1 IUCN PUBLICATIONS NEW SERIES Supplementary Paper No 27 TENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi, 24 November- 1 December, 1969 Volume II Proceedings and Summary of Business Published with the financial support of UNESCO 1948 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Morges, Switzerland 1970
2 IUCN PUBLICATIONS NEW SERIES Sapplementary Paper No 27 TENTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY Vigyan Bhavan, New Delhi, 24 November 1 December, 1969 Volume II Proceedings and Summary of Business Published with the financial support of UNESCO 1948 International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources Morges, Switzerland 1970
3 3 The International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) was founded in 1948 and has its headquarters in Morges, Switzerland; it is an independent international body whose membership comprises states, irrespective of their political and social systems, government departments and private institutions as well as international organizations. It represents those who are concerned at man's modification of the natural environment through the rapidity of urban and industrial development and the excessive exploitation of the earth's natural resources, upon which rest the foundations of his survival. IUCN's main purpose is to promote or support action which will ensure the perpetuation of wild nature and natural resources on a world-wide basis, not only for their intrinsic cultural or scientific values but also for the long-term economic and social welfare of mankind. This objective can be achieved through active conservation programmes for the wise use of natural resources in areas where the flora and fauna are of particular importance and where the landscape is especially beautiful or striking, or of historical, cultural or scientific significance. IUCN believes that its aims can be achieved most effectively by international effort in cooperation with other international agencies such as UNESCO and FAO. The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) is an international charitable foundation for saving the world's wildlife and wild places. It was established in 1961 under Swiss law and shares joint headquarters with the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources ''IUCN). Its aim is to support the conservation of nature in all its forms (landscape, soil, water, flora and fauna) by raising funds and allocating them to projects, by publicity, and the education of the general public and young people in particular. For all these activities, it takes scientific and technical advice from IUCN. Although WWF may occasionally conduct its own field operations, it tries as much as possible to work through competent specialists or local organizations. Among WWF projects, financial support for IUCN and for the International Council for Bird Preservation (ICBP) have highest priority, in order to enable these bodies to build up the vital scientific and technical basis for world conservation and specific projects. Other projects cover a very wide range from education, ecological studies and surveys, to the establishment and management of areas as national parks and reserves and emergency programmes for the safeguarding of animal and plant species threatened with extinction. WWF's fund-raising and publicity activities are mainly carried out by National Appeals in a number of countries, and its international governing body is made up of prominent personalities in many fields.
4 - 5 - CONTENTS Page 37th Session of the Assembly Opening of the Assembly 7 Addresses and Greetings Messages 7 Recognition of Honorary Presidents and Vice-Presidents 8 38th Session of the Assembly Ratification of New Members 9 Appointment of Committees 11 Amendments to Statutes and Rules of Procedure 11 39th Session of the Assembly Secretary-General's Report 12 Reports of the Chairmen of Commissions 13 IUCN Programme of Work and Budget 13 Declaration 17 Presentation of the John C. Phillips Medal 17 40th Session of the Assembly IUCN Programme of Work and Budget (contd) 18 Resolutions 22 Elections 24 Venue of the 11th General Assembly 28 Ratification of New Members (contd) 28 Closure of the Assembly 35 Appendices I Officers of the General Assembly 36 II Agenda 39 III Applications for Membership 42 IV Secretary-General's Report 44 V Accounts for VI Summary of Programme VII Statutes as amended 83 VIII Rules of Procedure as amended 93 IX Commission on Ecology 95 X Commission on Education 104 XI Commission on Legislation 107./...
