喀什检查精液常规怎么检查(喀什早孕试纸过期两个月) (今日更新中)

The State of Washington will soon have to rehab a lake that is overrun with an invasive species: Goldfish.The fish have filled West Medical Lake, along with Koi, and are crowding out other fish species.Pet owners likely dumped goldfish into the lake, and that may be the source of the problem, says the Division of Fish and Wildlife. Officials say while some believe it's a service to goldfish to release them into a lake, it is a disservice to the ecosystem.Goldfish are a domesticated version of a wild carp from East Asia and were developed due to artificial selection created by humans.Simply put, goldfish are mostly for visual effect.West Medical Lake, near Spokane, Washington, is known as one of the best producing opening day trout lakes in the state, according to the Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife. It gets stocked with thousands of native trout every year, but that trout is unable to flourish because of the goldfish, which is taking resources such as food and oxygen away. 1016

The travel industry is trying new tactics to recover from financial stress. Experts say new deals are emerging that allow people to go on a trip of their dreams through 2022."We quickly realized that the number one factor that helped incentivize travel planning, travel booking, even for 12 to 18 months down the road was this high sense of flexibility, and so, we came up with this concept of putting out and working with hundreds of thousands of travel partners to really come up with these very attractive, aggressively-priced offers, explained Gabe Saglie, senior editor of Travelzoo, a company that facilities travel deals around the world. “But they are fully refundable, and they had these very long travel windows.”Saglie says when COVID-19 hit, the industry came to a screeching halt. But through surveys of its 15 million members, Travelzoo soon found people were still willing to book, but mostly for future trips and not just any trip."People are looking not just to travel, but travel in a memorable way, a special way. So, we’ve been putting out these offers that in some cases are destinations that pre-COVID may not have been on people’s radar. Sort of far-flung bucket-list destinations," said Saglie.Aran Campas, the co-founder of the social media travel site Travevel, says the pent-up demand for travel is showing in different ways."We're seeing two extremes. When we look in groups, forums, different areas, we have the people that are like, 'I’m going now. I’m tired of being trapped. I’m not worried about it, I’m going now. I’m going to wear my mask,’ and then, we have the people who are like, 'Oh, I just booked for 2022 or 2023,'" explained Campas.Campas says pre-pandemic, people generally booked a year or less in advance. Now, they're seeing people either book a trip in the next 30 days or two years from now."What I think it is, I don't think it's so much the flexibility, I think it's let's get someone to book," said Campas.Travelzoo says the help in cashflow is certainly good for the longevity of the industry."There is this infusion of traveler cash now that is helping a lot of these companies. A lot of our travel partners that are looking to employ as many employees on the books as possible, bring back as many employees as quickly as possible. That’s certainly an infusion that’s important, as it helps the industry navigate through these next couple of months until we’re on the other side of this," said Saglie.So, how long will these flexible travel deals be around? Experts aren't too sure.As soon as life gets back to normal and regular travel resumes, the deals could be gone. But if you're wanting to book these deals and possibly change the dates later, Travevel says pay attention to the fine print as some may increase the prices if you adjust your date of travel. 2824

The Scottish Parliament voted on Tuesday to unanimously approve a bill that would provide free feminine hygiene products to the public. The bill says products that are disposable, such as tampons and wipes, will be available to the public for free.The legislation, titled SP Bill 45A, spells out that local authorities ensure “period products” be obtainable free of charge to all persons who need them; education providers make period products obtainable for free for students; and that period products be available for free in public buildings.The legislation points out that Scotland is the first nation in the world to implement such a law, so it is unknown what the cost might be to the government.The Scottish government estimates there are nearly 1.6 million women of menstruation age in Scotland.“Thank you to everyone who has campaigned for period dignity and to my MSP colleagues for backing the Bill tonight. A proud day for Scotland and a signal to the world that free universal access to period products can be achieved,” the bill’s sponsor Monica Lennon tweeted."Proud to vote for this groundbreaking legislation, making Scotland the first country in the world to provide free period products for all who need them. An important policy for women and girls," Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said on Twitter. 1337

