the text of the Agreement, its object and purpose, and the contemporaneous statements of the Parties reflecting their understanding of the Agreement. 3. The procedure is set out in Articles I through IV of the Agreement. Articles I through III provide for resolution of the controversy by diplomatic negotiations, conducted via a Mixed Commission composed of two representatives of each Party. 4. In the event of failure by the Mixed Commission to resolve the controversy within four years, Article IV(1) provides for the Parties to agree on another means of settlement. In the event of their failure to agree on another means of settlement, Article IV(2) then describes how the means of settlement will be chosen and the controversy will be resolved.
    [Show full text]
  • Memorandum of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on The
    Memorandum of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela on the Application filed before the International Court of Justice by the Cooperative of Guyana on March 29th, 2018 ANNEX Table of Contents I. Venezuela’s territorial claim and process of decolonization of the British Guyana, 1961-1965 ................................................................... 3 II. London Conference, December 9th-10th, 1965………………………15 III. Geneva Conference, February 16th-17th, 1966………………………20 IV. Intervention of Minister Iribarren Borges on the Geneva Agreement at the National Congress, March 17th, 1966……………………………25 V. The recognition of Guyana by Venezuela, May 1966 ........................ 37 VI. Mixed Commission, 1966-1970 .......................................................... 41 VII. The Protocol of Port of Spain, 1970-1982 .......................................... 49 VIII. Reactivation of the Geneva Agreement: election of means of settlement by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, 1982-198371 IX. The choice of Good Offices, 1983-1989 ............................................. 83 X. The process of Good Offices, 1989-2014 ........................................... 87 XI. Work Plan Proposal: Process of good offices in the border dispute between Guyana and Venezuela, 2013 ............................................. 116 XII. Events leading to the communiqué of the UN Secretary-General of January 30th, 2018 (2014-2018) ....................................................... 118 2 I. Venezuela’s territorial claim and Process of decolonization
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring the Links Between Natural Resource Use and Biophysical Status in the Waterways of the North Rupununi, Guyana
    Open Research Online The Open University’s repository of research publications and other research outputs Exploring the links between natural resource use and biophysical status in the waterways of the North Rupununi, Guyana Journal Item How to cite: Mistry, Jayalaxshmi; Simpson, Matthews; Berardi, Andrea and Sandy, Yung (2004). Exploring the links between natural resource use and biophysical status in the waterways of the North Rupununi, Guyana. Journal of Environmental Management, 72(3) pp. 117–131. For guidance on citations see FAQs. c 2004 Elsevier Ltd. Version: Accepted Manuscript Link(s) to article on publisher’s website: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2004.03.010 http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/622871/description#description Copyright and Moral Rights for the articles on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. For more information on Open Research Online’s data policy on reuse of materials please consult the policies page. oro.open.ac.uk Journal of Environmental Management , 72 : 117-131. Exploring the links between natural resource use and biophysical status in the waterways of the North Rupununi, Guyana Dr. Jayalaxshmi Mistry1*, Dr Matthew Simpson2, Dr Andrea Berardi3, and Mr Yung Sandy4 1Department of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, Surrey, TW20 0EX, UK. Telephone: +44 (0)1784 443652. Fax: +44 (0)1784 472836. E-mail: [email protected] 2Research Department, The Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust, Slimbridge, Glos. GL2 7BT, UK. E-mail: [email protected] 3Systems Discipline, Centre for Complexity and Change, Faculty of Technology, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA, UK.