5 - 6 - Appendices (contd) Page XII XIII XIV XV XVI XVII XVIII XIX XX XXI XXII XXIII XXIV XXV XXVI International Commission on National Parks Survival Service Commission Memorandum by Dr. J. Verschuren Cable from Mr. F. Benavides Commission on Landscape Planning Programme and Budget Declaration The Resolutions Draft of Resolution No. 34 Memorandum on IUCN's Resolutions by Mr. E.M. Nicholson... List of Board Members... Statement by Dr. L.L. Glasgow Statement by General Mabratu Closing Address by President List of Participants * * * * *
6 7-37th Session of the 10th General Assembly hrs., Monday, 24 November, The President of the Union, Mr. Harold J. Coolidge, took the Chair and calling the Meeting to order declared the Tenth General Assembly in session. The Minister of Food, Agriculture, Community Development and Cooperation, Shri Jagjivan R.am, gave an address of welcome*, which was followed by a brief address by the President of IUCN*, stressing the objectives of the Assembly. The Inaugural Speech was then presented by the Prime Minister of India, Shrimati Indira Ghandi*. An address and a vote of thanks was given by Dr. Karan Singh, the Minister for Tourism and Civil Aviation and the Chairman of the Indian Board for Wildlife*. 2. There followed a short intermission while a nature conservation exhibition was opened by the Prime Minister of India, Shrimati Indira Ghandi, and the first issue of a commemorative stamp of 20 paisa made available for the public. 3. Greetings messages* were then given by Dr. J. McDiarmid, on behalf of the United Nations Development Programme; Dr. G. Budowski, UNESCO; Mr. T. Riney, FAO; Prof. F. Bourlière, IBP; Prof. S. Dillon Ripley, ICBP; Mr. P.M. Scott, WWF; Mr. J.P. Doets, Council of Europe; Dr. J.C. de M. Garvalho, for Latin America; Dr. D.P.S. Wasawo, for Africa; and Prof. H. Basjarudin, for South East Asia. 4. The Secretary-General announced that since the Ninth General Assembly six States had declared their adherence to the Statutes of IUCN and were thus State Members. They were the Imperial Ethiopian Government, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland; Finland, Canada and India. 5. of the Election of Credentials Committee. The following were proposed by the Executive Board to be Members Credentials Corcmittee; W. Burhenne, Chairman I.N. Costantino B. Dioum V.C.iKaushik T. Senge F. Guilmin, Secretary Resolution No. 346 : Credentials Committee. It was unanimously resolved to appoint as Members of the Committee the six persons so nominated. * The speeches starred*r will be included in Volume I.
7 Adoption of the Agenda. The Agenda in its printed form as presented to the Tenth General Assembly was adopted unanimously (Appendix II). 7. Recognition of Honorary Presidents and Vice-Presidents. The President moved that Shri Jagjivan Ram, Minister of Food, Agriculture, Community Development and Cooperation and Dr. Karan Singh, Minister for Tourism and Civil Aviation and Chairman of the Indian Board for Wildlife, be recognized as Honorary Presidents of the General Assembly, and Shri A.P. Shinde, Minister of State in the Ministry of Food, Agriculture, Community Development and Cooperation, His Highness the Maharaja of Mysore, Dr. A.N. Jha, Lt. Governor in the Delhi Administration, and Dr. CD. Deshmukh, President, India International Centre, as Vice-Presidents. This was carried with acclamation. 8. The Inspector General of Forests, Shri R.C. Soni, then addressed the Assembly* emphasising the need for action programmes. A key-note address* prepared by Dr. F. Fraser Darling, "The Nomad, the Farmer and the Ecologist", was read by Dr. S. Dillon Ripley in his absence Ratification of New Member Organisations. Although the Credentials Committee had not completed its review of Credentials and so it was not possible to vote at present, the President asked the Secretary-General to read the list of Organisations whose applications to join the IUCN since the last General Assembly had been unanimously approved by the Executive Board 'Appendix III).After pointing out that membership was not only increasing in numbers, but spreading in its variety, the President postponed discussion until the next Session (continued in paragraph 11): 38th Session of the 10th General Assembly hrs., Monday, 24 November, Report of the Credentials Committee. Opening the Session, the President asked the Credentials Committee to present their report. The Chairman of the Committee, Mr. W. Burhenne, stated that the credentials had been reviewed. Out of twenty nine Member States, thirteen were present, and as each was entitled to two votes this made a total of twenty six votes. Out of fifty three countries with national organisations, twenty one countries were present, and at one vote each, this made twenty one votes. Out of eight international organisations, two were present and they aisd had one vote. The total number of votes was therefore forty nine. It was pointed out that several of the credentials were without letterheads and that this was unsatisfactory. Resolution No. 347 : Report of the Credentials Committee. The report was adopted unanimously.
