New Mars Forums

Official discussion forum of The Mars Society and MarsNews.com

You are not logged in.

Announcement

Announcement: We've recently made changes to our user database and have removed inactive and spam users. If you can not login, please re-register.

#151 2017-03-20 23:15:42

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,752
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Traditions once established can last a very long time. Long after the original reason is long since gone. When the United States of America was first established, one general was so revered that people begged him to become their first President. He really didn't want the position, but accepted it. He stayed on for two terms of office, but after two terms insisted on leaving. The reason is he never wanted to be President. He just served to support the country he helped found. Although he chose not to serve a third term for personal reasons, many Americans then felt that a president could only serve two terms, that there's something "immoral" to serving more.

I want to ensure there are no conflicts on Mars. That efforts on Mars are focused on building. But also realize individuals migrating to Mars will do so with the expressed belief they can start again. That they can build the society they had always dreamed of. Many have accepted the status-quo on Earth, because it has existed so long and they feel there's nothing they can do about it. But Mars is pristine, no human presence, everything is fresh and new. So competing visions could very easily result in conflict. People will arrive on Mars feeling they have escaped all the compromise and submission they left behind on Earth, so may not accept compromise on Mars. This could very quickly explode into conflict.

Neighbouring settlements may both claim a single deposit of hematite concretions (iron ore). Or thorium (reactor fuel). Or potash (potassium fertilizer).

I want to avoid dividing people into groups. No separate settlements. Only one Mars. Each town will be small, only the size of a town. No bigger. No "township". And towns will not have authority to expand their own borders; they would have to get approval from the land registry, which will be a division of the national/planetary government.

One concern is the Oka Crisis in Quebec in 1990. A small town decided they wanted to expand a golf course, so decided to expropriate territory beyond town limits. That land was claimed by a native reservation, they traditional burial ground. In Canada, no one can take land from a native reservation, no town or province or even a federal minister. It would take an act of the federal parliament to take land from a reservation. However, for some reason that land was not considered part of the reservation. They had filed a land claim, which means any attempt to take the land had to be settled by the courts. But the town didn't care, they didn't bother with any court challenge. And expanding town boundaries requires approval by provincial legislature, but they didn't bother with that either. They just sent in bulldozers to level the trees, with armed town police to protect them. The local Mohawk sent armed men to defend their burial ground. The provincial police went in, then the federal police, a federal minister went to negotiate, but finally the military had to be sent in. The federal government of Canada should have been their saviours, but the idiot Mohawks declared their territory was not part of Canada. Mohawk warriors (those carrying guns) were captured by the military, and I've never heard of their release. A whole lot of nastiness, everyone lost. The reservation kept their land, but their warriors are still in jail. Of course there's a lot more complication to this story, on all sides. But I don't want something like that on Mars.

Offline

#152 2017-03-21 04:22:59

louis
Member
From: UK
Registered: 2008-03-24
Posts: 4,719

Re: Mapping a way forward

We can't be too prescriptive about how Mars is organised. But it is important to get starting conditions right.                  The best approach I think would be to have a plan guaranteeing increased democratic control as population increases. This needs to be coupled with control over migration to Mars. A free for all  could prove disastrous.

RobertDyck wrote:

Traditions once established can last a very long time. Long after the original reason is long since gone. When the United States of America was first established, one general was so revered that people begged him to become their first President. He really didn't want the position, but accepted it. He stayed on for two terms of office, but after two terms insisted on leaving. The reason is he never wanted to be President. He just served to support the country he helped found. Although he chose not to serve a third term for personal reasons, many Americans then felt that a president could only serve two terms, that there's something "immoral" to serving more.

I want to ensure there are no conflicts on Mars. That efforts on Mars are focused on building. But also realize individuals migrating to Mars will do so with the expressed belief they can start again. That they can build the society they had always dreamed of. Many have accepted the status-quo on Earth, because it has existed so long and they feel there's nothing they can do about it. But Mars is pristine, no human presence, everything is fresh and new. So competing visions could very easily result in conflict. People will arrive on Mars feeling they have escaped all the compromise and submission they left behind on Earth, so may not accept compromise on Mars. This could very quickly explode into conflict.

Neighbouring settlements may both claim a single deposit of hematite concretions (iron ore). Or thorium (reactor fuel). Or potash (potassium fertilizer).