    [Show full text]
  • Check List 8(3): 592-594, 2012 © 2012 Check List and Authors Chec List ISSN 1809-127X (Available at Journal of Species Lists and Distribution N
    Check List 8(3): 592-594, 2012 © 2012 Check List and Authors Chec List ISSN 1809-127X (available at www.checklist.org.br) Journal of species lists and distribution N ISTRIBUTIO New records of fishes (Actinopterygii: Ostariophysi) from D the Upper Tapajós River Basin 1 1 1, 2* RAPHIC G Fernando C. P. Dagosta , Murilo N. L. Pastana and André L. H. Esguícero EO G N 1 Universidade de São Paulo - FFCLRP, Laboratório de Ictiologia de Ribeirão Preto, Departamento de Biologia. Avenida dos Bandeirantes, 3900. CEP O 14040-901. Ribeirão Preto, SP, [email protected]. 2 Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo, Avenida Nazaré, 481, Ipiranga. CEP 04218-970. São Paulo, SP, Brazil. OTES * Corresponding author. E-mail: N Abstract: Sartor Tatia intermedia Sartor The firstTatia report intermedia of (Anostomidae) and (Auchenipteridae) for the Upper Tapajós River Basin are presented here. is very rare on collections, and is reported only from the Trombetas, Tocantins and Upper Xingu river basins. is registered in the upper reaches of the Araguaia, Tocantins, Xingu, and Capim rivers, tributaries of the lower Amazon River in Brazil, northwards to the Suriname coastal rivers and the Essequibo River in Guyana. S. tucuruiense Since freshwater fishes are embedded within a It differs from by body depth (18.1-19.8 vs. terrestrial landscape that limits dispersal within and 23-25.9% of SL), caudal peduncle length (15-18.1 vs. 18.5- among drainage basins it can provide unique opportunities 20% of SL), caudal peduncle depth (8.6-9.8 vs. 10.4-11.2% for the identificationet al.of distribution patterns, which may of SL), interorbital width (38-41.8 vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Preparation for the National Vision on the Amazon Basin €“ Republic Of
    Department for Sustainable Amazon Cooperation Treaty Development Global Environment Organization United Nations Environment Organization of American States Fund Program INTEGRATED AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IN THE AMAZON RIVER BASIN GEF AMAZONAS PROJECT - ACTO/GEF/UNEP/OAS Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname, Venezuela Activity 1.1 Vision for the Basin and Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis Final Report NATIONAL VISION DOCUMENT Hydrometeorological Service, Ministry of Agriculture Georgetown - Cooperative Republic of Guyana INTEGRATED AND SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT OF TRANSBOUNDARY WATER RESOURCES IN THE AMAZON RIVER BASIN ACTO/GEF/UNEP/OAS Activity 1.1 Vision for the Basin and Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis Final Report NATIONAL VISION DOCUMENT Coordinated by: Hydrometeorological Service Ministry of Agriculture Consultant Anthony R. Cummings Contract CPR/OAS no. 97084 November 2006 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION: VISION AND OBJECTIVES The Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organisation (ACTO) was established in 1978 by the Governments of Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela. Its goal was WRSODQIRUWKHVXVWDLQDEOHGHYHORSPHQWRIWKHUHJLRQ¶VUHVRXUFHVDQG people, and in 2004, a strategic plan for the years 2004-2012 was published. The plan defines a number of areas or themes for development; including the sustainable management of the region¶s water and soil resources. The project Integrated and Sustainable Management of Transboundary Water Resources in the Amazon River Basin was prepared by the countries that are signatories to the Amazon Cooperation Treaty (ACTO): Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname, and Venezuela. The goal of this project was to strengthen the institutional framework for planning and executing, in a coordinated and coherent manner, activities for the protection and sustainable management of the land and water resources of the Amazon River Basin.
    [Show full text]
  • Effects of Land Use on Butterfly (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) Abundance and Diversity in the Tropical Coastal Regions of Guyana and Australia
    ResearchOnline@JCU This file is part of the following work: Sambhu, Hemchandranauth (2018) Effects of land use on butterfly (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) abundance and diversity in the tropical coastal regions of Guyana and Australia. PhD Thesis, James Cook University. Access to this file is available from: https://doi.org/10.25903/5bd8e93df512e Copyright © 2018 Hemchandranauth Sambhu The author has certified to JCU that they have made a reasonable effort to gain permission and acknowledge the owners of any third party copyright material included in this document. If you believe that this is not the case, please email [email protected] EFFECTS OF LAND USE ON BUTTERFLY (LEPIDOPTERA: NYMPHALIDAE) ABUNDANCE AND DIVERSITY IN THE TROPICAL COASTAL REGIONS OF GUYANA AND AUSTRALIA _____________________________________________ By: Hemchandranauth Sambhu B.Sc. (Biology), University of Guyana, Guyana M.Sc. (Res: Plant and Environmental Sciences), University of Warwick, United Kingdom A thesis Prepared for the College of Science and Engineering, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy James Cook University February, 2018 DEDICATION ________________________________________________________ I dedicate this thesis to my wife, Alliea, and to our little girl who is yet to make her first appearance in this world. i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ________________________________________________________ I would like to thank the Australian Government through their Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade for graciously offering me a scholarship (Australia Aid Award – AusAid) to study in Australia. From the time of my departure from my home country in 2014, Alex Salvador, Katherine Elliott and other members of the AusAid team have always ensured that the highest quality of care was extended to me as a foreign student in a distant land.
