For me it is more community/environmental in mind set than 'family business' at the moment. If I do manage to get my hands on suitable property then it has a decent chance of being passed on to the wildlife conservatory foundation in the province with the plan to work with them and other landowners to establish a sustained selective harvest and maintenance of "Old Growth" hardwood in the region that isn't currently available to craftsmen to work with.

If I start using land I purchase in this manner, encourage neighbours to do the same, and get more people in other communities to embrace the plan, then in the long term everyone wins. In the mean time we get the material from thinning cuts, large scale organized planning will help the forests be more disease resistant, and dedicated 'green spaces' provide wildlife habitat. In the long term the region will have access to larger and better grades of wood to work with.

I'm 30. One of my side projects in life currently is looking around for a suitable wood lot to begin a hardwood timber plantation to produce heavy timbers that currently are extremely rare and very hard to get for woodworkers. If I plant 2000-4000 trees of mixed hardwood in the next 5 years, then most of them will be ready for harvest and use at their intended size sometime around when I would be turning 200, if not 300... In my life time the only usable wood I'll see from the project will be trimmings and thinning cuts that most likely would only be suitable for firewood. It will cost me thousands of dollars, and many weekends of my lifetime to buy, prep, and manage the property, and there is no way I'm seeing a beautiful 16 inch wide oak plank out of it, but if I don't make an effort to ensure a plot of land is managed for production of beautiful North American hardwood in my region, then who exactly is going to? The Irving Family (Largest lumber producer in the region) sure doesn't seem interested in producing hardwood, as they are too busy planting fast growing softwoods that will be market usable for 2x4 stud frame in the next 30-50 years, if that.

I just want to say that that is a fantastic project and kudos to you.

The world doesn't end when we die. Many of us on this planet feel that it would be a lot better of a place in general if more of us remembered this fact.

Amen, brother.

I'm still trying to assess whether the core fundamental of this nation is even possible.

It's one thing to have great ideals, and quite a different one to sit at the United Nations as an actual nation and leverage influence with other nations that have everyone guarantee the sovereignty of space (demilitarization, etc.)

I'm still trying to assess whether the core fundamental of this nation is even possible.

Out of all of the things Asgardia is attempting this is the most possible out of all of them.

There are only a few things they need to be considered a country.

Asgardia is already gathering the citizens, and Asgardia says they must be from nations that allow multiple citizenships, this seams like a good idea for a space country as you can't send them all in space at once.

Next you need some territory. If you have money- and Asgardia has money- you could just buy some, it is even allowed to be some uninhabitable place like a piece of desert or Antarctica. I mean if you are space nation why not just launch a something into space and as it is your property claim it as territory.

It does need a population, at least one person, you could also own some private property on earth and then say it's part of Asgardia in a attempt to have a population.

Also do you really need a population? I can't find the stats on North Sudan.

If they get enough citizens it would be easy for them to get recognized as a country, also some media attention would help. Yay, look at us doing our part! :P

Just having these few things Asgardia will be able to influence not only space laws but in a small way earth laws. I believe they will have a significant say in space laws, considering they will be the first space nation.

It's strange to think that a freshly born country will actually have a say on the matters of space travel because "The vision is very, very clear: This nation will do things to help protect the Earth and, secondly, it will be for exclusively peaceful purposes and also allowing access to developing countries that don't have that So, if that is done, recognition will not be a major problem. If these four elements are achieved it become a state and can apply for its membership of the United Nations."

Wow, they are vague. Like why are they using a country outside of Outer Space Treaty. <_<

It could be a good thing to have a country unconcerned with earth politics guiding space travel, maybe Asgardia will be a good thing; just wish they where more open with what they are doing.

"What would you do with a nation if you had one?" - Dorothy

Next you need some territory.

That might be the difficult part as treaties signed internationally in 1967 state that space is not any one countries territory and is the province of all mankind.

This does imply that a space station can't be sovereign territory as the space it's in belongs to everyone.

Therefore you can't have a space nation, just a group of earth nations teaming up to build a station for the benefit of all.

That is unless said treaties are abolished first...

That is unless said treaties ate abolished first...

Or if you decide to operate outside the treaties and only work with people that never signed the treaty.

That is unless said treaties ate abolished first...

Or if you decide to operate outside the treaties and only work with people that never signed the treaty.

Or somehow all earth nations who signed the treaty decide to join together as a show of Unity, so that one nation is the one in space... Unlikely though.

Wording of that treaty does have some wiggle room for the creation of a 'nation' that exists there. It does make some things slightly awkward if you try to simply apply the traditional approach to a nationstate and how it normally functioned on earth, specifically how the concept of sovereignty is applied, but nothing stops a 'nation' from actually existing in space.

The core points that apply are that Canada can't say "The moon is ours, hands off and stay away", but I can't find any aspect of the treaty that stops a group of people from saying "We're living here, this bit is ours. You're welcome to tag along, but please stay civil and try to help out."

Also, a nation which does not exist yet cannot sign a treaty barring the creation of itself until after the nation has been created...

This does imply that a space station can't be sovereign territory as the space it's in belongs to everyone.

Not quite. Any object that a nation launches is considered its sovereign territory. The US segment of the International Space Station is considered "US soil" because the US owns, built, and launched it. It's claiming territory on celestial objects that is prohibited. The LEM descent stages on the Moon are still considered "US property," but the land surrounding them is not.

I am not a space lawyer, but I believe the nation that launched the station would be considered legally responsible for it unless they waived their claim.