8 The President pointed out that as some questions had been raised with regard to the ratification of Member Organisations, further discussion should be delayed until the 39th Session to be held on 29 November, 1969 (continued in paragraph 13). 12. Dr. CD. Deshmukh then presented the Indian key-note address.* The President stated that his attention had been called to the importance of ratifying new member associations so that they might be able to vote during the proceedings.he would therefore like to take up this item and asked if there were any questions in connection with the ratification of the forty seven organisations presented in Paper 37/14 (Appendix III). Dr. Cragg asked whether the Board was really satisfied that the National Rifle Association of America was a suitable organisation to be a Member of IUCN. He then asked whether IUCN had the power to exclude or remove from membership any organisation which in the course of its activity was considered to be unworthy of membership. The President stated that the Executive Board had given serious consideration to the first question when the Association's name was presented for membership. He asked Mr. Gutermuth whether he would like to comment on the matter. Mr. Gutermuth pointed out that the National Rifle Association, which was to celebrate its 100th Anniversary in 1970, was an outstanding and important organisation in the United States of America. It had a "vast" conservation programme and was publishing conservation literature. Its membership was about one million. He urged that its membership application be approved. The President referred to Dr. Cragg's second point, which had already been discussed by the Executive Board. There was no way of expelling a Member from the Union once its membership had been ratified, apart from asking it to leave voluntarily. He considered that the Statutes in this respect should be changed, but this could not be done without giving a six months notice to the General Assembly. Prof. S.Dillon Ripley, while appreciating the information which the representative of the Organisation had provided, moved that the ratification of the application of the National Rifle Association of America be postponed until IUCN had the power to remove from membership organisations which it felt were not fulfilling their obligations to the Union. The President then suggested postponing the ratification of this Association's application and referring it back to the Board for reconsideration. The Chairman of the Commission on Legislation considered that the General Assembly had the right only to ratify or not to ratify decisions of the Board. There was no provision for postponement in the Statutes. Mr. Olindo considered that the mechanism of IUCN should be such that it would be impossible for a list to be given to the Assembly with such short notice that intelligent discussion by the Members was impossible. He considered that changes in the Statutes were essential for this purpose. Dr. R.G. Miller stated that he would give his views on the subject at the next Session of the General Assembly (see paragraph 55). Resolution No. 348 : Ratification of New Members. The applications for membership of the Union of 46 out Of the 47 names in Appendix III were ratified, that of the National Rifle Association being omitted on the grounds that insufficient evidence that it was "concerned with the conservation of nature and natural resources" had been presented.
9 Secretary-General's Report The report was formerly presented by the President and tabled for subsequent debate (Appendix IV). 15. In the unavoidable absence of Prof. R. Revelle of Harvard University, U.S.A., his key-note speech*, "How to race with time", was presented by Mr. Ernest Brooks, of the National Audubon Society Formal presentation of accounts, etc. The accounts for (Appendix V) and a draft programme for , together with a budget (Summary in Appendix VI) were presented by the President and tabled for subsequent debate. 17. Appointment of Committees. The Accounts Committee: The Executive Board had proposed as Members of this Committee: J.C. de M. Calvalho, Chairman C.R. Gutermuth M.F. Mörzer Bruyns K. Williams, Secretary. Resolution No. 349 : Appointment of Accounts Committee. It. was unanimously resolved to appoint as Members of the Committee the four persons so nominated. 18. Committee for the Programme and Budget. The Executive Board had proposed the following for this Committee: L.M. Talbot, Chairman K. Curry-Lindahl W.A.L. Fuller M.E.D. Poore D.P.S. Wasawo W. Mills, Secretary. Resolution No. 350 : Appointment of the Programme and Budget Committee. It was unanimously resolved to appoint the six Members proposed to constitute the Programme and Budget Committee. 19. Appointment of Resolutions Committee. The Executive Board had recommended the following to constitute the Resolutions Committee: D,J. Kuenen, Chairman J.B. Alvarez E.O.A. Asibey F.C. Badhwar Boonsong Lekagul H. Basjarudin J.P. Doets V. Kozlovsky T. Monod
10 E.M. Nicholson P. Scott H. Sioli M.A.G. Warland, Secretary. Resolution No. 351 : Appointment of Resolutions Committee. It was unanimously resolved to appoint as Members of this Committee the thirteen persons so nominated. 20. The Chairman of the Committee then called the attention of the General Assembly to the importance of the Resolutions and that it was necessary that all Resolutions should be presented to the Committee before hrs. on Saturday, 29 November, Appointment of a Declaration Committee. The proposal of the Board was that the Declaration Committee should consist of: Z. Futehally, Chairman E. Brooks W. Burhenne L.K. Caldwell J.-P. Harroy M. Hirs G. Mountford M. Pavan N. Polunin F. Guilmin, Secretary. Resolution No. 352 : Appointment of a Declaration Committee. It was unanimously resolved to appoint as Members of the Declaration Committee the ten persons so nominated. 22. Amendments to the Statutes. The Secretary-General pointed out that proposed amendments to the Statutes had been sent to all Members of IUCN on 28 March, 1969, which gave adequate warning to the General Assembly. The papers were before them now as Paper 38/7. The Chairman of the Commission on Legislation, Mr. W. Burhenne, then explained the documents. The proposed alterations to the Statutes were read and voted upon paragraph by paragraph. The Statutes as amended are attached in Appendix VII. Resolution No. 353 : Amendments to the Statutes. The Members having no comments,the proposals were adopted unanimously. 23. Rules of Prccedure of the General Assembly. The Secretary-General pointed out that subsequent to the changes in the Statutes, the Rules of Procedure must also be changed. A new set of rules was before the Assembly as Paper 38/3 (Appendix VIII).