I want to avoid dividing people into groups. No separate settlements. Only one Mars. Each town will be small, only the size of a town. No bigger. No "township". And towns will not have authority to expand their own borders; they would have to get approval from the land registry, which will be a division of the national/planetary government.

One concern is the Oka Crisis in Quebec in 1990. A small town decided they wanted to expand a golf course, so decided to expropriate territory beyond town limits. That land was claimed by a native reservation, they traditional burial ground. In Canada, no one can take land from a native reservation, no town or province or even a federal minister. It would take an act of the federal parliament to take land from a reservation. However, for some reason that land was not considered part of the reservation. They had filed a land claim, which means any attempt to take the land had to be settled by the courts. But the town didn't care, they didn't bother with any court challenge. And expanding town boundaries requires approval by provincial legislature, but they didn't bother with that either. They just sent in bulldozers to level the trees, with armed town police to protect them. The local Mohawk sent armed men to defend their burial ground. The provincial police went in, then the federal police, a federal minister went to negotiate, but finally the military had to be sent in. The federal government of Canada should have been their saviours, but the idiot Mohawks declared their territory was not part of Canada. Mohawk warriors (those carrying guns) were captured by the military, and I've never heard of their release. A whole lot of nastiness, everyone lost. The reservation kept their land, but their warriors are still in jail. Of course there's a lot more complication to this story, on all sides. But I don't want something like that on Mars.


Let's Go to Mars...Google on: Fast Track to Mars blogspot.com

Offline

#153 2017-03-21 06:43:57

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

RobertDyck wrote:

No separate settlements. Only one Mars. Each town will be small, only the size of a town. No bigger. No "township".

I have worked as an estimator and electrician.  I have sat all day long analyzing blueprints for building projects and preparing construction bids for tens of thousands and hundreds of thousands of dollars.  I have dealt with county planning departments, architects, engineers, owners, general contractors, subcontractors, tradesmen, material suppliers, building inspectors,  Fire Marshals and more.  Constructing a modern building is an extremely complicated task. 

The “urban planners” whom I have dealt with are in general some of the smartest people I have known, and that should not be surprising.  People attend universities for many years to obtain bachelors and masters degrees in urban planning.

     http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/urban-planni … -planning/

I understand why you want to keep things small and simple but that kind of living will not prevail on Mars.  Surviving on Mars will be a constant struggle and the systems that sustain human life will have to be precisely constructed and constantly maintained by people who know exactly what they are doing.  A small mistake could result in a fire that has catastrophic results.


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#154 2017-03-21 10:20:17

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Mapping a way forward

Scott Beach wrote:
Tom Kalbfus wrote:

...I wonder why you didn't propose that the Vatican City in Rome govern Mars...

The Holy See is a party to the Outer Space Treaty so it is not a sovereign that could claim a portion of Mars.  Please see the "Holy See" at...

     https://www.state.gov/t/isn/5181.htm

That kind of leaves Taiwan doesn't it. Since Taiwan can't be a party to the Outer Space Treaty as its not recognized as a country by the UN. So does Taiwan get Mars?

Offline

#155 2017-03-21 10:46:45

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

I drew a simple diagram which illustrates the "Settlement Pattern" that I have proposed.

     http://docdro.id/8GXv97N

The Holy See is a party to the Outer Space Treaty so it could not exert sovereignty over any portion of Mars.  However, I believe that the Holy See could lease 5 acres of land from the Board of Regents of the Spaceport.  A church could be built there.  Those construction jobs could have a very positive effect on the economy of the area around the Spaceport.


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#156 2017-03-21 11:26:16

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 3,063
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Robert,

Why do you think the Settlement Corporation needs to have a monopoly on settling Mars? Do you think they won't be able to raise the capital if it's open to competition?

All,

The formation of some sort of solar court to arbitrate claims over extraterrestrial resources - and perhaps also to establish a baseline of law (possibly under the principle of Hostis humani generis,enemy of mankind, that applies to maritime piracy and slavery) - should not be outside the bounds of the Outer Space Treaty. Indeed, it could be quite easily argued that it's required by the treaty, as party states are responsible for the space activities of individuals and corporations, and if those are establishing space stations and planetary bases there needs to be some way of handling disputes.

