Trump administration pulls US out of agreement to help restore salmon in the Columbia River
SEATTLE (AP) — President Donald Trump on Thursday pulled the U.S. out of an agreement with Washington, Oregon and four American Indian tribes to work together to restore salmon populations and boost tribal clean energy development in the Pacific Northwest, deriding the plan as 'radical environmentalism' that could have resulted in the breaching of four controversial dams on the Snake River.
The deal, known as the Resilient Columbia Basin Agreement, was reached in late 2023 and heralded by the Biden administration, tribes and conservationists as historic. It allowed for a pause in decades of litigation over the harm the federal government's operation of dams in the Northwest has done to the fish.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
32 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Iranian missiles penetrated Israel's air defenses Friday. How ironclad is the system?
JERUSALEM (AP) — Israel's multilayered air-defense system was tested Friday night as Iran launched ballistic missiles at Israel, with some reportedly landing in the city of Tel Aviv. Israel's military said it had intercepted the vast majority of the missiles but that some left 'a few impacts on buildings.' An Associated Press reporter saw smoke rising in Tel Aviv after an apparent missile strike. A Tel Aviv area hospital said it was treating 15 injured civilians. The attack was a stiff challenge for Israel's air-defense system, which has intercepted projectiles fired from Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Iran since the start of the war Oct. 7, 2023. They have ranged from short-range rockets to medium-range missiles to attack drones to ballistic missiles like those fired Friday night. U.S. ground-based air defense systems in the region were helping to shoot down Iranian missiles, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the measures. But the vast majority of Israel's air defense over the past year has been carried out by Israel itself. Over the decades, Israel has developed a sophisticated system capable of detecting incoming fire and deploying only if the projectile is headed toward a population center or sensitive military or civilian infrastructure. Israeli leaders say the system isn't 100% guaranteed, but credit it with preventing serious damage and countless casualties. Here's a closer look at Israel's multilayered air-defense system: The Arrow This system developed with the U.S. is designed to intercept long-range missiles, including the types of ballistic missiles Iran launched on Tuesday. The Arrow, which operates outside the atmosphere, has also been used in the current war to intercept long-range missiles launched by Houthi militants in Yemen. David's Sling Also developed with the U.S., David's Sling is meant to intercept medium-range missiles, such as those possessed by Hezbollah in Lebanon. It has been deployed on multiple occasions throughout the war. Iron Dome This system, developed by Israel with U.S. backing, specializes in shooting down short-range rockets. It has intercepted thousands of rockets since it was activated early last decade – including thousands of interceptions during the current war against Hamas and Hezbollah. Israel says it has a success rate of over 90%. Iron Beam Israel is developing a new system to intercept incoming threats with laser technology. Israel has said this system will be a game changer because it would be much cheaper to operate than existing systems. According to Israeli media reports, the cost of a single Iron Dome interception is about $50,000, while the other systems can run more than $2 million per missile. Iron Beam interceptions, by contrast, would cost a few dollars apiece, according to Israeli officials — but the system is not yet operational. ___ This story was originally published on Oct. 2, 2024. It was updated Friday.
