If the leaseholder is found there is no guarantee that the person who serves the notice will recognise or act upon any personal circumstances which may prevent the leaseholder from responding. Furthermore, a personal service requirement cannot be satisfied if the leaseholder cannot be found or lives abroad. We could require that landlords or their representatives visit the premises and attempt to contact any occupant. Online Reputation Management Services Indeed, there may be a danger that unscrupulous operators may play down the seriousness of the situation during the visit and /or misreport the outcome to the court.
Alternatively, there is also a risk that a new requirement for personal visits might be exploited and seen as an opportunity for legalised harassment to try and recover unreasonable charges. Leaseholders who sub-let their property ought to be aware of their obligations and would normally be expected to notify their landlord of a contact address. This could alert neighbours / visitors to the problem and enable representations to be made on a vulnerable leaseholder’s behalf. Such notices could also indicate that a property was unoccupied and encourage burglars or squatters.
It could simply ask if anyone knows of the whereabouts of the leaseholder and ask them to contact the landlord or representative. We could require landlords to notify agencies such as the police, social services departments and health authorities before commencing possession proceedings. In theory, such a requirement ought to identify vulnerable leaseholders who are in hospital or are being cared for by these agencies in the locality.
However, an arrangement for the systematic notification of all leaseholders who do not respond to notices would generate bureaucracy and involve significant costs for the agencies in question. Procedures would have to be set up to ensure that notifications were processed promptly. Such an arrangement may also imply a duty on the agency to inform or act on behalf of the leaseholder with potential liabilities on the agency if this duty were not fulfilled.
There is a realization that without attention to rights and equity regarding access to and ownership of land, the intentions of protected areas may backfire as animosity and resource degradation rise outside park boundaries. However, around the world governments continue to oppose indigenous land rights and practices of relocation and assimilation continue. Yet even in these cases, there are questions about whether the rights are adequate and difficult work remains surrounding the realization of these rights and access to real decision-making power in the face of continued resistance from governments and conservationists.
And while some land rights are now restored, others are being threatened, sometimes just across the border, as protected area establishment continues to be proposed on indigenous lands on all continents without involvement of the residents themselves. The time is ripe to focus on and resolve issues surrounding land rights and protected areas around the world. We need to take a close look at the protected area system we’ve inherited and redefine the terms of this system. These changes have the potential to bring equity and justice to the protected area system making parks not an elite Endeavour but relevant to all.
In 1996, Burma’s military rulers who’d slaughtered more than 3,000 demonstrators during a peaceful uprising in 1988 proclaimed the strategy seemed to work. The junta, says Burma Campaign UK, claims to earn $100 million a year from tourism. And 40% of its budget is spent on the military. The crisis in Burma has inspired international outrage and strong reactions. This is done VIEWS ON BURMA with full awareness that every dime spent on visa fees along with the $200 in foreign currency that tourists must change upon arrival fattens the coffers of the military regime.
Aung San Suu Kyi was released from house arrest, and the generals agreed to let her travel through the country. Most Burmese still wear longyis and sandals, best service of search engine optimization rather than western sneakers and T-shirts. There are no 7-11s, Coca-Cola signs, or McDonald’s. The streets are safe at night, and the people are astonishingly friendly and generous. Japan Ecotourism Society (JES) was established in March 1998 and certified as non-profit organization in February 2003.
JES aims to provide an open forum for people who work in the field of ecotourism, to provide training opportunities to promote the appropriate development of ecotourism, and to undertake specific projects aimed at strengthening ecotourism. Currently, JES has 110 corporate members, 435 individual members, and 135 student members throughout Japan and abroad.