    [Show full text]
  • Juan De La Cosa's Projection
    Page 1 Coordinates Series A, no. 9 Juan de la Cosa’s Projection: A Fresh Analysis of the Earliest Preserved Map of the Americas Persistent URL for citation: http://purl.oclc.org/coordinates/a9.htm Luis A. Robles Macias Date of Publication: May 24, 2010 Luis A. Robles Macías ([email protected]) is employed as an engineer at Total, a major energy group. He is currently pursuing a Masters degree in Information and Knowledge Management at the Universitat Oberta de Catalunya. Abstract: Previous cartographic studies of the 1500 map by Juan de La Cosa have found substantial and difficult-to- explain errors in latitude, especially for the Antilles and the Caribbean coast. In this study, a mathematical methodology is applied to identify the underlying cartographic projection of the Atlantic region of the map, and to evaluate its latitudinal and longitudinal accuracy. The results obtained show that La Cosa’s latitudes are in fact reasonably accurate between the English Channel and the Congo River for the Old World, and also between Cuba and the Amazon River for the New World. Other important findings are that scale is mathematically consistent across the whole Atlantic basin, and that the line labeled cancro on the map does not represent the Tropic of Cancer, as usually assumed, but the ecliptic. The underlying projection found for La Cosa’s map has a simple geometric interpretation and is relatively easy to compute, but has not been described in detail until now. It may have emerged involuntarily as a consequence of the mapmaking methods used by the map’s author, but the historical context of the chart suggests that it was probably the result of a deliberate choice by the cartographer.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydro Power and Mining Threats to the Indigenous Peoples of the Upper Mazaruni District, Guyana
    DUG OUT, DRIED OUT OR FLOODED OUT? HYDRO POWER AND MINING THREATS TO THE INDIGENOUS PEOPLES OF THE UPPER MAZARUNI DISTRICT, GUYANA . FPIC: Free, Prior, Informed Consent? Audrey Butt Colson September 2013 i CONTENTS FOREWORD iv INTRODUCTION 1 The Location 1 THE AMAILA FALLS HYDRO PROJECT (AFHP), Phase I 2 THE AMAILA FALLS HYDRO PROJECT, Phases 1 - 3; the Potaro and Mazaruni Diversions. 4 THE UPPER MAZARUNI HYDRO PROJECT (the ‘Kurupung project’) 10 The Brazilian Factor 15 The Venezuelan Factor 17 The Development of an Aluminium Complex 19 Secrecy 21 The RUSAL PRE-FEASIBILITY STUDY in the UPPER MAZARUNI 23 Summary Data 24 The Upper Mazaruni Hydro Electric Project, 1970s and 1980s 25 THE CONSEQUENCES OF AN UPPER MAZARUNI DAM 30 The Human Population 30 The Environmental Consequences 35 a. The Loss of Bio-diversity 35 b. A Region of Vital Fluvial Systems and Watersheds 36 c. A Region of Climatic Regulation 37 The Case of the Guri Hydro Complex 38 THE PAKARAIMA MOUNTAINS AND THE ISOLATION FACTOR 41 Isolation and Road-Making in Guyana 42 The Amaila Falls Hydro Project Road 42 Upper Mazaruni Access Roads 44 MINING IN THE UPPER MAZARUNI DISTRICT 47 THE PRESENT SITUATION: 2010-2012 50 INDIGENOUS LAND RIGHTS 53 PROBLEMS AND REMEDIES 60 1. Climate and the Siting of Hydro Projects 61 2. Fragile watersheds: Biodiversity and Eco-Systems 61 3. Indigenous Peoples and their Lands 65 4. A Conflict Zone 65 CONCLUSION 66 APPENDIX A: The Wikileaks Cable 67-68 ii APPENDIX B: Letter of Survival International to the Minister of Amerindian Affairs, 31 August 2010 69-73 APPENDIX C (a): Statement by the Toshaos, Councillors and Community members of the Upper Mazaruni.
    [Show full text]
  • The Guiana Shield
    THIRTEEN The Guiana Shield NATHAN K. LUJAN and JONATHAN W. ARMBRUSTER Highland areas that serve as sources and boundaries for the a superfamily sister to all other Siluriformes, and their bio- great rivers of South America can be broadly divided into two geographic tractability due to distributions across headwater categories based on their geologic age and origin. As reviewed habitats and associated allopatric distribution patterns among elsewhere in this volume (Chapters 15 and 16), the allochtho- sister taxa. We conclude that the diverse loricariid fauna of the nous terrains and massive crustal deformations of the Andes Guiana Shield accumulated gradually over tens of millions of Mountains that comprise the extremely high-elevation west- years with major lineages being shaped by geologic evolution ern margin of South America have their origins in diastrophic across the whole continent, and not as the result of a rapid, (distortional) tectonic activity largely limited to the Late Paleo- geographically restricted adaptive radiation. We demonstrate gene and Neogene (<25 Ma; Gregory-Wodzicki 2000). In con- the role of the Guiana and Brazilian shields as ancient reser- trast, vast upland regions across much of the interior of the voirs of high-gradient lotic habitats infl uencing the origin of continent have been relatively tectonically quiescent since the frequently rheophilic loricariid taxa. We also show how diver- Proterozoic (>550 Ma; Gibbs and Baron 1993) and exhibit a sifi cation was infl uenced by a restricted number of landscape topography that is instead largely the result of nondeforma- scale features: especially dispersal and vicariance across several tional, epeirogenic uplift of the Guiana and Brazilian shields geologically persistent corridors, expansion and contraction of and subsequent erosion of overlying sedimentary formations.
    [Show full text]