Globe and Mail
38 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
The great theatre of Donald Trump's U.S. military parade
With armed forces on the streets of cities on both U.S. coasts this weekend, the country is marching into a new American era faster than at the standard military rate of 120 steps per minute. The Saturday evening military parade through Washington to mark the 250th anniversary of the United States Army realizes one of President Donald Trump's fondest hopes: a bravura procession occurring, by coincidence if not by cosmic convergence, on the minor but evocative holiday of Flag Day and on the day he turns 79 years old. It comes as the Marines he has dispatched to Los Angeles continue to patrol the streets, in an uninvited effort to keep the peace that California government officials insist they can achieve themselves. The Army, once commanded by George Washington, and Marines, celebrated in their lyrical hymn for their bravery from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, have special purchase in American sentiment. As a result, their presence in two of the country's most distinctive cities − one of the hard reality of politics, the other of the dreams and mythology stirred by the movie industry − provokes unusually strong feelings. Like almost everything else in a land riven by divisions and disputes, the twin mobilizations have provoked a civilian battle, in part because there are more American troops deployed in Los Angeles than in Syria and Iraq combined, in part because massive displays of military personnel and firepower in American streets are not part of the country's tradition. The President's supporters see the Washington parade as an expression of his power and will, an affirmation of his command of both capital and country in his effort, as the sentiment often is expressed, but not universally embraced, to return the country to its founding values. Mr. Trump's opponents see it as a pair of needless assertions of executive excess in direct contradiction to the republican principles of those very founders. With arrays of helicopters, tanks and other battle vehicles, there will be great theatre in Saturday night's procession, a marked contrast with the drama on the streets of Los Angeles. But at the centre of these stereo spectacles is the President himself, playing his constitutional role of commander in chief in a fashion that provokes debate about whether he does so in a way that is in conflict with the constitutional principles his predecessors have respected. In truth, politics, the presidency, and the military are more intertwined than commonly acknowledged − ties that Mr. Trump, who attended a military academy in his high-school years but received deferments from service during the Vietnam War, seems determined to reinforce. The country traditionally has honoured military service, and for a generation in the middle of the 20th century, it was regarded almost as an indispensable requirement for high elected office. A dozen presidents, including George Washington, Ulysses Grant and Dwight Eisenhower, were generals. Several more, including Andrew Jackson, Zachary Taylor, Theodore Roosevelt, and John F. Kennedy, burnished their images or made their names in battle. Overall, 31 presidents had military service, and most presidents from the Civil War to the end of the 19th century were veterans of that bloody conflict. But four of the past five presidents had no military record; the only exception was George W. Bush, who served in the Texas Air National Guard. But for all that military service − for all the ubiquitous rote 'thank-you-for-your-service' greetings to Americans in uniform today − there has been a skepticism about great shows of military strength, much the way wealthy members of the country's establishment often have been wary of displaying their riches. Opinion: For Trump, the L.A. protests are an opportunity to wield power and spread fear Eisenhower, a five-star general before becoming president, brushed aside as unseemly suggestions that the country conduct a military parade during the Cold War. He thought it indecorous and, because the United States was the predominant superpower, redundant. 'The notion of putting tanks on the street as a symbol of our power is unseemly,' former Republican senator William Cohen of Maine, a onetime defence secretary, said in an interview. 'Nations run by autocrats do that. We haven't. I'm happy to celebrate the people, Black and white, who have served in the Army. But it's overload to put tanks on the street.' It's also expensive. For years, deep, unsightly ruts remained in the streets of Washington created by heavy vehicles in the parade to commemorate the end of the 1991 Gulf War. Estimates put the cost of the road repairs alone for this procession at US$16-million. Large demonstrations of military power have been undertaken by the old Soviet Union, China and North Korea, often to smug ridicule in the West. 'These parades are designed in North Korea to reinforce the army's loyalty to the leader and to praise the leader,' said George Lopez, a Notre Dame University international-relations scholar who was part of the United Nations panel of experts monitoring Pyongyang's violation of sanctions growing out of its nuclear program. 'This isn't something we do,' he said. 'We aren't having legions of people returning from a conflict right now. It's unclear to whom we are sending the message that we are powerful.' Trump friends and foes alike believe the message of the march of thousands of troops in period uniforms from the Revolutionary War to today (plus one dog, a Blue Heeler named Doc Holliday) is to the American people. 'This has nothing to do with patriotism and everything to do with Donald Trump getting his wish to politicize our military in order to advance his personal political agenda,' said Democratic Representative Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, who had four tours of Marine Corps duty in Iraq. 'For anyone who doesn't know, troops hate marching in parades.'
Toronto Star
42 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Columbia protester can remain jailed over claims he lied on green card application, judge says
NEW YORK (AP) — The Trump administration can continue to detain Columbia University protester Mahmoud Khalil on allegations that he lied on his green card application, a federal judge ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge Michael Farbiarz conceded in a brief filing that the Republican administration could continue to hold the legal U.S. resident on those grounds since they were not addressed in his ruling earlier this week.
