990 resultados para United States. Department of Commerce
Resumo:
Date stamped on cover.
Resumo:
For more than 25 years all sea turtle products have been prohibited from international commerce by the 170-member nations of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). Sea turtles continue to be threatened by direct take (including poaching) and illegal trade despite multi-national protection efforts. Although take may contribute significantly to sea turtle decline, illegal take is difficult to measure since there are few quantified records associated with legal fisheries and fewer still for illegal take (poaching). We can, however, quantify one portion of the illegal sea turtle trade by determining how many illegal products were seized at United States ports of entry over a recent 10-year period. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) oversees the import and export of wildlife and wildlife products, ensuring that wildlife trade complies with United States laws and international treaties. Additionally, the USFWS has legal authority to target suspected illegal wildlife activity through undercover and field investigations. In an effort to assess the scale of illegal sea turtle take and trade, we have conducted a 10-year (1994 – 2003) review of the law enforcement database maintained by the USFWS. This database tracks the number and type of wildlife cases, the quantity of seized products, and the penalties assessed against violators. These data are minimum estimates of the sea turtle products passing through the United States borders, as smuggled wildlife is oftentimes not detected.
Resumo:
"February 7, 1817, ordered to be printed for the use of the Senate." Message addressed to the Senate and dated February 7th, 1817. Consists of the covering letter from the President and a report from the Secretary of State, dated Department of State, February 5th, 1817; which itself consists largely of diplomatic correspondence between the United States and Great Britain Relates to the restitution of captured slaves by the British during the War of 1812-1814.
Resumo:
The narrative of the United States is of a "nation of immigrants" in which the language shift patterns of earlier ethnolinguistic groups have tended towards linguistic assimilation through English. In recent years, however, changes in the demographic landscape and language maintenance by non-English speaking immigrants, particularly Hispanics, have been perceived as threats and have led to calls for an official English language policy.This thesis aims to contribute to the study of language policy making from a societal security perspective as expressed in attitudes regarding language and identity originating in the daily interaction between language groups. The focus is on the role of language and American identity in relation to immigration. The study takes an interdisciplinary approach combining language policy studies, security theory, and critical discourse analysis. The material consists of articles collected from four newspapers, namely USA Today, The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and San Francisco Chronicle between April 2006 and December 2007.Two discourse types are evident from the analysis namely Loyalty and Efficiency. The former is mainly marked by concerns of national identity and contains speech acts of security related to language shift, choice and English for unity. Immigrants are represented as dehumanised, and harmful. Immigration is given as sovereignty-related, racial, and as war. The discourse type of Efficiency is mainly instrumental and contains speech acts of security related to cost, provision of services, health and safety, and social mobility. Immigrants are further represented as a labour resource. These discourse types reflect how the construction of the linguistic 'we' is expected to be maintained. Loyalty is triggered by arguments that the collective identity is threatened and is itself used in reproducing the collective 'we' through hegemonic expressions of monolingualism in the public space and semi-public space. The denigration of immigrants is used as a tool for enhancing societal security through solidarity and as a possible justification for the denial of minority rights. Also, although language acquisition patterns still follow the historical trend of language shift, factors indicating cultural separateness such as the appearance of speech communities or the use of minority languages in the public space and semi-public space have led to manifestations of intolerance. Examples of discrimination and prejudice towards minority groups indicate that the perception of worth of a shared language differs from the actual worth of dominant language acquisition for integration purposes. The study further indicates that the efficient working of the free market by using minority languages to sell services or buy labour is perceived as conflicting with nation-building notions since it may create separately functioning sub-communities with a new cultural capital recognised as legitimate competence. The discourse types mainly represent securitising moves constructing existential threats. The perception of threat and ideas of national belonging are primarily based on a zero-sum notion favouring monolingualism. Further, the identity of the immigrant individual is seen as dynamic and adaptable to assimilationist measures whereas the identity of the state and its members are perceived as static. Also, the study shows that debates concerning language status are linked to extra-linguistic matters. To conclude, policy makers in the US need to consider the relationship between four factors, namely societal security based on collective identity, individual/human security, human rights, and a changing linguistic demography, for proposed language intervention measures to be successful.
Resumo:
Caption title.
Resumo:
"Prepared by the Divisions of Regional Information and Business Review in cooperation with the Division of Foreign Trade Statistics."
Resumo:
Chiefly tables.
Resumo:
Prepared under the supervision of Z.R. Pettet.
Resumo:
At head of title: U.S. Dept. of Commerce, Jesse H. Jones, Secretary. Bureau of the Commerce, J.C. Capt, director ..
Resumo:
At head of title: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Jesse H. Jones, Secretary. Bureau of the Census. J.C. Capt, Director ..
Resumo:
At head of title: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Jesse H. Jones, Secretary. Bureau of the Census. J.C. Capt, Director ..
Resumo:
At head of title: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Jesse H. Jones, Secretary. Bureau of the Census. J.C. Capt, Director ..
Resumo:
At head of title: U.S. Dept. of Commerce. Jesse H. Jones, Secretary. Bureau of the Census. J.C. Capt, Director ..
Resumo:
Cover title.
Resumo:
1932 includes Summary tables, 1919-1932.