Three-river-sources ecological environment protection Essay

Three-river-sources ecological environment protection - Essay Example It sought to evaluate the region’s management strategies on how the conflict between protection of the region’s ecological environment and exploitation of the natural resources for commercial purposes can be best resolved. The major findings of the paper showed that the activities of men such as hunting and construction of infrastructure have immensely contributed to the degradation of the ecology. As such, this paper observed that in order to create a long-term plan for management of ecological environment in the Three-River-Source, nationwide and local government will need to be foresighted and consider the specifics of each environmental problem in order to balance the conflict between protection of the region’s ecological environment and the use of natural resources for commercial purposes. Three-River-Source which is also known as Sanjiangyuan is located in the Qinghai Tibet Plateau. This name refers to the headwater of three rivers in Chinese and these are Yangtze River, the Yellow River and the Lancang River. These rivers are the major sources of water in the region whereby Yellow River accounts for 42 per cent of the total volume of water supplied while Yangtze River accounts for 25 % and Lancang River accounts for 15% (Wang, 2008). The Three-River-Source region has significant ecological value in the Qinghai Tibet plateau which is regarded as the worlds highest and largest plateau with wetland ecosystem. The region accounts for 2.32% of the total area of national wetlands (Wang, 2008). As such, the region is known as the â€Å"water tower† in China.

Analysis of Wisconsin v Mitchell (1993) Case Essay

Analysis of Wisconsin v Mitchell (1993) Case - Essay Example Mitchell reminded the group about their discussion and instigated them to attack the white boy. Thereafter, the group accosted the white youth, beat him unconscious and stole his footwear. Mitchell’s sentence was enhanced, as he had intentionally selected the victim on the basis of the latter’s race. It was to be decided, whether such enhancement of punishment was in breach of Mitchell’s First Amendment rights. The US Supreme Court concluded that the First Amendment rights of Mitchell had not been violated, by the enhancement provision of the Wisconsin penalty. As the Supreme Court of Wisconsin had ruled that such breach had transpired, the US Supreme Court reversed that decision and remanded the case for further proceedings that would not be inconsistent with its opinion. In addition, the US Supreme Court held that there was no tangible disparity between the federal and state antidiscrimination laws and the Wisconsin statute. To this end, the Court made a comparison between the Wisconsin statute and Title VII, which renders it illegal for an employer to subject an employee to discrimination on ground of color, religion, gender, race, or national origin (Resler, 1994, p. 422). It was surmised by the US Supreme Court that the Wisconsin statute accords punishment of greater severity for bias motivated crimes, as these crimes had a much greater potential to engender harm to the individual and society. This reason was deemed to be adequate to justify the penalty enhancement facility available in the Wisconsin statute, and which transcended mere disagreement with the prejudices of proclivities of the offender (Resler, 1994, p. 423). Mitchell had been sentenced for aggravated battery. This sentence was enhanced, in accordance with a Wisconsin statute, as he had intentionally selected the victim on the basis of the latter’s race. His appeal regarding the constitutionality of the Wisconsin statute was