11 Resolution No. 354 : Amendments to the Rules of Procedure. The amended rules were accepted with one alteration, that in Rule 5 "an Honorary President" read "Honorary Presidents". 24. As Prof. Dr. V.A. Kovda of the U.S.S.R. was not present to give his key-note speech*, "Social and Scientific Aspects of Nature Conservation", Prof. Bannikov, the leader of the Russian delegation, made a declaration* in his place. The Session then adjourned. 39th Session of the 10th General Assembly hrs., Saturday, 29 November, Addresses were made by representatives of UNESCO*, FAO*, IYF* and the Council of Europe*. 26. Second Report of the Credentials Committee. The Chairman of the Committee pointed out that it had met to consider the Credentials of Members under the new voting structure. The Committee had delivered a form, No. 37/8, to each accredited delegate in order to check to which category the Member belonged. On this basis, voting cards had been distributed to accredited delegates. In this General Assembly, governmental Members now had 70 votes and non-governmental 52 votes; they were not, however, in competition as each would be counted separately. In cases where agreement in voting in both categories was not reached, the decision would be negative. He then described the voting procedure as given in the new Statutes. Member States with black cards had three votes, all governmental agencies in a state which was not a Member had red cards with one vote; in the nongovernmental category, international organisations had yellow cards with two votes, and other non-governmental agencies, associations and organisations green cards with one vote. This report was approved. 27. Adoption of the Secretary-General's Report. The Secretary-General said that since the Report had been presented the previous Monday, he had received a few comments, particularly one about the Abruzzi National Park in Italy. This had been circulated to Members. He hoped that the Report with these amendments would now be adopted. Resolution No. 355 : The Secretary-General's Report. The Report was adopted. 28. Report by the Accounts Committee. The Chairman of the Accounts Committee, Dr. J. de M. Carvalho, said that his Committee had examined the accounts in accordance with Article IV.B. of the Statutes. The accounts were in order and he moved that they be approved.
12 Resolution No. 356 : The accounts for were adopted unanimously. 29. Adoption of the Reports of the Permanent Commissions. The Reports were presented as follows: Commission on Ecology by J.B. Cragg, Vice-Chairman, on behalf of F. Bourlière, Chairman (Appendix IX). Commission on Education by T. Pritchard, Vice-Chairman, on behalf of L.K. Shaposhnikov, Chairman (Appendix X). Commission on Legislation by W. Burhenne, Chairman (Appendix XI). International Commission on National Parks by Prof. J.-P. Harroy, Chairman (Appendix XII). Survival Service Commission by P.M. Scott, Chairman (Appendix XIII). During the discussion on the Report of the International Commission on National Parks, Dr. J. Verschuren read a statement (Appendix XIV) pointing out inter alia that during the last three years 23 game "guardes" had laid down their lives to preserve the animals in the National Parks of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. The delegates rose and stood for a moment of silence as a mark of respect and tribute to the memory of those who had died. In reviewing the Report of the Survival Service Commission, P.M. Scott referred to a telegram from Mr. Felipe Benavides, the President of the Zoological Association of Peru (Appendix XV). 30. Report of the temporary Commission on Landscape Planning. This Report was presented by the Chairman, Mr. R.J. Benthem (Appendix XVI). Resolution No. 357 : The Assembly adopted the Reports of the permanent Commissions and of the temporary Commission and expressed a vote of thanks to their Chairmen and Members. 31. Programme of Work and Budget for IUCN, The Programme of Work and Budget for IUCN , as amended in the General Assembly,is given in Appendix XVII. It was proposed and seconded that a discussion on this item be adjourned forthwith until Monday, 1 December, This motion was put to a vote by a show of hands and a large majority favoured continuing the meeting and initiating the discussion. The President then called on the Chairman of the Committee to open the discussion. Dr. L.M. Talbot pointed out that since the foundation of the Union in 1948, the world conservation climate had changed considerably; it was to deal with the new conservation challenges that IUCN, as one of the highest scientific authorities in environmental conservation, had had to expand and strengthen its programme. The programme was presented in two parts, a continuation of the present work and areas of expansion. The present operations included those of the Commissions and the intelligence and information functions of the IUCN headquarters itself. Such projects as the publication of the Red Data Book and the U.N. List of National Parks and Equivalent Reserves had to be continued, as had the running of regional and topical conferences, and work carried out in coordination with
13 the World Wildlife Fund. The programme of new activities included the expansion of the work of the Commissions, more active participation with technical assistance organisations, increased use of consultants and advisers, improved library and information facilities, the transfer of executive officers of Commissions to headquarters to provide increased support for Commission activities and better coordination, the formation of ad hoc Project Groups to handle particular conservation problems, and the expansion of cooperation with WWF. To accommodate this programme, an expansion and strengthening of the Secretariat was required, and the document tabled gave details of it. All were within the responsibility of the Executive Board under the present Statutes, and no changes in Statutes would be required. The section of the document concerning the budget needed a few comments. Under Article X.1 of the Statutes, the General Assembly determined the maximum budget for the coming three years; the budget projected On page 11 on the document should be considered in that light. In previous years, actual expenditure and income had never reached the maximum budget. The dramatic increase in funds during the past three years had been due largely to the efforts of the President and it was clear that the expanded programme represented an even greater fund-raising responsibility. A large part of the budget must come from new sources, but it was hoped that the expanded programme itself would provide a better basis for expanded funding. The President stated that the programme was not one that had been lightly conceived, but it was based on studies that had been made over the past couple of years and many Members had been consulted in its preparation. The report was then open for discussion. 32. Mr. Anthony Wayne Smith had several questions to ask. His first was "What safeguards were provided against seeking and accepting funds not compatible with IUCN's purposes?". The plan gave blanket authorization to secure adequate funding, and in this he was not questioning the integrity of the Board; it was a matter of judgement in which the Members of IUCN were entitled to be considered. He asked whether any conditions had been imposed by the Foundation concerned with regard to its anticipated contribution. The Chairman stated that no donations would be accepted if they had strings or conditions attached to them. This was equivalent to saying that no funds would be accepted if they were used for projects or expenditure incompatible with the general policy and working plans approved by the General Assembly and the Executive Board. With regard to the matter of accepting Industrial Associates, Mr. Smith commented on the importance of IUCN being careful not to be manoeuvered into a position which might hamper its work, especially when dealing with chemical and pesticides manufacturers and similar corporations. The President stressed the need for obtaining adequate funds and considered that the Executive Board, which he hoped in the future would be enlarged, would be capable of making adequate judgements on these important points. Although he had no fears that the officers to be elected by the General Assembly would find themselves accepting money from dubious industrial associates, in the event of it happening, the relationship could be terminated.
14 Mr. Smith continued that in his opinion the need for a cooperative relationship between IUCN and other international organisations was not sufficiently stressed in the report. The World Health Organisation, for example, was not mentioned. Although close cooperation had been developed with FAO, whose representative had given a fine report to the Assembly, there was no mention of it in the plan. He also hoped that the work of the Landscape Planning Commission would be expanded into the field of ecological agriculture. Mr. Smith pointed out that, from his personal experience for many years, problems of pesticides, insecticides and fertilisers were of great importance, but apparently IUCN was not undertaking any work in this field. For IUCN, social science apparently did not exist but, as had been noted in one or two of the papers presented at the Technical Meeting, many of the problems concerned were not biological, but social ones. Alao the plan failed to touch on the problem of population stabilization. He believed that it was time that IUCN took positive action to cope with such problems. There was also a lack of implementation of policies. Although he had been attending the General Assemblies of IUCN for the past 17 years on and off, and he considered that some magnificent work had been done in the scientific and educational areas, he did not consider that adequate implementation programmes had been developed. In the fields of landscape planning and international conventions, much remained to be done, and it should be possible to assist major agencies of the United Nations in this work. Direct action in a number of cases by the United Nations General Assembly itself might be indicated. In the plan he could find no mention concerning the preparation for the UN Conference on Human Environment to take place in It had been mentioned in the discussion, but not in the report. However, the particular question which he would like to raise at present was whether trade associates should be included in the membership of IUCN. Although this might have short-range advantages, it should be most carefully considered before being adopted. The President said that the membership question will be taken up later when time had been scheduled for a discussion on it. 33. Prof. D.J. Kuenen hoped that Mr. Smith was aware of the fact that the Commission on Ecology had a Committee on the Ecological Effects of Chemical Controls which was doing a great deal of work in the local, national and international spheres. Secondly, the Resolutions Committee had accepted a Resolution on the problem of population and had also accepted a Resolution on collaboration with social scientists; there would also be a Resolution on pesticides. Thus several of Mr. Smith's points would be taken care of in later discussions. Dr. L.M. Talbot emphasized that the question of cooperation with WHO and other UN Organisations had been mentioned in the Programme of Work on page 3, item 3.1. which included a generalized statement on cooperation with the United Nations Organisations. Consideration was given to listing all of them, but it had been decided not to; if necessary, they could be added. On the question of social sciences, the MAB Programme was specifically mentioned in the first paragraph of Appendix B. The Report of the Landscape Planning
