Northwest's Salmon Population May Be Running Out of Time
A Washington state report put it bluntly ( ): Because of the devastating ( ) effects of climate change and deteriorating ( ) habitats ( ), several species of salmon in the Pacific Northwest are “on the brink of ( ) extinction ( ).”
Of the 14 species of salmon and steelhead trout in Washington state that have been deemed ( ) endangered ( ) and are protected under the Endangered Species Act, 10 are lagging ( ) recovery goals, and five are considered “in crisis,” according to the 2020 State of Salmon in Watersheds report.
“Time is running out,” said the report, which is produced every other year ( ) by the Washington state Recreation and Conservation Office. “The climate is changing, rivers are warming, habitat is diminishing ( ), and the natural systems that support salmon in the Pacific Northwest need help now more than ever.”
Researchers say recovery efforts — involving state and federal agencies, Native American tribes, local conservation groups and others — have helped slow the decline of some salmon populations. The report found that two species — the Hood Canal summer chum and Snake River fall chinook — were approaching ( ) their recovery goals. It also noted that no new salmon species had been added to the endangered list since 2007.
“We are at least treading water,” said Kaleen Cottingham, director of the Washington state Recreation and Conservation Office. “We have not, however, seen the kind of progress ( ) that we had hoped for.”
With the effects of climate change expected to accelerate ( ), researchers said that more must be done to prevent further population decline and the possible extinction of some species.
Salmon play a vital ( ) role in the environment, economy and culture of the Pacific Northwest. At least 138 species depend on salmon for their food in some way. Salmon support an estimated ( ) 16,000 jobs in the fishing industry, and they are a draw ( ) for tourists.
Before the 20th century, an estimated 10 million to 16 million adult salmon and steelhead trout returned annually to the Columbia River system. The current return of wild fish is 2% of that.
One of the largest factors inhibiting salmon recovery is habitat loss. A growing human population has led to development along the shoreline and the addition of bulkheads, or sea walls, that encroach ( ) on beaches where salmon generally find insects and other food. More pavement ( ) and hard surfaces have contributed to an increase in toxic stormwater runoff ( ) that pollutes Puget Sound.
美國西北部鮭魚 陷瀕臨絕種危機
華盛頓州一篇報告直截了當指出,由於氣候變遷跟棲地劣化的毀滅性影響, 美國西北部有數種鮭魚「瀕臨滅絕」。
根據《2020年水域內鮭魚狀況報告》,華盛頓州有14種鮭魚和虹鱒被認定為瀕危物種,並受到《瀕危物種法》保護,其中10種復育進度未能達標,有5種更被認定「處於危機之中」。
這份由華盛頓州休閒與保育辦公室兩年發表一次的報告說:「時間不多了。氣候正在改變,河流水溫正在升高,棲地正在減少,供養美國西北部鮭魚生存的自然系統,如今比以往任何時候都更需要幫助。」
研究人員說,由州與聯邦機構、美國原住民部落、地方保育組織和其他機構共同參與的復育行動,緩和了一些鮭魚數量的減少。報告中發現胡德運河夏天的鉤吻鮭與蛇河秋天的帝王鮭兩種鮭魚,復育正接近目標。報告還指出,自2007年以來沒有新的鮭魚種列入瀕危名單。
華盛頓州休閒與保育辦公室主任Kaleen Cottingham說:「我們至少勉強穩住了情況,但我們沒有看到我們所期望的進展。」
研究人員表示,氣候變遷的影響料將加速,必須更加努力以防止鮭魚數量進一步減少和一些魚種的滅絕。
鮭魚在美國西北部環境、經濟與文化中扮演至關重要角色。在某種程度上,至少有138個物種以鮭魚為食。鮭魚為漁業提供約1萬6千個工作,並吸引大量遊客。
20世紀以前,估計每年有1000萬到1600萬成年鮭魚和虹鱒回到哥倫比亞河水系。目前返回的野生鮭魚數量只有這個數字的2%。
阻礙鮭魚復育的最大原因之一為棲地喪失,不斷成長的人口導致海岸沿線的開發,加上隔板或海堤的增加,這些侵占了鮭魚平常尋找昆蟲及其他食物的海灘。更多的鋪裝路面和堅硬的地面導致有毒雨水流量的增加,進而汙染了普吉特海灣。
#高雄人 #學習英文 請找 #多益達人林立英文
#高中英文 #成人英文
#多益家教班 #商用英文
#國立大學外國語文學系講師
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「native american culture」的推薦目錄:
- 關於native american culture 在 多益達人 林立英文 Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於native american culture 在 Xiaomanyc 小馬在紐約 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於native american culture 在 Mordeth13 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於native american culture 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的精選貼文
- 關於native american culture 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
- 關於native american culture 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳解答
native american culture 在 Xiaomanyc 小馬在紐約 Facebook 的最讚貼文
Living with the Navajo Diné Native American people and learning about their language and culture has been hands down one of the coolest and most meaningful things I've ever done. They are some of the most welcoming and friendly people I've ever met, and I've been honored to experience the original American culture they live and embody. Thanks for the great pic @dave.disci Videos coming soon! #navajo #nativeamerican #navajonation #diné #mountains #mountainlife #fashion #selfie
native american culture 在 Mordeth13 Facebook 的最佳貼文
Jenna Cody :
Is Taiwan a real China?