From there, with the application of a safety zone around bases and the ability to ring a territory with habitats, you can develop what is effectively land title. You won't be able to claim ownership of unused tracts of land, but you shouldn't be doing that anyway. If you want to use it in the future, go to the expense now of putting a base there. If you want autonomy, fly under a flag of convenience - perhaps even buy sovereignty off a small nation (1000 sq.m. of sovereign territory will do) to set up a Terran Commonwealth Office of Space Colonisation, with strictly limited laws imposed on the colonies.

So there's my proposal for a way forward. One which might actually be able to get support from the Powers That Be. Well, not the sovereignty purchase part, they tend to be loathe to let new countries join the sovereign club.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#157 2017-03-21 11:29:52

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

So does Taiwan get Mars?

The Republic of China (Taiwan) and the People's Republic of China have a very tense relationship.  I think it would be unwise to inflame that relationship by speculating about whether Taiwan is or is not a sovereign that can make a territorial claim on Mars or anything else.  We should stay a safe distance from that unsettled situation.


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#158 2017-03-21 11:43:31

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

Terraformer wrote:

Robert,

Why do you think the Settlement Corporation needs to have a monopoly on settling Mars? Do you think they won't be able to raise the capital if it's open to competition?

All,

The formation of some sort of solar court to arbitrate claims over extraterrestrial resources - and perhaps also to establish a baseline of law (possibly under the principle of Hostis humani generis,enemy of mankind, that applies to maritime piracy and slavery) - should not be outside the bounds of the Outer Space Treaty. Indeed, it could be quite easily argued that it's required by the treaty, as party states are responsible for the space activities of individuals and corporations, and if those are establishing space stations and planetary bases there needs to be some way of handling disputes.

From there, with the application of a safety zone around bases and the ability to ring a territory with habitats, you can develop what is effectively land title. You won't be able to claim ownership of unused tracts of land, but you shouldn't be doing that anyway. If you want to use it in the future, go to the expense now of putting a base there. If you want autonomy, fly under a flag of convenience - perhaps even buy sovereignty off a small nation (1000 sq.m. of sovereign territory will do) to set up a Terran Commonwealth Office of Space Colonisation, with strictly limited laws imposed on the colonies.

So there's my proposal for a way forward. One which might actually be able to get support from the Powers That Be. Well, not the sovereignty purchase part, they tend to be loathe to let new countries join the sovereign club.

There is a big slice of Antarctica that no one has claimed.  Depending on your nationality,  you might go there and claim it in the name of the Government of Mars.  Then borrow a billion dollars and establish a prototype Martian settlement that provides training for proto-Martian settlers.  When that venture is a success, borrow more money to build a floating launch platform that can be towed to Earth's equator, and launch from there.  Start sending your Martian Academy graduates to Mars with all the equipment that they will need to found self-sustaining settlements.


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#159 2017-03-21 13:16:23

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,752
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Scott Beach wrote:
RobertDyck wrote:

No separate settlements. Only one Mars. Each town will be small, only the size of a town. No bigger. No "township".

I understand why you want to keep things small and simple but that kind of living will not prevail on Mars.

I said a town will only be allowed to claim territory of a town. A city will only be allowed to claim territory of a city. That does not mean "small". Portage la Prairie is a bit bigger than I thought. According to Wikipedia it's 24.68 km² (9.53 sq mi). Google Maps only showed developed land, not town limits. They have 13,304 people according to last year's census. Winnipeg has 464.08 km² (179.18 sq mi) with a population of 705,244 (not including "bedroom communities" outside city limits). Manhattan has 22.83 sq mi (59.1 km²) of land (not including water) with 1,644,518 people according to the 2015 census. These are plenty big.

There is no need to create a group of towns or group of cities separate from other cities. There is no need to say this city belongs to this county or this state, while this other city belongs to some other county or some other state. Organizing people into groups is just to control them. Towns or cities have a practical reason, but arbitrarily drawing a line on a map to say these cities belong to this group while these other cities belong to this other group? That's just to control people. And as soon as you do so, politicians in control of that grouping will claim they need more money, they need more power. They'll increase taxes, and restrict what people can do.

And once you have more than one sovereign, you have conflict. There is no need for a political entity to claim control over vast areas of land. That's just the same power and control crap we want to get away from.