15 Commission had stated that it had already established cooperation with FAO on the exchange of information with their integrated planning unit. The Commissions would go into details of these proposals, but in the plan only the broad outlines had been given. Mr. P.M. Scott suggested that many people in the Assembly felt that Mr. Smith had made a number of important points. He hoped that it would be possible for Mr. Smith to confer with the Chairman of the Programme and Budget Committee to make sure that these important details were included in the plan which could be discussed further on Monday. Mr. Gutermuth believed that a number of points which had been raised by Mr. Smith were covered by the rules and regulations adopted by the General Assembly and in previous Resolutions. He moved "that this re6rganisation plan be ratified and approved by this General Assembly at this time with the understanding that it would include further amendments agreed between Members and the Chairman of the drafting Committee". 34. Dr. R.G. Miller asked whether this motion also included item 5, the Budget. He emphasised that the work of IUCN was much more significant to the world now than that of any one University; yet, the funds available to IUCN for a five year period were small compared to the support given to a University. Several Universities, and at least one conservation organisation, were more heavily supported by such Foundations. He urged that IUCN present its case for the environment in such a way that the resources branch of the Foundation be recognized by the Foundation as of greater importance than its other branches. He believed that this could best be done by partial acceptance of the proffered help, pointing out as IUCN accepted that it did not feel committed to a formula directed from the outside. IUCN must realize that alliance with the name of a big Foundation sometimes tended to make it more difficult to find other help, and the amount proposed only met in part the many valid requests and projects IUCN faced in environmental protection. Some Member Organisations of IUCN had in fact over the past ten years put as much or nearly as much into 'IUCN, or into activities directly related to IUCN business as that offered for the first year in this proposal; no dictates for changes had been implied or asked. Should a new grantor now request that our structure be redesigned on the basis of a shorter history, and in this case only apparently on an iridicatibri that a grant may be made? The proposal as stated suggested that the granting Foundation had under-interpreted the history of performance of the Uriiori and of its Commissions; they had either been undersold or did not recognize the values of IUCN. He suggested that the vote be postponed until Monday, when there would have been further discussions on it, and the Board had had an opportunity to tell the membership more about their deliberations. The Chairman of the Committee, Dr. L.M. Talbot, then moved the Resolution, this was seconded by Mr. Gutermuth. Mr. Olindo, however, pointed out that the Meeting had been going on for a long time, and that the proposal for the plan for was a most important one. The next day would be open for discussion and he saw no reason why the Assembly should be rushed into a vote now. The delegates should be given more time
16 to go through it. The plan had been issued only in English, and some delegates did not understand the language well. He therefore urged that the membership should be given time to vote adequately on the Resolution. The Chairman agreed that it would be possible to study the proposals over the week-end and that the vote should be postponed until Monday (continued in paragraph 38) Declaration. : The President requested Mr. Z. Futehally, Chairman of the Conservation Declaration Committee, to present the Declaration. Mr. Futehally pointed out that he would need tha cooperation of the General Assembly because it was impossible to satisfy 411 people with one Declaration. Some would like to see a short Declaration, and others a long one. He then read the Declaration which is given in Appendix XVIII. The Declaration was accepted with acclaim and the President congratulated the Committee on the document which they had prepared. 36. The President pointed out that the Executive Board had no proposals for Honorary Members, but at this time he would like to pay a tribute to the memory of Charles Jean Bernard, who had died in Amsterdam on 29 July, 1967; he was not only the first President of the Union, but had been reelected twice, in 1950 and 1952; in the year 1954, he was made Honorary President. He had devoted his whole life to the cause of conservation and had achieved great success. We should therefore record our great respect and honour to his memory. 37. He also pointed out that Sir Julian Huxley, another old friend of IUCN, had been unable to attend the General Assembly on account of illness, but had sent his greetings, congratulating the Union on its 21st Anniversary. He welcomed these greetings and requested Mr. Nicholson to convey to Sir Julian a message of admiration and appreciation from the participants of the Assembly. Ho also said that a message of gratitude would be sent to the Friends of the Forest of Fontainebleau who had organized the unveiling of a tablet on the wall of an old monastery in the Forest to commemorate IUCN's 21st Anniversary. 38. The John C. Phillips Medal. The President invited Mr. Nicholson to join him on the platform. He then gave an account of the life of Dr. Phillips, a distinguished naturalist, explorer, author and conservationist in whose memory had been founded the John C. Phillips Memorial Medal for distinguished services in international conservation. In the past, the Medal had been awarded at previous General Assemblies to Mr. E.M. Nicholson (U.K.), and Dr. E. Beltran (Mexico). He said that it gave him great pleasure to announce that the presentation this year Would be to Shri Salim Ali, who was then invited to the platform. The citation read: "To Shri Salim Ali, Senior Statesman of conservation and distinguished scientist, whose influence on conservation in his own continent has been great and whose work and accomplishments are known and respected throughout the world. Most distinguished ornithologist and field naturalist