No, and with the exception of a few intervening decades - here’s the part that’ll surprise you - it never has been.
This’ll blow your mind too: that it never has been doesn’t matter.
So let’s start with what doesn’t actually matter.
Until the 1600s, Taiwan was indigenous. Indigenous Taiwanese are not Chinese, they’re Austronesian. Then it was a Dutch colony (note: I do not say “it was Dutch”, I say it was a Dutch colony). Then it was taken over by Ming loyalists at the end of the Ming dynasty (the Ming loyalists were breakaways, not a part of the new Qing court. Any overlap in Ming rule and Ming loyalist conquest of Taiwan was so brief as to be inconsequential).
Only then, in the late 1600s, was it taken over by the Chinese (Qing). But here’s the thing, it was more like a colony of the Qing, treated as - to use Emma Teng’s wording in Taiwan’s Imagined Geography - a barrier or barricade keeping the ‘real’ Qing China safe. In fact, the Qing didn’t even want Taiwan at first, the emperor called it “a ball of mud beyond the pale of civilization”. Prior to that, and to a great extent at that time, there was no concept on the part of China that Taiwan was Chinese, even though Chinese immigrants began moving to Taiwan under Dutch colonial rule (mostly encouraged by the Dutch, to work as laborers). When the Spanish landed in the north of Taiwan, it was the Dutch, not the Chinese, who kicked them out.
Under Qing colonial rule - and yes, I am choosing my words carefully - China only controlled the Western half of Taiwan. They didn’t even have maps for the eastern half. That’s how uninterested in it they were. I can’t say that the Qing controlled “Taiwan”, they only had power over part of it.
Note that the Qing were Manchu, which at the time of their conquest had not been a part of China: China itself essentially became a Manchu imperial holding, and Taiwan did as well, once they were convinced it was not a “ball of mud” but actually worth taking. Taiwan was not treated the same way as the rest of “Qing China”, and was not administered as a province until (I believe) 1887. So that’s around 200 years of Taiwan being a colony of the Qing.
What happened in the late 19th century to change China’s mind? Japan. A Japanese ship was shipwrecked in eastern Taiwan in the 1870s, and the crew was killed by hostile indigenous people in what is known as the Mudan Incident. A Japanese emissary mission went to China to inquire about what could be done, only to be told that China had no control there and if they went to eastern Taiwan, they did so at their own peril. China had not intended to imply that Taiwan wasn’t theirs, but they did. Japan - and other foreign powers, as France also attempted an invasion - were showing an interest in Taiwan, so China decided to cement its claim, started mapping the entire island, and made it a province.
So, I suppose for a decade or so Taiwan was a part of China. A China that no longer exists.
It remained a province until 1895, when it was ceded to Japan after the (first) Sino-Japanese War. Before that could happen, Taiwan declared itself a Republic, although it was essentially a Qing puppet state (though the history here is interesting - correspondence at the time indicates that the leaders of this ‘Republic of Taiwan’ considered themselves Chinese, and the tiger flag hints at this as well. However, the constitution was a very republican document, not something you’d expect to see in Qing-era China.) That lasted for less than a year, when the Japanese took it by force.
This is important for two reasons - the first is that some interpretations of IR theory state that when a colonial holding is released, it should revert to the state it was in before it was taken as a colony. In this case, that would actually be The Republic of Taiwan, not Qing-era China. Secondly, it puts to rest all notions that there was no Taiwan autonomy movement prior to 1947.
In any case, it would be impossible to revert to its previous state, as the government that controlled it - the Qing empire - no longer exists. The current government of China - the PRC - has never controlled it.
After the Japanese colonial era, there is a whole web of treaties and agreements that do not satisfactorily settle the status of Taiwan. None of them actually do so - those which explicitly state that Taiwan is to be given to the Republic of China (such as the Cairo declaration) are non-binding. Those that are binding do not settle the status of Taiwan (neither the treaty of San Francisco nor the Treaty of Taipei definitively say that Taiwan is a part of China, or even which China it is - the Treaty of Taipei sets out what nationality the Taiwanese are to be considered, but that doesn’t determine territorial claims). Treaty-wise, the status of Taiwan is “undetermined”.
Under more modern interpretations, what a state needs to be a state is…lessee…a contiguous territory, a government, a military, a currency…maybe I’m forgetting something, but Taiwan has all of it. For all intents and purposes it is independent already.
In fact, in the time when all of these agreements were made, the Allied powers weren’t as sure as you might have learned about what to do with Taiwan. They weren’t a big fan of Chiang Kai-shek, didn’t want it to go Communist, and discussed an Allied trusteeship (which would have led to independence) or backing local autonomy movements (which did exist). That it became what it did - “the ROC” but not China - was an accident (as Hsiao-ting Lin lays out in Accidental State).
In fact, the KMT knew this, and at the time the foreign minister (George Yeh) stated something to the effect that they were aware they were ‘squatters’ in Taiwan.