Instead of your model, try this. The capital city will have a spaceport. But the spaceport will not be separated by miles, it will be attached so people walk off the shuttle into the spaceport terminal building, then walk into the city. All attached, all connected. How far is Dulles airport from Washington DC? Something like that. Of course I envision the interplanetary spacecraft flying from Low Earth Orbit to Mars orbit and back. A shuttle would ferry passengers to the surface. So you don't need separation of a Saturn V from the VAB. Instead treat it as an airport. Small communities may form around the capital city, outside city limits. These communities will not be within jurisdiction of the city, so not bound by city bylaws.

Perhaps I should explain another example. A couple mayors of my city wanted to charge taxes on communities surrounding Winnipeg. But the reason many people moved to those towns was to get away from city taxes. They have long commutes, but live with it to get away from high city property tax, and several other taxes or license fees on small business. Of course the answer was "NO!" The reason people put up with long commutes was specifically to get away from that crap, so no, the city can't charge taxes to homes or businesses operating outside city limits. If the mayor doesn't like it, he can reduce city taxes. If he does, people will move back.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-03-21 13:24:32)

Offline

#160 2017-03-21 14:05:09

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

RobertDyck wrote:

I said a town will only be allowed to claim territory of a town. A city will only be allowed to claim territory of a city.

I cannot respond to your proposal because, in part, I do not know what you mean by “town”.  And what you mean by “city”. 

Is this the sort of thing that you mean by “city”?

“The city shall have the right and power to make and enforce all the laws and regulations in respect to municipal affairs, subject only to the restrictions and limitations provided in this Charter; provided that nothing herein shall be construed to prevent or restrict the city from exercising or consenting to, and the city is hereby authorized to exercise, any and all rights, powers and privileges heretofore or hereafter granted or prescribed by the general laws of the state including those specifically applicable to general law cities; provided, also that where the general laws of the state provide a procedure for the carrying out and the enforcement of any rights or powers belonging to the city, said procedure may be followed unless a different procedure is provided or required by the Charter, ordinance or resolution.

“It is the intention of the people in adopting this section to take advantage of the provisions of Section 5 of Article XI of the Constitution of the State of California giving cities Home Rule as to municipal affairs.”

     http://www.qcode.us/codes/sacramento/vi … &frames=on

I proposed a means of bringing a “Tharsis Transportation Cooperative” into existence.  And a means of providing for the construction and operation of a spaceport, governed by a Board of Regents.

You are making general suggestions, using words that are not defined.  I cannot respond to your proposal because I do not understand it.  Please be very specific.  If you can, please specify the name of the law that your corporation will be formed under.

     http://www.sos.state.co.us/biz/ViewImag … 9971145500


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#161 2017-03-21 14:57:17

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

RobertDyck wrote:

No separate settlements. Only one Mars. Each town will be small, only the size of a town. No bigger. No "township".

I see the problem now.  You are using "township" as a reference to a political entity.  That is not correct.  A township is an area bounded by the lines on a surveyor's map.  A township is not a legal entity.  However, the lines on a surveyors map could be used to describe the boundary of a political entity.

I am not proposing that Mars be divided into hundreds or thousands of counties.  I am not proposing that Mars be divided into a number of states.  A surveyor's map could show township boundaries from the north pole of Mars to the south.  However, those lines do not create counties or states or any other type of political entity.

I am proposing that groups of people (Mars Society chapters) who want to promote the settlement of Mars be given control over portions of Mars so that they can organize efforts to build settlements on Mars (and a spaceport).


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#162 2017-03-21 15:21:20

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,752
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

I said no subdivision of people or settlements or communities. Your map clearly shows 6 separate communities. I said each community shall have it's own town council. The exact nature of the town council shal be up to the people who found that town. It's not clear, because it's supposed to be flexible. However, each town will only be a town. I do not want some back-door way for someone to create a state. I said no states. No provinces, no counties, no shires, etc. That means no rulers trying to assert sovereignty over vast areas of Mars. As soon as you have rulers, you have oppression and war.

Last edited by RobertDyck (2017-03-21 19:15:07)

Offline

#163 2017-03-21 17:50:08

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

RobertDyck wrote:

Your map clearly shows 6 separate communities.