17 in his own country, whose published works have long been the basic and authoritative references on the birds of his country and have established him in the foreground of world ornithologists. Internationally recognised, and respected leader in conservation, whose efforts over the years have been a major factor in creating the climate of acceptance in conservation matters and preservation of wildlife which exist in his own country today." Following tremendous applause, Shri Salim Ali, in accepting the Medal, said: "I feel deeply grateful and gratified, and honoured and flattered". The President then ajourned the Session. 40th Session of the 10th General Assembly hrs., hrs., Monday, 1st December, The President called the Meeting to order and asked Dr. L.M. Talbot, the Chairman of the Committee for the Programme and Budget, to make comments. Dr. Talbot said that as a result of the previous discussions, the Committee would like now to suggest certain amendments to the Programme and Budget document, as shown in Appendix XIX. He also emphasized the purpose and nature of the document under the Statutes; it was not a long-term policy statement but, as required in the Statutes, it represented broad guidelines for the programme for the coming three years, together with a maximum budget, for approval, addition and alteration by the General Assembly. Mr. E.M. Nicholson said that he represented a sister organisation, the International Biological Programme, a non-permanent organisation which would end in 1973 by voluntary euthanasia. He considered that the proposals on the programme were highly conservative, maintaining and strengthening existing lines of work by giving more resources to the well-tried Commissions and centralising this power at headquarters as a single team. This would enable all concerned to cooperate and assist in projects to be pursued with other specialized bodies. The strengthening of the Secretary-General's power was an overdue management reform. It had to be admitted that the financial provision was still inadequate and one could only hope that in practice the level might be exceeded. He believed that the fears expressed about foundations imposing improper conditions were mistaken, but no serious grant-giving body acted without being satisfied that the project was well-conceived on current conditions, and that the promoters would be able to get good value for money. He agreed, however, that the Union's past very good record in obtaining results with small funds had not been sufficiently appreciated. Finally, as one who had had close contact with IUCN over its 21 years, he stressed that the plan contained nothing which had not been considered in Executive Board discussions. Nothing should be done today to weaken or divide the Union. While his own
18 attitude had always been and would continue to be critical, he would vote for the plan as amended. Mr. Anthony Wayne Smith concurred with Mr. Nicholson's remarks. IUCN was vitally important; he was full of admiration for the President of the Union and for the Chairman of the Programme Committee and his Committee who had made the proposed changes which went a long way towards meeting his questions, and subject to one comment, he supported the Programme. On behalf of the U.S. National Parks Association, however, he would like it to be recorded that they considered that the programme should have included a statement that IUCN would not accept financial contributions from sources which were inevitably substantially in conflict with IUCN's purpose, such as chemical companies, pharmaceutical companies, oil companies and so on; this was a question of integrity in which there could be no compromise. He would support the amended proposal. Mr. A.D. Butcher said that some members had left on Friday with misgivings, particularly on the failure of the programme to emphasize fundamental issues. The present amendments removed his misgivings and he spoke on behalf of himself and other delegates in accepting the programme at this Assembly. 40. Mrs. J. Goodwin pointed out that the National Audubon Society of the United States was an organisation with a history of 70 years. They accepted funds from foundations and individuals, but not from oil and chemical companies, She considered that many such companies were preparing conservation programmes as a public relations project, and that this was largely to cover their other activities which in many cases were very much against conservation. She considered the National Rifle Association to be such an organisation. If IUCN was going to accept money actively in this field, then many national conservation organisations would be going in one direction, and IUCN in another. She cited the history of the National Audubon Society which, in 1913, accepted funds from an ammunition manufacturer in spite of protests from Members, and it was not until 1920 that the Society was able to get out of its invidious position. It was up to IUCN to fight the oil companies which were constructing ships like matchboxes which were unqualified to fly the flag of their own country. Before accepting contributions from such people, they should be scrutinised very carefully. Dr. R.G. Miller was much moved by the former speaker's comments in putting the case clearly to the Union. He was grateful to the Committee for what they had done over the weekend in preparing the amendments which he considered were a concession to the point of view which he had previously expressed. He asked whether the Union would accept it as satisfactory to accept the kind of funds proposed for the next three years, reserving the right of curtailing it at the end of that period if there was cause to do so. The President and Officers of the Union should have the opportunity to amplify this point of view with this Foundation or with any other foundation, in the light of the amendments during the discussions which had been presented. He pointed out that he had not been conniving with anybody to reach this decision and he considered that the right solution had been arrived at; he would back the plan as amended. Dr. Talbot said that the amendments to the plan agreed completely with the ideas of his Committee which, in the short time available to it, had failed to