Since then, it’s true that the ROC claims to be the rightful government of Taiwan, however, that hardly matters when considering the future of Taiwan simply because they have no choice. To divest themselves of all such claims (and, presumably, change their name) would be considered by the PRC to be a declaration of formal independence. So that they have not done so is not a sign that they wish to retain the claim, merely that they wish to avoid a war.
It’s also true that most Taiwanese are ethnically “Han” (alongside indigenous and Hakka, although Hakka are, according to many, technically Han…but I don’t think that’s relevant here). But biology is not destiny: what ethnicity someone is shouldn’t determine what government they must be ruled by.
Through all of this, the Taiwanese have evolved their own culture, identity and sense of history. They are diverse in a way unique to Taiwan, having been a part of Austronesian and later Hoklo trade routes through Southeast Asia for millenia. Now, one in five (I’ve heard one in four, actually) Taiwanese children has a foreign parent. The Taiwanese language (which is not Mandarin - that’s a KMT transplant language forced on Taiwanese) is gaining popularity as people discover their history. Visiting Taiwan and China, it is clear where the cultural differences are, not least in terms of civic engagement. This morning, a group of legislators were removed after a weekend-long pro-labor hunger strike in front of the presidential palace. They were not arrested and will not be. Right now, a group of pro-labor protesters is lying down on the tracks at Taipei Main Station to protest the new labor law amendments.
This would never be allowed in China, but Taiwanese take it as a fiercely-guarded basic right.
*
Now, as I said, none of this matters.
What matters is self-determination. If you believe in democracy, you believe that every state (and Taiwan does fit the definition of a state) that wants to be democratic - that already is democratic and wishes to remain that way - has the right to self-determination. In fact, every nation does. You cannot be pro-democracy and also believe that it is acceptable to deprive people of this right, especially if they already have it.
Taiwan is already a democracy. That means it has the right to determine its own future. Period.
Even under the ROC, Taiwan was not allowed to determine its future. The KMT just arrived from China and claimed it. The Taiwanese were never asked if they consented. What do we call it when a foreign government arrives in land they had not previously governed and declares itself the legitimate governing power of that land without the consent of the local people? We call that colonialism.
Under this definition, the ROC can also be said to be a colonial power in Taiwan. They forced Mandarin - previously not a language native to Taiwan - onto the people, taught Chinese history, geography and culture, and insisted that the Taiwanese learn they were Chinese - not Taiwanese (and certainly not Japanese). This was forced on them. It was not chosen. Some, for awhile, swallowed it. Many didn’t. The independence movement only grew, and truly blossomed after democratization - something the Taiwanese fought for and won, not something handed to them by the KMT.
So what matters is what the Taiwanese want, not what the ROC is forced to claim. I cannot stress this enough - if you do not believe Taiwan has the right to this, you do not believe in democracy.
And poll after poll shows it: Taiwanese identify more as Taiwanese than Chinese (those who identify as both primarily identify as Taiwanese, just as I identify as American and Armenian, but primarily as American. Armenian is merely my ethnicity). They overwhelmingly support not unifying with China. The vast majority who support the status quo support one that leads to eventual de jure independence, not unification. The status quo is not - and cannot be - an endgame (if only because China has declared so, but also because it is untenable). Less than 10% want unification. Only a small number (a very small minority) would countenance unification in the future…even if China were to democratize.
The issue isn’t the incompatibility of the systems - it’s that the Taiwanese fundamentally do not see themselves as Chinese.
A change in China’s system won’t change that. It’s not an ethnic nationalism - there is no ethnic argument for Taiwan (or any nation - didn’t we learn in the 20th century what ethnicity-based nation-building leads to? Nothing good). It’s not a jingoistic or xenophobic nationalism - Taiwanese know that to be dangerous. It’s a nationalism based on shared identity, culture, history and civics. The healthiest kind of nationalism there is. Taiwan exists because the Taiwanese identify with it. Period.
There are debates about how long the status quo should go on, and what we should risk to insist on formal recognition. However, the question of whether or not to be Taiwan, not China…
…well, that’s already settled.
The Taiwanese have spoken and they are not Chinese.
Whatever y’all think about that doesn’t matter. That’s what they want, and if you believe in self-determination you will respect it.
If you don’t, good luck with your authoritarian nonsense, but Taiwan wants nothing to do with it.
native american culture 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的精選貼文
native american culture 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最讚貼文
native american culture 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳解答
native american culture 在 Native American | History, Art, Culture, & Facts | Britannica 的相關結果
Groups throughout the region had in common several forms of material culture, including the tepee, tailored leather clothing, a variety of battle regalia (such ... ... <看更多>
native american culture 在 Indigenous peoples of the Americas - Wikipedia 的相關結果
Main article: Native American name controversy ... among people of over 400 different cultures in the US alone, ... ... <看更多>
native american culture 在 Native American Cultures - Facts, Regions & Tribes - HISTORY 的相關結果
Native Americans, also known as American Indians and Indigenous Americans, are the indigenous peoples of the United States. ... <看更多>