The Supreme Court appears deeply divided about whether it can address partisan gerrymandering and come up with a standard to decide when politicians go too far in using politics to draw congressional districts that benefit one party over another.Hearing a case on Wednesday challenging a district in Maryland, several of the justices suggested that the issue could be addressed by the courts, but grappled with how to devise a manageable standard to govern future legislative maps.How the court rules could dramatically impact future races, as Democrats try to win back the House amid widespread unhappiness at President Donald Trump. Recently a state court in Pennsylvania redrew congressional districts there, possibly serving to erase the Republicans' 12-6 district advantage.Wednesday's case was brought by a group of Republican voters in Maryland who say Democrats went too far in redrawing districts after the last census.At one point during their one hour of oral arguments, Justice Stephen Breyer wondered whether the court should take the two challenges it has already heard dealing with maps in Wisconsin and Maryland, and another case out of North Carolina and hold arguments again next fall.The suggestion could have interesting implications if Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has been considering retirement and could be a key vote in the case, were to step down at the end of this term.On the issue of partisan gerrymandering, Breyer acknowledged that there seemed like "a pretty clear violation of the Constitution in some form" but he worried that the court needed a "practical remedy" so that judges would not have to get involved in "dozens and dozens and dozens of very important political decisions."Justice Elena Kagan pointed to the case at hand and said that Democrats had gone "too far" and took a "safe" Republican district and made it into a "pretty safe one" for Democrats. She referenced a deposition that then Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley gave where he said his intent was to create a map "that all things being legal and equal, would nonetheless be more likely to elect more Democrats rather than less."Kagan asked a lawyer for Maryland, "How much more evidence of partisan intent could we need?"Breyer seemed to urge his more conservative colleagues to step in, for the first time, and devise a framework for how to address gerrymandering.Pointing to the particular facts in the case he said, "We will never have such a record again.""What do we do, just say goodbye... forget it," Breyer asked.The challengers say former Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley led the charge to redraw the lines to unseat long-time GOP incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett. They argue that Democrats diluted the votes of Republicans in the district by moving them to another district that had a safe margin for Democrats.In 2010, Bartlett won his district with by 28 percentage points, but he lost after the new maps were drawn in 2012 by 21 percentage points.But Justice Samuel Alito seemed to be on the other side of the spectrum and said, "Hasn't this Court said time and again you can't take all consideration of partisan advantage out of redistricting?"Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote could be critical, did not tip his hand but indicated that the current map, no matter what happens in the court, would have to be used in the next cycle.While the Supreme Court has a standard limiting the overreliance on race in map drawing except under the most limited circumstances, it has never been successful in developing a test concerning political gerrymandering. If the justices do come up with a standard, it could reshape the political landscape.In court, Michael Kimberly, a lawyer for the challengers, said that the Democratic politicians violated the free speech rights of voters by retaliating against them based on their party registration and prior voting history.He said that government officials may not "single out" a voter based on the votes he cast before.Maryland Solicitor General Steven Sullivan defended the map and suggested that the courts should stay out of an issue that is "inherently political." He argued that if the challengers prevail in their First Amendment challenge, it will mean that any partisan motive by political players would constitutionally doom all district maps.Justice Neil Gorsuch, appearing to agree with Sullivan, noted that the maps had been approved by the legislature.The challengers suffered a setback in the lower court when a special three-judge panel of federal judges refused to issue a preliminary injunction.Last year, the Supreme Court heard a similar political gerrymandering case in Wisconsin.That case was a statewide challenge brought by Democratic challengers to Republican-drawn state legislative maps. Challengers rely on both the First Amendment charge and say the maps violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.It is unclear why the Supreme Court added the Maryland case to the docket after hearing arguments in the Wisconsin case. 5026

The Supreme Court cleared the way on Monday for states to legalize sports betting, striking down a 1992 federal law that had prohibited most states from authorizing sports betting.The 6-3 ruling is a victory for New Jersey and other states who have considered allowing sports gambling as a way to encourage tourism and tax revenue. The NCAA, NFL and NBA had backed the federal prohibition.The court said the federal law violated constitutional principles limiting the federal government from controlling state policy, unconstitutionally forcing states to prohibit sports betting under their own laws. 608

来源：资阳报