Niagara River (Ontario) Remedial Action Plan fonds, 1984-1997, n.d.

The Niagara River Remedial Action Plan was part of an initiative to restore the integrity of the Great Lakes Basin ecosystem. In 1972, the Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement was signed by both Canada and the United States to demonstrate their commitment to protecting this valuable resource. An amendment in 1987 stipulated that Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) be implemented in 43 ecologically compromised areas known as Areas of Concern. The Niagara River was designated as one of these areas by federal and provincial governments and the International Joint Commission, an independent and binational organization that deals with issues concerning the use and quality of boundary waters between Canada and the United States. Although the affected area included parts of both the Canadian and American side of the river, Remedial Action Plans were developed separately in both Canada and the United States. The Niagara River (Ontario) RAP is a three-stage process requiring collaboration between numerous government agencies and the public. Environment Canada, the Ontario Ministry of the Environment, and the Niagara Peninsula Conservation Authority are the agencies guiding the development and implementation of the Niagara River (Ontario) RAP. The first stage is to determine the severity and causes of the environmental degradation that resulted in the location being designated an Area of Concern; the second stage is to identify and implement actions that will restore and protect the health of the ecosystem; and the third stage is to monitor the area to ensure that the ecosystem’s health has been restored. Stage one of the RAP commenced in January 1989 when a Public Advisory Committee (PAC) was established. This committee was comprised of concerned citizens and representatives from various community groups, associations, industries and municipalities. After several years of consultation, the Niagara River (Ontario) Remedial Action Plan Stage 2 Report was released in 1995. It contained 16 goals and 37 recommendations. Among them was the need for Canadians and Americans to work more collaboratively in order to successfully restore the water quality in the Niagara River. Stage three of the Niagara River (Ontario) RAP is currently ongoing, but it is estimated that it will be completed by 2015. At that point, the Niagara River Area of Concern will be delisted, although monitoring of the area will continue to ensure it remains healthy.

Morphonotactic and phonotactic processing in German-speaking adults

Based on the theoretical framework of Dressler and Dziubalska-Kołaczyk (2006a,b), the Strong Morphonotactic Hypothesis will be tested. It assumes that phonotactics helps in decomposition of words into morphemes: if a certain sequence occurs only or only by default over a morpheme boundary and is thus a prototypical morphonotactic sequence, it should be processed faster and more accurately than a purely phonotactic sequence. Studies on typical and atypical first language acquisition in English, Lithuanian and Polish have shown significant differences between the acquisition of morphonotactic and phonotactic consonant clusters: Morphonotactic clusters are acquired earlier and faster by typically developing children, but are more problematic for children with Specific Language Impairment. However, results on acquisition are less clear for German. The focus of this contribution is whether and how German-speaking adults differentiate between morphonotactic and phonotactic consonant clusters and vowel-consonant sequences in visual word recognition. It investigates whether sub-lexical letter sequences are found faster when the target sequence is separated from the word stem by a morphological boundary than when it is a part of a morphological root. An additional factor that is addressed concerns the position of the target cluster in the word. Due to the bathtub effect, sequences in peripheral positions in a word are more salient and thus facilitate processing more than word-internal positions. Moreover, for adults the primacy effect most favors word-initial position (whereas for young children the recency effect most favors word- final position). Our study discusses effects of phonotactic vs. morphonotactic cluster status and of position within the word.