You must log in or register to comment.

board__ t1_je7tjbc wrote

Almost looks like dog teeth marks on the tag in your other photo, might have been using it for training thier dog to shed hunt.


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_je7xlb3 wrote

I was wondering what the holes were from, wasn't sure if they had them in when printed. Impressed with how well the electrical tape held up


XXdotXXcoXX t1_jea1ol3 wrote

It's a viking clay pigeon thrower, sweet!


sleeknub t1_jeajaq0 wrote

What part of the Salish sea?


TheDevilDogg t1_jeak53r wrote

Not gonna lie, jealous


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_jeao7k6 wrote

We do beach cleanup fairly often, and it is the coolest thing I found so far. At first I thought someone had taped it together, then I saw there was paper under it, and for a hot minute I thought I found a message in a "bottle" which is my dream


The_Bob_Plissken t1_je8fmxu wrote

Puget Sound


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_je8ijgt wrote

Marine Area 6


etcpt t1_je8l1g1 wrote

So if anything the Strait, not the Sound.


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_je8ltrt wrote

You don't recognize the Salish Sea?


wwJones t1_je8pcrq wrote

I'm with you. Those guys are a-holes. Like Denali and Tahoma, these things were named something else for a long long time.


lvcoug t1_je8rahp wrote

Like… the Salish Sea by definition encompasses Puget Sound, the Straight of Juan de Fuca, and the Straight of Georgia going up into BC. Too many people think it’s just another name for the Sound


etcpt t1_je9wqrz wrote

Which was precisely my point.


etcpt t1_jea08jy wrote

Sorry to burst your bubble, but:

>The first known use of the term "Salish Sea" was in 1988 when Bert Webber, a geography and environmental social studies professor emeritus in Huxley College of the Environment at Western Washington University in Bellingham, Washington, created the name for the combined waters in the region with the intention to complement the names Georgia Strait, Puget Sound, and Strait of Juan de Fuca, not replace them.

To quote Dr. Webber,

>I knew that the tribes around our inland sea from both British Columbia and Washington State all shared a historical connection with the Coast Salish language. I also knew that the indigenous people occupying our inland sea were different from those living on the North West Coast of Washington State and those of the West Coast of Vancouver Island in British Columbia. As well, the indigenous people of the tribes living to the north on the British Columbia coast differed from those with a link to Salish languages. The name Salish Sea acknowledges the first peoples to live on the shores of our inland sea.

The first people who lived around this basin spoke a huge variety of languages, and probably didn't have one single word or name for this massive body of water. In fact, as David Buerge points out in his 2021 article "Why We Should Stop Calling it the Salish Sea",

>Webber misappropriates a linguistic term to identify his sea. Many native groups on its putative shore developed spectacular cultures over thousands of years, but not one ever identified themselves as Salish. It is a white term. It appeared in the 1840s when the Jesuit philologist, Gregorio Mengarini (1811-1886), was inspired to leave Italy and work as a missionary among the Flathead People in the American West.

He goes on to explain that this fellow traveled to Montana and lived with a people who called themselves Say LEESH. He became proficient in their language and wrote a dictionary of it, which linguists later used to realize that languages spoken by people living further to the west were similar, so they started calling them the Salish languages. Importantly, none of those people used this term to describe their own language - instead, as you'd expect, they each had their own terms. Similarly, they have different words to refer to this water, none of which is "Salish Sea".

So in summary, the term "Salish Sea" was coined in the late '80s by a WWU professor, using a term concocted by linguists from the name of a native people who live hundreds of miles away in present-day Montana, under which they lumped all peoples living in this area who spoke similar languages, even though none of them called themselves by it.

Now that's not to say that the current Indian tribes are unilaterally opposed to the name - a coalition of 70 tribes from around the region call themselves the Coast Salish Gathering and use the term to refer to this water in stating their desire to protect it. But if you want the historic name, from before European colonizers came to this land, then perhaps you should call it Tlahlch, like the S'klallam people do, or Kwailkw, as the Chemainus say.

(And just because someone wants to clarify some geographic distinction within a large body of water, kindly don't assume they're a colonialist "a-hole".)


sleeknub t1_jeajg55 wrote

Puget Sound and Salish Sea are not two names for the same thing (unlike those other examples).

And as the other person pointed out, the Salish Sea is a very recent name.


etcpt t1_je9wq7d wrote

I absolutely do - my point was that the original comment's assertion that Salish Sea = Puget Sound was wrong, especially since you said you were in MA 6. The Salish Sea encompasses a wide area, and specific geographic designators within that area are useful to understanding more precisely where something happened.


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_jeabvkt wrote

I was trying to be vague on purpose, that is why I used Salish Sea.


etcpt t1_jeagzu0 wrote

That's fine, I have no problem with that. But y'all are jumping all over me for adding some geographic detail to your less-vague comment (specifying MA 6) as though I'm some colonialist monster. Friend, I've got news for you - the "Salish Sea" is not the original native name for these waters. It was coined in the late '80s by a WWU professor, using a term concocted by linguists from the name of a native people who live hundreds of miles away in present-day Montana, to express that the areas called "Strait of Juan de Fuca", "Strait of Georgia", and "Puget Sound" are all interconnected and should be thought of as one combined ecosystem in an inland sea. Just because someone wants a little geographical distinction in an area encompassing nearly 7,000 square miles, how about not assuming that they're a colonialist "a-hole"?


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_jeahgx4 wrote

I didn't jump on that wagon. I knew it was new, and even we agreed with Canada to call it that. I just think it's kinda cool, and where I found it isn't easily accessible to the public, and I didn't want to encourage any beach combers. Plus, I am kinda of an asshole and I worry about people knowing where I live. Lol. I was surprised to wake up to that argument today.


BeKindDontBlind OP t1_jeahubg wrote

I was just more curious about if you just refuse to call it that, or hadn't heard they gave all the bodies one name. Some people hadn't ever heard of it yet Sorry to get you jumped on!