No; my map shows 6 settlements, not communities.  Each settlement (144 square miles) would be under the control of a chapter of the Mars Society.  A chapter might adopt parcel maps and then lease parcels in the settlement to individuals and organizations and then invest the lease payments in shares of the Tharsis Transportation Cooperative or in infrastructure improvements in the settlement.  And whether or not they adopt laws that authorize the incorporation of cities is up to them.

The parcel maps might create large parcels that have a rural character while other parcels are small and intended to be components of an urban area (an unincorporated town of 1,000 people or an incorporated city of 100,000 people).  The town parcels might contain 1 to 10 acres while city parcels might contain one-quarter acre or less.  The settlement's professional urban planners will advise the settlement's owners on these issues.


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#164 2017-03-21 20:25:38

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Do any of you (Scott, Robert, being the main contributors; also Terraformer, Tom, Louis if you're reading this) have all of your proposal for a Mars system together in one document? It sounds like you do, or at least it's all a complete plan in your head.

Would any of you be willing to email your whole plan to each other, to me, to Mars Society 'management' (if such a thing exists) so that all these great ideas don't disappear down the sink-hole? I'm sure it's completely valid for the Mars Society members to produce plans that conflict in many details or even in their overall philosophy. After all, such diversity may help some future would-be-settlers to think it all through for themselves.


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

#165 2017-03-21 22:11:58

RobertDyck
Moderator
From: Winnipeg, Canada
Registered: 2002-08-20
Posts: 5,752
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

The Mars Society does have a president, executive director, board of directors, and steering committee. It does manage FMARS and MDRS, so it's important. However, the Mars Society doesn't have any real authority on Mars. And the usual way of presenting material like this is at Convention. This year it's September 7-10, at University of California, Irvine. I haven't gone in a number of years due to unemployment. Airfare and hotel costs money. Louis is in the UK, they have a convention July 22-24 in Manchester. But I can't afford to fly to the UK, and don't know if Louis can afford to fly to America. Scott didn't mark in his profile where he is. I see Terraformer has a website hosted in Canada, and JohnX is from Thunder Bay.

Cool! Thunder Bay. Winnipeg has a science fiction convention every May long weekend: May 19-21. I always give a presentation about real space exploration: NASA, ESA, CSA, etc. It's an 8½ hour drive along highway 17. Or 1½ hour flight. Interested in coming to Keycon? It's mostly science fiction and fantasy, but a fun weekend-long party. Interested?

Ps. Terraformer: where are you?

Offline

#166 2017-03-21 23:38:47

IanM
Moderator
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 275

Re: Mapping a way forward

I have some ideas for the administration of Mars, mostly articulated in this thread but not entirely, that I can certainly e-mail to anyone who's interested. What's your e-mail address JohnX?


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#167 2017-03-22 04:49:53

Terraformer
Member
From: Lancashire
Registered: 2007-08-27
Posts: 3,063
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

I'm in North England, 60 miles north of Manchester. It takes me about an hour to get there on the train (direct). It's good to know they have a convention there. Perhaps I will go this year.

I don't have my plan fully fleshed out, only the bare bones of it. Basically I think that the easiest way forward is the extension of current customary laws of the sea to space colonisation (plus a bit of sovereignty hacking...). Though without the silly bits like the International Seabed Authority. I'm proposing the establishment of an International Space Authority that would ensure colonies aren't interfering with each other, the right to own mined resources in the same way that fish catches can be owned, and the use of flags of convenience for colonies (so the Mars Society could pay a small nation to set up an Office of Space Colonisation on their behalf, which would enable them to regulate their own colonies). Probably also an authority to impose some level of basic law. Space Patrol, perhaps.

You won't own anything outside your colony - no laying claim to a glacier that you want to mine in the future, either mine it or don't - but you'll still be able to run your colony as you see fit. Basically, it's the homestead principle. Unless you're going to mix your labour with it, you don't gain rights over it, but if you build a low pressure greenhouse on the site it comes under your control. If you cover several square kilometres with a low pressure lake for aquaculture, it's yours.

Given such protections for colonies, I think a corporation might be able to make money transporting colonists to Mars and selling them what they need. I think, though, that in the early stages it will be selling transport and equipment to governments rather than individuals. Get the space agencies to pay for putting in the infrastructure, then the costs can be lowered for the settlers following later.