19 specify its own views. It had now done a better job. He emphasised that this plan applied only to the next three years. Mr. Z. Futehally agreed with the sentiments expressed that IUCN must be careful from whom it received funds. In India, for example, IUCN's brief was to spread conservation ideas throughout the country. If, with a view to doing this, IUCN established dialogues only with existing conservationists, then only the members of the four recognised conservation associations, about 3,000 people, would be concerned. It was essential to escape from this limited circle and to approach others, including business firms, for funds. He admitted that it was a delicate matter, but the Board must be allowed to exercise its judgement. IUCN could not withdraw within its shell and speak only to committed consarvationsits. Mr. R.S.R. Fitter supported Mr. Futehally. He pointed out that conservationists were now able to exercise great influence in many parts of the world. The conservation movement must cooperate with existing organisations and not always fight against them. 41. Mr. Thomas L. Kimball considered that the proposed programme and budget were now excellent and he was prepared to support them. It was, however, difficult for members to participate in the debates unless they were given the documents early enough for them to digest them. The Paper on the Programme and Budget was received too late and only that morning had they received the resolutions. He hoped that in future papers would be received earlier. The President assured him that this would be taken up by the new Executive Board. As the Assembly met only at intervals of three years, there would always be ad hoc arrangements and subjects to be discussed at short notice by the Assembly. He hoped that in the future, papers could be circulated to the delegates well ahead of time. Mrs. Jean Goodwin agreed with three of the previous speakers, but considered that they had put the story together wrongly. It was true that the companies were afraid of the conservationists; that was why they produced conservation booklets. Those industrial concerns which were not creating havoc did not produce conservation booklets, and IUCN had to make up its mind whether it wanted persistent pesticides or booklets. IUCN could cooperate in the event of an oil spill by having readily available lists of the species likely to be harmed, and methods of how best they could be protected. We should not accept funds from them. Oil firms should know that the conservation movement was opposed to them and would continue to be so. Dr. Talbot backed Mr. Kimball's proposals and stated that the Executive Board's Secretariat would welcome advice on operation and structures at any time, and not only during General Assemblies. Mr. Yoffe commented on the membership of the Union. It should be confined to those associations which were wholly working for the conservation of nature. IUCN should cooperate and receive funds from other organisations, only provided their motives were the right ones. Such organisations should not, however, be accepted as Members of the Union. Dr. Leslie Glasgow considered that IUCN should be free to accept funds, from chemical companies, oil companies or any other industry. They might not yet be converted to conservation, but they had shown great improvement over the past few years. IUCN's Officers had sound enough judgement to decide from whom it should accept or not accept funds.
20 Mr. Olindo pointed out that in the document not enough provision for the structure of the organisation to be strengthened had been included. He asked whether the question of membership was going to be discussed. Representation of the various regions of the world was inadequate, both on the Board and in the Staff of IUCN. He asked how appointments were carried out. Dr. Talbot considered that the second paragraph of amendment 2 proposed that morning covered the point on changes in the structure. He emphasized that adequate warning must be given before changes could be made to the Statutes. 42. The President said that the Executive Board was aware of the need for the Staff to reflect the kind of distribution which IUCN had in its Executive Board. Efforts had been made, and would continue to be made, to fill positions by people of different nationalities, maintaining as far as possible high-quality of work, but at the same time international distribution must reflect the world interest and activities of IUCN, and so make it function in the way which all would like to see. Mr. Conway, commenting on finance, considered that valid points had been raised for both sides of the issue. A compromise solution might be to insert a private funding organisation between the donors and IUCN. Dr. Talbot then read the draft Resolution. Resolution No. 358 : Approval of the Programme and Budget Having considered the Program and Budget for as submitted by the Program and Budget Committee (IUCN/10GA/39/5 Rev. 1), being determined to reorganise and strengthen the Secretariat to deal effectively with an expanded program geared to the new challenges facing the Union in the conservation field: The Tenth General Assembly resolves: 1. That the Program as submitted be implemented and that the Executive Board be empowered to take all necessary action to secure adequate funding for this purpose. 2. That the broad outline of the Budget as submitted be approved. 3. That the Executive Board take action to reorganize the Secretariat along the lines recommended by the Program and Budget Committee including the engagement of the highest level of professional staff. 4. That the Executive Board prepare draft staff regulations (Article VII.4) for professional staff conforming as closely as possible to the staff rules of the United Nations and that these draft staff regulations be applied to professional staff appointments made during the period until que next meeting of the General Assembly when the draft regulations will be submitted for approval. The Resolution was proposed by Mr. Kimball and seconded by Mr. Gutermuth. It was unanimously approved.