"I guarantee you that at some point, everything's going to go south on you, and you're going to say, 'This is it, this is how I end.' Now you can either accept that, or you can get to work." - Mark Watney

Offline

#168 2017-03-22 08:01:27

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

RobertDyck wrote:

Cool! Thunder Bay. Winnipeg has a science fiction convention every May long weekend: May 19-21. I always give a presentation about real space exploration: NASA, ESA, CSA, etc. It's an 8½ hour drive along highway 17. Or 1½ hour flight. Interested in coming to Keycon? It's mostly science fiction and fantasy, but a fun weekend-long party. Interested?

Yes, interested; able to come: not so much. Our family is already stretched by our 2 sons' soccer (aka football) tournaments. It is great to live in Thunder Bay but it's a long way to most other places apart from the lake & the forest!

A few of the soccer events are in Winnipeg. If one coincides with any of your events I'd surely try to attend.


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

#169 2017-03-22 08:05:43

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Terraformer wrote:

Given such protections for colonies, I think a corporation might be able to make money transporting colonists to Mars and selling them what they need. I think, though, that in the early stages it will be selling transport and equipment to governments rather than individuals. Get the space agencies to pay for putting in the infrastructure, then the costs can be lowered for the settlers following later.

You sound like SpaceX - transporting people to Mars. Competing with Musk would be a tough race!

We might see a number of people willing to raise silly amounts of money to get to Mars, especially super-rich adventurers, scientists backed by wealthy institutions.

Yes some space agencies would be sane enough to pay for the ride rather than building their own stuff at 10x the price! (know who I mean?)


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

#170 2017-03-22 08:07:23

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

IanM wrote:

I have some ideas for the administration of Mars, mostly articulated in this thread but not entirely, that I can certainly e-mail to anyone who's interested. What's your e-mail address JohnX?

Look beneath my name on any of my posts. Click 'email'! I'm not sure I want to put my actual address out there for the public (and spam bots), but on a 1-to-1 basis it's fine.


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

#171 2017-03-22 08:28:05

IanM
Moderator
From: Chicago
Registered: 2015-12-14
Posts: 275

Re: Mapping a way forward

JohnX wrote:

Look beneath my name on any of my posts. Click 'email'! I'm not sure I want to put my actual address out there for the public (and spam bots), but on a 1-to-1 basis it's fine.

Ah! Duly noted, thanks.


The Earth is the cradle of the mind, but one cannot live in a cradle forever. -Paraphrased from Tsiolkovsky

Offline

#172 2017-03-22 10:04:36

Scott Beach
Member
Registered: 2017-02-21
Posts: 132

Re: Mapping a way forward

“A forum such as the Mars Society could be a way for many 'little people' to get together and do something magnificent, like ensuring that Mars is free from Earth's domination from the start”. — John Peace

     https://johnmpeace.blogspot.ca/2017/03/ … orums.html

The members of the New Mars Forums should adopt a “Mars Development Plan” that will ensure “that Mars is free from Earth’s domination from the start”.

For the purposes of discussion, let’s start at a point that is about 200 miles south by southeast of Fesenkov Crater.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fesenkov_(Martian_crater)

That crater is near to the eastern edge of the “Tharsis Region” of Mars. 

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tharsis

Fesenkov Crater it is shown on the Lunae Palus quadrangle map of Mars.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USGS … n-mola.png

Our Mars Development Plan might provide that (1) a spaceport will be built at 85 degrees west longitude and 15 degrees north latitude, (2) six permanent human settlements will be constructed within 20 miles of the spaceport, (3) those settlements will organize a Tharsis Transportation Cooperative, (4) the cooperative will be governed by a Board of Regents composed of 6 Regents, and (5) each settlement will elect one Regent.

The Cooperative will invite SpaceX and Blue Origin and Mars One and other rocket companies to land their rockets at the Cooperative’s spaceport.  The Cooperative will operate a fleet of ground vehicles that transport people and supplies between the spaceport and the surrounding settlements, and from one settlement to another.

Each settlement will control a land grant that contains 144 square miles.  The government of a settlement may adopt parcel maps that divide the lands of the settlement into parcels of various sizes.  A settlement may lease parcels to people and organizations.  A settlement may use lease payments to purchase shares in the Tharsis Transportation Cooperative or to pay for settlement infrastructure.  Some lease agreements may include an option to purchase the parcel at a future time.

To be continued…


"It is possible to build a rational and humane culture completely free from the threat of supernatural restraints."  Arthur C. Clarke, The Songs of Distant Earth

Offline

#173 2017-03-22 10:25:43

Tom Kalbfus
Banned
Registered: 2006-08-16
Posts: 4,401

Re: Mapping a way forward

Who cares whether Mars is free of Earth's domination or not? There aren't any Martian residents to state an opinion on the matter, for all we know they might be fine with it!

Last edited by Tom Kalbfus (2017-03-22 10:26:04)

Offline

#174 2017-03-22 10:49:03

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Scott Beach wrote:

“A forum such as the Mars Society could be a way for many 'little people' to get together and do something magnificent, like ensuring that Mars is free from Earth's domination from the start”. — John Peace

     https://johnmpeace.blogspot.ca/2017/03/ … orums.html

The members of the New Mars Forums should adopt a “Mars Development Plan” that will ensure “that Mars is free from Earth’s domination from the start”.

For the purposes of discussion, let’s start at a point that is about 200 miles south by southeast of Fesenkov Crater.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fesenkov_(Martian_crater)

That crater is near to the eastern edge of the “Tharsis Region” of Mars. 

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tharsis

Fesenkov Crater it is shown on the Lunae Palus quadrangle map of Mars.

     https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:USGS … n-mola.png

Our Mars Development Plan might provide that (1) a spaceport will be built at 85 degrees west longitude and 15 degrees north latitude, (2) six permanent human settlements will be constructed within 20 miles of the spaceport, (3) those settlements will organize a Tharsis Transportation Cooperative, (4) the cooperative will be governed by a Board of Regents composed of 6 Regents, and (5) each settlement will elect one Regent.

The Cooperative will invite SpaceX and Blue Origin and Mars One and other rocket companies to land their rockets at the Cooperative’s spaceport.  The Cooperative will operate a fleet of ground vehicles that transport people and supplies between the spaceport and the surrounding settlements, and from one settlement to another.

Each settlement will control a land grant that contains 144 square miles.  The government of a settlement may adopt parcel maps that divide the lands of the settlement into parcels of various sizes.  A settlement may lease parcels to people and organizations.  A settlement may use lease payments to purchase shares in the Tharsis Transportation Cooperative or to pay for settlement infrastructure.  Some lease agreements may include an option to purchase the parcel at a future time.

To be continued…

It sounds like the right kind of initiative to get things started. I like it, but some 'realistic' drawbacks:

- not many in SpaceX et.al. may want to settle Tharsis - see NASA's search for an ideal settling point for example: 'The first human landing sites workshop in 2015 yielded 47 landing site proposals. ' - NASA landing site workshop
- Are you anticipating that the Cooperative gets there first and builds a spaceport? Or are we just calling the location a spaceport in anticipation? At first landings there won't be anything there; the Cooperative wouldn't have anything to offer (unless it was v v well funded and could send its own autonomous infrastructure landers for robotic construction)
- Out of interest, how did you choose 'Regent' for the board members?

So possibly to add to your plan:
- Open a public debate among involved parties to choose one best site to start this settlement - get maximum agreement
- Develop and promote this model for use wherever rockets land; it may help the unity of all the growing areas & settlements in future if they're all run in a similar style but with enough flexibility to express each group's uniqueness


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

#175 2017-03-22 10:54:25

JohnX
Member
From: Thunder Bay
Registered: 2017-03-10
Posts: 73
Website

Re: Mapping a way forward

Tom Kalbfus wrote:

Who cares whether Mars is free of Earth's domination or not? There aren't any Martian residents to state an opinion on the matter, for all we know they might be fine with it!

Very true. Who are we to speak for them. The trouble would be if they are not fine with it. Getting free of 'domination' might involve a lengthy process of dispute, activism, political struggle, even armed struggle. That's great if we want to re-live Kim Stanley Robinson's novels, but not great for the people who have to live through it.

Isn't it better that Mars be free? As has been often stated in this thread & elsewhere, if there's even one Earth-based country, company or group with sovereignty or control over a patch of Mars or the settlers there, soon there could be many, then that leads pretty surely to conflicting claims and division. Much harder to reverse that and unite Mars later.

Is this a clash of visions? Some want Mars to continue what we do on Earth - making money, profits for the shareholders back home, being the best & strongest; others want to start again & try for something better.


-- Because it's there! --

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB