Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

Beneath the biotech boom

MIT historian Robin Scheffler’s research shows how local regulations helped create certainty and safety principles that enabled an industry’s massive growth.

It’s considered a scientific landmark: A 1975 meeting at the Asilomar Conference Center in Pacific Grove, California, shaped a new safety regime for recombinant DNA, ensuring that researchers would apply caution to gene splicing. Those ideas have been so useful that in the decades since, when new topics in scientific safety arise, there are still calls for Asilomar-type conferences to craft good ground rules.There’s something missing from this narrative, though: It took more than the Asilomar conference to set today’s standards. The Asilomar concepts were created with academic research in mind — but the biotechnology industry also makes products, and standards for that were formulated after Asilomar.“The Asilomar meeting and Asilomar principles did not settle the question of the safety of genetic engineering,” says MIT scholar Robin Scheffler, author of a newly published research paper on the subject.Instead, as Scheffler documents in the paper, Asilomar helped generate further debate, but those industry principles were set down later in the 1970s — first in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where politicians and concerned citizens wanted local biotech firms to be good neighbors. In response, the city passed safety laws for the emerging industry. And rather than heading off to places with zero regulations, local firms — including a fledgling Biogen — stayed put. Over the decades, the Boston area became the world leader in biotech.Why stay? In essence, regulations gave biotech firms the certainty they needed to grow — and build. Lenders and real-estate developers needed signals that long-term investment in labs and facilities made sense. Generally, as Scheffler notes, even though “the idea that regulations can be anchoring for business does not have a lot of pull” in economic theory, in this case, regulations did matter.“The trajectory of the industry in Cambridge, including biotechnology companies deciding to accommodate regulation, is remarkable,” says Scheffler. “It’s hard to imagine the American biotechnology industry without this dense cluster in Boston and Cambridge. These things that happened on a very local scale had huge echoes.”Scheffler’s article, “Asilomar Goes Underground: The Long Legacy of Recombinant DNA Hazard Debates for the Greater Boston Area Biotechnology Industry,” appears in the latest issue of the Journal of the History of Biology. Scheffler is an associate professor in MIT’s Program in Science, Technology, and Society.Business: Banking on certaintyTo be clear, the Asilomar conference of 1975 did produce real results. Asilomar led to a system that helped evaluate projects’ potential risk and determine appropriate safety measures. The U.S. federal government subsequently adopted Asilomar-like principles for research it funded.But in 1976, debate over the subject arose again in Cambridge, especially following a cover story in a local newspaper, the Boston Phoenix. Residents became concerned that recombinant DNA projects would lead to, hypothetically, new microorganisms that could damage public health.“Scientists had not considered urban public health,” Scheffler says. “The Cambridge recombinant DNA debate in the 1970s made it a matter of what your neighbors think.”After several months of hearings, research, and public debate (sometimes involving MIT faculty) stretching into early 1977, Cambridge adopted a somewhat stricter framework than the federal government had proposed for the handling of materials used in recombinant DNA work.“Asilomar took on a new life in local regulations,” says Scheffler, whose research included government archives, news accounts, industry records, and more.But a funny thing happened after Cambridge passed its recombinant DNA rules: The nascent biotech industry took root, and other area towns passed their own versions of the Cambridge rules.“Not only did cities create more safety regulations,” Scheffler observes, “but the people asking for them switched from being left-wing activists or populist mayors to the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council and real estate development concerns.”Indeed, he adds, “What’s interesting is how quickly safety concerns about recombinant DNA evaporated. Many people against recombinant DNA came to change their thinking.” And while some local residents continued to express concerns about the environmental impact of labs, “those are questions people ask when they no longer worry about the safety of the core work itself.”Unlike federal regulations, these local laws applied to not only lab research but also products, and as such they let firms know they could work in a stable business environment with regulatory certainty. That mattered financially, and in a specific way: It helped companies build the buildings they needed to produce the products they had invented.“The venture capital cycle for biotechnology companies was very focused on the research and exciting intellectual ideas, but then you have the bricks and mortar,” Scheffler says, referring to biotech production facilities. “The bricks and mortar is actually the harder problem for a lot of startup biotechnology companies.”After all, he notes, “Venture capital will throw money after big discoveries, but a banker issuing a construction loan has very different priorities and is much more sensitive to things like factory permits and access to sewers 10 years from now. That’s why all these towns around Massachusetts passed regulations, as a way of assuring that.”To grow globally, act locallyOf course, one additional reason biotech firms decided to land in the Boston area was the intellectual capital: With so many local universities, there was a lot of industry talent in the region. Local faculty co-founded some of the high-flying firms.“The defining trait of the Cambridge-Boston biotechnology cluster is its density, right around the universities,” Scheffler says. “That’s a unique feature local regulations encouraged.”It’s also the case, Scheffler notes, that some biotech firms did engage in venue-shopping to avoid regulations at first, although that was more the case in California, another state where the industry emerged. Still, the Boston-area regulations seemed to assuage both industry and public worries about the subject.The foundations of biotechnology regulation in Massachusetts contain some additional historical quirks, including the time in the late 1970s when the city of Cambridge mistakenly omitted the recombinant DNA safety rules from its annually published bylaws, meaning the regulations were inactive. Officials at Biogen sent them a reminder to restore the laws to the books.Half a century on from Asilomar, its broad downstream effects are not just a set of research principles — but also, refracted through the Cambridge episode, key ideas about public discussion and input; reducing uncertainty for business, the particular financing needs of industries; the impact of local and regional regulation; and the openness of startups to recognizing what might help them thrive.“It’s a different way to think about the legacy of Asilomar,” Scheffler says. “And it’s a real contrast with what some people might expect from following scientists alone.” 

Monteverde Fights Gentrification to Preserve Community

In the Tilarán Mountains, Monteverde, Costa Rica is known for its biodiversity and ecotourism. However, rising rents and land prices are driving gentrification, forcing many local residents to commute from nearby areas for work as living costs exceed their budgets. Ecotourism drives Monteverde’s economy, attracting over 200,000 visitors each year to its cloud forests and […] The post Monteverde Fights Gentrification to Preserve Community appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

In the Tilarán Mountains, Monteverde, Costa Rica is known for its biodiversity and ecotourism. However, rising rents and land prices are driving gentrification, forcing many local residents to commute from nearby areas for work as living costs exceed their budgets. Ecotourism drives Monteverde’s economy, attracting over 200,000 visitors each year to its cloud forests and reserves. The high demand for land has prompted some locals to sell to foreign investors, who build hotels and tour businesses. This has intensified gentrification, with homes often converted into Airbnbs, reducing affordable housing options. “We’re not immune to gentrification,” Monteverde Mayor Yeudy Ramírez said. “We’re focusing on empowering our community by supporting local entrepreneurs and encouraging residents to start businesses instead of selling their land.” The municipality backs local entrepreneurs through training and resources. The National Learning Institute (INA) provides English language courses to prepare residents for tourism jobs, while the Emprende Rural program offers funding and advice to rural producers and business owners. These initiatives aim to create diverse income sources and reduce land sales. “We want the local farmer or small business owner to say, ‘I’ll develop my property with community support rather than sell it cheaply to a foreigner,’” Ramírez said. The Monteverde Community Fund supports these efforts with project management and grant-writing courses for local organizations. Programs like the Monteverde Summit connect nonprofits to promote sustainable development, and the “Hecho en Monteverde” certification highlights locally made, eco-friendly products. Ramírez said Monteverde opposes large foreign companies building major projects. “We prefer foreign partners who work with locals, not control our economy,” he said. This approach aligns with the community’s goal of preserving its identity, as noted in recent reports on Monteverde’s resistance to gentrification. The Monteverde Commission for Climate Change Resilience (CORCLIMA), led by Katy VanDusen, promotes sustainable practices and certifies businesses meeting environmental standards. This helps ensure tourism benefits the community while protecting the environment.Monteverde is addressing environmental and infrastructure needs. The Monteverde Environmental Technology Park (PTAM), run by the Santa Elena ASADA and municipal council, processes over six tons of organic waste weekly from businesses, creating eco-friendly fertilizer. In 2020, the region composted 333 tons of its 450-ton organic waste output, cutting landfill use. The municipality is also upgrading unpaved access roads, which have limited tourist traffic but challenge locals. Improved roads aim to enhance connectivity while supporting controlled tourism growth. Despite gentrification pressures, Monteverde’s community remains committed to its roots. From the Monteverde Cloud Forest Reserve to cooperatives like CASEM, which supports female artisans, locals are channeling tourism revenue into conservation and development. These efforts reflect a focus on sustainable growth that prioritizes residents. Ramírez and Monteverde’s residents continue to work toward a future where the area remains a home for its people, not just a destination for tourists. The post Monteverde Fights Gentrification to Preserve Community appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

UK's rarest wildlife being 'pushed to extinction' by grass fires

Wildfires could spell the end for rare species like water voles and hen harriers, conservationists warn.

UK's rarest wildlife being 'pushed to extinction' by grass firesSteffan MessengerEnvironment correspondent, BBC Wales NewsClare HutchinsonBBC Wales NewsGaran ThomasThis blaze on the Rhigos Mountain in south Wales in June 2023 destroyed an area the size of 140 football pitchesSome of the UK's rarest wildlife is being "torched alive" and pushed closer to extinction after weeks of intense grass fires, conservationists have warned.They include endangered birds like hen harriers and water voles, which are now the UK's fastest declining mammal.The National Trust said it believed ongoing wildfires at Abergwesyn common in Powys had destroyed "the last remaining" local breeding habitat for golden plovers - considered one of the most beautiful birds of the British uplands.So far this year 110 sq miles (284 sq km) of land has been burnt by wildfires around the UK - an area larger than Birmingham.Figures obtained by the BBC show that in Wales, fire crews have battled almost 1,400 wildfires already this year, leading fire services to urge people to "act responsibly" and report any suspicious behaviour to the police.The National Trust said 2025 was "turning out to be the worst year ever for these human-caused fires across the country"."We're extremely worried, this is looking like it's going to be the worst year for seeing our wildlife going up in flames," said Ben MacCarthy, the charity's head of nature conservation.A record dry spell and unusually high temperatures in March are believed to have contributed to the fires. A low number of blazes in 2024 also left more vegetation to fuel them.Getty ImagesWater voles are already on the UK's Red List for endangered animals due to loss of habitatCoed Cadw, the Woodland Trust in Wales, said an "irreplaceable" area of temperate Atlantic rainforest had been affected at Allt Boeth near Aberystwyth, with damage to protected bluebells too.Also known as Celtic rainforest, the habitat harbours scarce plants, lichens and fungi, and is considered more threatened than tropical rainforest.In England, the National Trust said several thousand newly planted trees at Marsden Moor, in West Yorkshire, had gone up in flames.While on the Morne Mountains, in Northern Ireland, invertebrates and ground dwelling animals like reptiles were "simply being torched alive"."That then cascades through the food web because without the invertebrates you don't get the birds who are reliant on them for food," Mr MacCarthy said.He said government funding to help farmers and land managers restore peat bogs in the uplands, to prevent fires while also soaking in planet-warming carbon and providing habitat, was essential.National Trust/PAThe hen harrier nests in upland moorlands and is one of the most endangered breeding birds of prey in the UKConservation charities including The Wildlife Trusts and the Initiative for Nature Conservation Cymru (INCC) also voiced fears for the future of the water vole, which is already under serious threat from habitat loss and predation by American minks.Small animals like water voles and shrews, which live in burrows, can survive fast-moving fires but their habitats and the food they rely on are destroyed.Water voles are "the fastest-declining mammal ever" according to Rob Parry of the INCC."Their last foothold [in Wales] is in the uplands so when those sites are burned it is awful for that particular population, but from a UK point of view we are one step closer to the extinction of an entire species," he said.Rob ParryThe scorched burrow of a water vole, following grass fires in CeredigionThe INCC is also monitoring five breeding pairs of barn owls in the Amman Valley in south Wales, where wildfires have destroyed huge areas of habitat. "A few weeks ago they had all of this area to find food for their chicks and suddenly they don't have that any more," said Mr Parry."I don't know how they are going to cope. A wildfire just makes that habitat disappear overnight."Other rare birds are also affected, including hen harriers, which have been subject to recent conservation efforts to increase their numbers in the Welsh uplands, and skylarks, which have declined in huge numbers since the 1970s."We're worried enough as it is about wildlife," said Mr Parry."We're one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world and wildfires every spring at the worst possible time is a burden that wildlife and the environment just can't cope with."Eddy BlancheFire crews have reported more than 1,100 wildfires in Wales so far this year - including this one near in Merthyr Tydfil in MarchThe INCC has called for closer oversight of controlled burns by farmers and better monitoring of the impact of wildfires on the environment.Natural Resources Wales (NRW) said wildfires were a "massive issue", particularly in south Wales, where Welsh government figures showed more than half of wildfires in Wales took place last year.Becky Davies, a senior officer at NRW, said: "In the last three days we've had over 75 fires in the south Wales valleys alone."We have a lot of hillsides that are linear, the valley side has a lot of bracken, a lot of heathland, grassland and coal spoil and that is the sort of hillside that goes up in flames."The environmental impact of wildfires can also be felt more widely.When it rains after a fire, the newly bare soil and the phosphates that were trapped inside it can wash off into streams and rivers, affecting water quality.'Deliberate fire setting is a crime'Numbers of wildfires vary year-on-year depending on when spells of dry weather happen.But figures obtained by the BBC show that in south Wales, grassfires have increased by 1,200% from the same time period last year.In north Wales, crews have attended 170 fires this year, and Mid Wales Fire and Rescue said it had tackled 772 blazes.Wildfires are also up in England and Northern Ireland compared to last year, while the fire service in Scotland has issued an extreme wildfire alert covering the whole country.Statistics show the majority of wildfires are started by people, including accidental fires from disposable BBQs or controlled burns that get out of hand.Firefighters and police are teaching children in schools about the damage wildfires can cause to wildlifeIn south Wales, firefighters are going to primary schools to teach children from a young age about the devastating impact.At Pontnewydd Primary School in Cwmbran, staff from South Wales Fire and Rescue Service and Gwent Police brought along animals like snakes, hedgehogs and foxes for children to meet.Station manager Mark Bowditch said his crews saw the damage to wildlife from wildfires first-hand."We see the death of local wildlife, we see the destruction of their habitat," he said."We accept that some fires can be accidental, but deliberate fire setting is a crime and that's the message we'd like to get out."Additional reporting by Dylan Greene.

That Blue Origin flight was a success but isn't landing well among some stars: 'Disgusted'

Olivia Wilde and Emily Ratajkowski are among those slamming Blue Origin for its totally necessary 11-minute flight Monday, which had an all-female celebrity crew.

Earth to Jeff Bezos’ Blue Origin: This week’s fleeting space launch featuring an all-female crew was a wasteful, performative and tone-deaf endeavor reminiscent of the “Hunger Games” dystopia — according to author, model and actor Emily Ratajkowski. The outspoken “My Body” writer did not mince words Tuesday as she continued to criticize Monday’s Blue Origin flight that launched six women including Katy Perry, Gayle King and Bezos’ fiancée Lauren Sanchez into space. The endeavor, which had been heavily hyped and promoted for more than a month, lasted only 11 minutes from takeoff to landing. (Previous Blue Origin flights, including the 2021 launch with “Star Trek” icon William Shatner, were equally as brief.)Ratajkowski dissected the New Shepard rocket mission in a TikTok video posted Tuesday morning, claiming that the women-led initiative was not as progressive as it seemed. While Monday’s celebrity launch was the nation’s first spaceflight where women filled each seat and “optically looks like progress,” Ratajkowski alleged, the “truth” was that Amazon executive Bezos just wanted to “take his fiancée and a few other famous women to space for space tourism.”“It just speaks to the fact that we are absolutely living in an oligarchy where there is a small group of people who are interested in going to space for the sake of getting a new lease on life while the rest of the population, most people on planet Earth, are worried about paying rent or having dinner for their kids,” she said. She added elsewhere in her video: “Being able to take the privilege that you have gained from exploitation and greed of the planet, of resources of human beings, and doing something like going to space for 11 minutes is not an accomplishment.”Tuesday’s video was the second Ratajkowski shared reacting to Monday’s launch. In a clip posted shortly after the Blue Origin crew returned to Earth, Ratajkowski said the space trip resembled “end times s—” and was “beyond parody.” She also called out the discrepancies between the environmental messaging surrounding the flight and the resources expended to send the women to space. “I’m disgusted,” she said. Blue Origin, founded in 2000 by Bezos, declined Monday to say how much the flight, a quick up-and-down trip from west Texas, cost or who paid for what. The launch precedes Sanchez and Bezos’ Venice, Italy, wedding in two months. Ratajkowski hasn’t been the only star to express disdain for the Blue Origin flight on social media. “Don’t Worry Darling” director-actor Olivia Wilde in a since-expired Instagram story reacted to the flurry of jokes inspired by the launch. “Billion dollars bought some good memes I guess,” she said sarcastically. Comedian Amy Schumer also poked fun at the flight Monday, joking she was a last-minute addition to the eclectic female crew. “I’m going to space and thank you to everyone who got me here and I’ll see you in space,” she said in an intentionally vapid-sounding voice, repeating the word “space” numerous times. Even before Blue Origin’s New Shepard lifted off with film producer Kerianne Flynn, scientist Amanda Nguyen, former NASA engineer Aisha Bowe and the others in tow, “Your Friends and Neighbors” star Olivia Munn dubbed the spaceflight a “gluttonous” stunt. During her April 3 guest spot on “Today With Jenna and Friends,” Munn questioned the purpose of the trip amid more pressing societal and political issues. “It’s so much money to go to space and there’s a lot of people who can’t even afford eggs,” she said before further scrutinizing media coverage of the endeavor.After returning from space, “CBS Mornings” co-host King told People on Monday that critics “don’t really understand what is happening here” and said she and her fellow passengers have heard “from young women, from young girls about what this represents.”Sanchez took another approach to the criticism, telling the outlet she invites skeptics to “come to Blue Origin and see the thousands of employees” that she said have devoted themselves to the New Shepard and the mission. The author and journalist, engaged to billionaire Bezos for nearly two years, added: “When we hear comments like that, I just say, ‘Trust me. Come with me. I’ll show you what this is about, and it’s, it’s really eye-opening.’”The Associated Press contributed to this report.

L.A. will set aside $3 million to help owners of fire-damaged homes test their soil for lead

The L.A. County Board of Supervisors approved a proposal to allocate $3 million to help owners of fire-damaged homes test their soil for lead.

The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors will allocate $3 million to help homeowners near the Eaton burn area test for lead contamination, after preliminary tests found elevated levels of the heavy metal on homes standing after the fire.Supervisors Kathryn Barger and Lindsey Horvath proposed the motion after preliminary test results released last week by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health showed lead levels above state health standards in as many as 80% of soil samples collected downwind of the Eaton burn scar.On Tuesday, the board voted 4-0 to direct $3 million from the county’s 2018 $134-million settlement with lead-paint manufacturers to test residential properties that are both downwind and within one mile of the Eaton burn scar boundary.Lead is a heavy metal linked to serious health problems including damage to the brain and nervous system, as well as digestive, reproductive and cardiovascular issues, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.Roux Associates, a private testing firm hired by the county, collected samples from 780 properties in both burn zones over four weeks from mid-February to mid-March. It tested for 14 toxic substances commonly found after wildfires: heavy metals such as arsenic and lead; polyaromatic hydrocarbons such as anthracene and napthalene; and dioxins.More than one-third of samples collected within the Eaton burn scar exceeded California’s health standard of 80 milligrams of lead per kilogram of soil, Roux found. Nearly half of samples just outside the burn scar’s boundary had lead levels above the state limit. And downwind of the fire’s boundary, to the southwest, between 70% and 80% of samples surpassed that limit.In the Palisades burn area, tests found little contamination beyond some isolated “hot spots” of heavy metals and polyaromatic hydrocarbons, Roux’s vice president and principal scientist Adam Love said last week.Nichole Quick, chief medical advisor with the L.A. County Department of Public Health, said at the time that officials would be requesting federal and state help to further assess the Palisades hot spots, and working with the county on targeted lead testing in affected areas downwind of the Eaton fire.The county is for now shouldering the responsibility of contaminant testing because, as The Times has reported, the federal government has opted to break from a nearly two-decade tradition of testing soil on destroyed properties cleaned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers after fires.After previous wildfires, the Army Corps would first scrape 6 inches of topsoil from cleared properties and then test the ground underneath. If those tests revealed toxic substances still on the property, it would scrape further.After the devastating Camp fire in Paradise in 2018, soil testing of 12,500 properties revealed that nearly one-third still contained dangerous levels of contaminants even after the first 6 inches of topsoil were scraped by federal crews.L.A. County ordered testing from Roux in lieu of that federal testing. So far, the county has announced results only from standing homes, which are not eligible for cleanup from the Army Corps of Engineers; results from land parcels with damaged or destroyed structures are still pending.FEMA’s decision to skip testing after L.A.’s firestorms has frustrated many residents and officials, with some calling for the federal agency to reconsider.“Without adequate soil testing, contaminants caused by the fire can remain undetected, posing risks to returning residents, construction workers, and the environment,” the state’s Office of Emergency Services director Nancy Ward wrote in a February letter to FEMA. “Failing to identify and remediate these fire-related contaminants may expose individuals to residual substances during rebuilding efforts and potentially jeopardize groundwater and surface water quality.”

Allowing forests to regrow and regenerate is a great way to restore habitat

New research found regrowth in Queensland provided valuable habitat after 15 years, on average, with some species benefiting from trees as young as 3 years of age.

Cynthia A Jackson, ShutterstockQueensland is widely known as the land clearing capital of Australia. But what’s not so well known is many of the cleared trees can grow back naturally. The latest state government figures show regrowth across more than 7.6 million hectares in Queensland in 2020-21. These trees, though young, still provide valuable habitat for many threatened species – as long as they’re not bulldozed again. Our new research explored the benefits of regrowth for 30 threatened animal species in Queensland. We found regrown forests and woodlands provided valuable habitat and food for species after an average of 15 years. Some species were likely to benefit from trees as young as three years. This presents an opportunity for governments to support landowners and encourage them to retain more regrowing forest and woodland, especially where it can provide much-needed habitat for wildlife. But it’s a challenge because there is strong pressure to clear regrowth, largely to maintain pasture. Clearing of regrowth woodlands in Queensland. Martin Taylor When do young forests and woodlands become valuable habitat? We focused on threatened animal species that depend on forests and woodlands, and occur in regions with substantial regrowth. We wanted to find out which species use regrowth, and how old the trees need to be. But there’s not much survey data available on threatened species living in naturally regenerated forest and woodlands. To elicit this information we asked almost 50 experts to complete a detailed questionnaire and attend a workshop. We found 15 years was the average minimum age at which regrowth became useful to threatened species. But the full range was 3-68 years, depending on factors such as what a species eats, how it moves through the landscape and whether it needs tree hollows for shelter or breeding. For example, one threatened bird (the squatter pigeon) could use woodlands as young as three years old. Koalas benefited from regrowth as young as nine years old. Some species, such as the greater glider, need much older forests. This is because they require large tree hollows to shelter in during the day, and large trees to feed on and move between at night. So young forests shouldn’t be seen as an alternative to protecting old forests. We need both. The squatter pigeon could benefit from just three years of regrowth. Imogen Warren, Shutterstock Understanding the extent of habitat loss We also estimated the proportion of each species’ current habitat that comprises regrowth, using satellite data and publicly available data. For some species, we found regrowth made up almost a third of their potential habitat in Queensland. On average, it was 18%. However, nearly three-quarters of the habitat lost in Queensland since 2018 was regrowth forests and woodlands. So while the loss of older, “remnant” vegetation is more damaging per unit area, the regrowth habitat is being lost on a bigger scale. Our research suggests retaining more regrowth could be an easy and cost-effective way to help save threatened species. In contrast, tree planting is time-consuming and expensive. What’s more, only 10% of our native plants are readily available as seeds for sale. This, combined with more extreme weather such as prolonged droughts, often causes restoration projects to fail. Encouraging landholders to retain regrowth The fact that habitat can regrow naturally in parts of Queensland is a huge bonus. But farmers also need to maintain productivity, which can decrease if there’s too much regrowth. So, how do we help these landowners retain more regrowth? One way is to provide incentives. For example, government-funded biodiversity stewardship schemes provide payments to cover the costs of managing the vegetation – such as fencing off habitat and managing weeds – as well as compensation for loss of agricultural production. Targeting areas of regrowth with high habitat values could be a way for such schemes to benefit wildlife. Alternatively, market-based schemes allow landowners to generate biodiversity or carbon “credits” by keeping more trees on their property. Then, businesses (or governments) buy these credits. For example, some big emitters in Australia have to purchase carbon credits to “offset” their own emissions. However, Australia’s carbon market has been accused of issuing “low integrity” carbon credits. This means the carbon credits were paid for projects that may not have captured and stored the amount of carbon they were supposed to. To make sure these markets work, robust methods are needed – and until now, there hasn’t been one that worked to retain regrowth. Trees are good for the land, air and sea In February, the Queensland government released a method by which landholders could generate carbon credits by agreeing not to clear their regrowing woodlands and forests. The new carbon method provides a promising opportunity to allow landowners to diversify their farm income. In addition, tree cover brings direct, on-farm benefits such as more shade and shelter for livestock, natural pest control and better soil health. At a landscape level, greater tree cover can improve local climate regulation, reduce sediment run-off to the Great Barrier Reef and reduce Australia’s carbon emissions. Ideally, Australia’s carbon and biodiversity markets would work alongside sufficient government funding for nature recovery, which needs to increase to at least 1% (currently it’s around 0.1%). Meanwhile, our research has shown embracing natural regeneration potential in Queensland will have benefits for a range of threatened species too. We acknowledge our research coauthors, Jeremy Simmonds (2rog Consulting), Michelle Ward (Griffith University) and Teresa Eyre (Queensland Department of Environment, Tourism, Science and Innovation). Hannah Thomas received an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship with a $10,000 top-up from WWF-Australia. She is an early-career leader with the Biodiversity Council.Martine Maron has received funding from various sources including the Australian Research Council, the Queensland Department of Environment and Science, and the federal government's National Environmental Science Program, and has advised both state and federal government on conservation policy. She is a member of the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, a director of the Australian Wildlife Conservancy, a councillor with the Biodiversity Council, and leads the IUCN's thematic group on Impact Mitigation and Ecological Compensation under the Commission on Ecosystem Management. She currently sits on the Protect and Enhance advisory panel to the NSW Natural Resources Commission.

Commercial salmon season is shut down — again. Will California’s iconic fish ever recover?

While it’s an unprecedented third year in a row for no commercially caught salmon, brief windows will be allowed for sportsfishing in California.

In summary While it’s an unprecedented third year in a row for no commercially caught salmon, brief windows will be allowed for sportsfishing in California. Facing the continued collapse of Chinook salmon, officials today shut down California’s commercial salmon fishing season for an unprecedented third year in a row.  Under the decision by an interstate fisheries agency, recreational salmon fishing will be allowed in California for only brief windows of time this spring. This will be the first year that any sportfishing of Chinook has been allowed since 2022. Today’s decision by the Pacific Fishery Management Council means that no salmon caught off California can be sold to retail consumers and restaurants for at least another year. In Oregon and Washington, commercial salmon fishing will remain open, although limited. “From a salmon standpoint, it’s an environmental disaster. For the fishing industry, it’s a human tragedy, and it’s also an economic disaster,” said Scott Artis, executive director of the Golden State Salmon Association, an industry organization that has lobbied for river restoration and improved hatchery programs.  The decline of California’s salmon follows decades of deteriorating conditions in the waterways where the fish spawn each year, including the Sacramento and Klamath rivers. California’s salmon are an ecological icon and a valued source of food for Native American tribes. The shutdown also has an economic toll: It has already put hundreds of commercial fishers and sportfishing boat operators out of work and affected thousands of people in communities and industries reliant on processing, selling and serving locally caught salmon.  California’s commercial fishery has never been closed for three years in a row before.  Some experts fear the conditions in California have been so poor for so long that Chinook may never rebound to fishable levels. Others remain hopeful for major recovery if the amounts of water diverted to farms and cities are reduced and wetlands kept dry by flood-control levees are restored.  This year’s recreational season includes several brief windows for fishing, including a weekend in June and another in July, or a quota of 7,000 fish.   Jared Davis, owner and operator of the Salty Lady in Sausalito, one of dozens of party boats that take paying customers fishing, thinks it’s likely that this quota will be met on the first open weekend for recreational fishing, scheduled for June 7-8.   “Obviously, the pressure is going to be intense, so everybody and their mother is going to be out on the water on those days,” he said. “When they hit that quota, it’s done.” One member of the fishery council, Corey Ridings, voted against the proposed regulations after saying she was concerned that the first weekend would overshoot the 7,000-fish quota. Davis said such a miniscule recreational season won’t help boat owners like him recover from past closures, though it will carry symbolic meaning. “It might give California anglers a glimmer of hope and keep them from selling all their rods and buying golf clubs,” he said.  “It continues to be devastating. Salmon has been the cornerstone of many of our ports for a long time.”Sarah Bates, commercial fisher based in San Francisco Sarah Bates, a commercial fisher based at San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf, said the ongoing closure has stripped many boat owners of most of their income.  “It continues to be devastating,” she said. “Salmon has been the cornerstone of many of our ports for a long time.” She said the shutdown also has trickle-down effects on a range of businesses that support the salmon fishery, such as fuel services, grocery stores and dockside ice machines. “We’re also seeing a sort of a third wave … the general seafood market for local products has tanked,” such as rockfish and halibut. She said that many buyers are turning to farmed and wild salmon delivered from other regions instead. Davis noted that federal emergency relief funds promised for the 2023 closure still have not arrived. “Nobody has seen a dime,” he said.  Fewer returning salmon Before the Gold Rush, several million Chinook spawned annually in the river systems of the Central Valley and the state’s northern coast. Through much of the 20th century, California’s salmon fishery formed the economic backbone of coastal fishing ports, with fishers using hook and line pulling in millions of pounds in good years.  But in 2024, just 99,274 fall-run Chinook — the most commercially viable of the Central Valley’s four subpopulations — returned to the Sacramento River and its tributaries, substantially lower than the numbers in 2023. In 2022, fewer than 70,000 returned, one of the lowest estimates ever. About 40,000 returned to the San Joaquin River. Fewer than 30,000 Chinook reached their spawning grounds in the Klamath River system, where the Hoopa, Yurok and Karuk tribes rely on the fish in years of abundance.  The decline of California’s salmon stems from nearly two centuries of damage inflicted on the rivers where salmon spend the first and final stages of their lives. Gold mining, logging and dam construction devastated watersheds. Levees constrained rivers, turning them into relatively sterile channels of fast-moving water while converting floodplains and wetlands into irrigated farmland.  Today, many of these impacts persist, along with water diversions, reduced flows and elevated river temperatures that frequently spell death for fertilized eggs and juvenile fish. The future of California salmon is murky Peter Moyle, a UC Davis fish biologist and professor emeritus, said recovery of self-sustaining populations may be possible in some tributaries of the Sacramento River.  “There are some opportunities for at least keeping runs going in parts of the Central Valley, but getting naturally spawning fish back in large numbers, I just can’t see it happening,” he said. Jacob Katz, a biologist with the group California Trout, holds out hope for a future of flourishing Sacramento River Chinook. “We could have vibrant fall-run populations in a decade,” he said.  That will require major habitat restoration involving dam removals, reconstruction of levee systems to revive wetlands and floodplains, and reduced water diversions for agriculture — all measures fraught with cost, regulatory constraints, and controversy.  “There are some opportunities for at least keeping (salmon) runs going in parts of the Central Valley, but getting naturally spawning fish back in large numbers, I just can’t see it happening.”Peter moyle, uc davis fish biologist State officials, recognizing the risk of extinction, have promoted salmon recovery as a policy goal for years. In early 2024, the Newsom administration released its California Salmon Strategy for a Hotter, Drier Future, a 37-page catalogue of proposed actions to mitigate environmental impacts and restore flows and habitat, all in the face of a warming environment.  Artis of Golden State Salmon Association said the state’s salmon strategy includes some important items but leaves out equally critical ones, like protecting minimum required flows for fish — what Artis said are threatened by proposed water projects endorsed by the Newsom administration. “It fails to include some of the upcoming salmon-killing projects that the governor is pushing like Sites Reservoir and the Delta tunnel, and it ignores the fact that the Voluntary Agreements are designed to allow massive diversions of water,” he said. Experts agree that an important key to rebuilding salmon runs is increasing the frequency and duration of shallow flooding in riverside riparian areas, or even fallow rice paddies — a program Katz has helped develop through his career.  On such seasonal floodplains, a shallow layer of water can help trigger an explosion of photosynthesis and food production, ultimately providing nutrition for juvenile salmon as they migrate out of the river system each spring.  Through meetings with farmers, urban water agencies and government officials, Rene Henery, California science director with Trout Unlimited, has helped draft an ambitious salmon recovery plan dubbed “Reorienting to Recovery.” Featuring habitat restoration, carefully managed harvests and generously enhanced river flows — especially in dry years — this framework, Henery said, could rebuild diminished Central Valley Chinook runs to more than 1.6 million adult fish per year over a 20-year period.  He said adversaries — often farmers and environmentalists — must shift from traditional feuds over water to more collaborative programs of restoring productive watersheds while maintaining productive agriculture. As the recovery needle for Chinook moves in the wrong direction, Katz said deliberate action is urgent.  “We’re balanced on the edge of losing these populations,” he said. “We have to go big now. We have no other option.” more about salmon ‘No way, not possible’: California has a plan for new water rules. Will it save salmon from extinction? by Alastair Bland December 16, 2024December 16, 2024 A third straight year with no California salmon fishing?  Early fish counts suggest it could happen by Alastair Bland October 30, 2024October 30, 2024

The California grizzly bear, gone for 100 years, could thrive if brought back

A new study found that it's possible to return grizzly bears to California. Whether that's a good idea is a matter for residents and policymakers.

Grizzly bears are extinct in California but still show up everywhere you look.The golden bruins emblazon the state flag and seal, live on in cartoonish effigy as university mascots, and roll off the tip of our tongue in place names like Grizzly Flats and Big Bear Lake.But what if the real ursine deal could be brought back?A new study indicates that they can be — roughly 1,180 of them — and Southern California mountains are among prime potential habitat for the apex predators. Whether they should be is a question for 40 million Californians and their policymakers.The state’s official animal inspires awe and holds cultural significance for tribes, and researchers note that they pose low statistical danger. But some wildlife officials say reintroducing grizzlies — which can weigh up to 1,000 pounds and run 35 mph for short bursts — would lead to increased conflict between humans and bears. An estimated 60,000 black bears roam the state, and property damage, break-ins and the first confirmed fatality linked to the bruins have made headlines in recent years. “Recovering grizzly bears in California is a choice,” said Alex McInturff, co-editor of the study and assistant unit leader of U.S. Geological Survey’s Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit. “We can choose to do it by making necessary investments and creating the necessary partnerships to make it possible. There’s habitat available. A number of questions can be answered. But it’s a choice.” A grizzly stands over a cub at Grand Teton National Park. (C. Adams / Grand Teton National Park / AP) California was home to as many as 10,000 bears before the Gold Rush in 1848, but their fortunes turned swiftly. Human-fueled habitat loss drove down their numbers, but their ultimate demise came at the hands of hunters and trappers. In 1916, the last known grizzly roaming Southern California was gunned down in the Sunland area of L.A., and aptly became known as the Sunland Grizzly. Just a few years later, in the spring of 1924, California’s last known grizzly bear was spotted in Sequoia National Park. While they’re unlikely to return to the state on their own, “[a] well-planned, well-resourced and well-managed reintroduction and recovery program could, however, likely establish a sustainable California grizzly population in one or more recovery areas over several decades,” the study released Tuesday states.Behind the study is the Grizzly Alliance Network, a group of collaborators that include researchers, tribal leaders and wildlife advocates working to bring the bears back to the state. Spanning just over 200 pages, the report pulls together novel and existing research to explore where in the state bears could live and how many could live in those areas, as well as economic effects, safety considerations and other dimensions. Reintroducing the bears would require moving them from a place they currently live, such as Yellowstone National Park, into California.Using several habitat suitability models, the study identifies three potential regions where the bears could live: in the Transverse Ranges stretching from the coast to the desert in Southern California (with a focus on large, protected areas in the Los Padres National Forest); the entire Sierra Nevada (with emphasis on the southern part of the range); and the Northwest Forest (which includes the Klamath Mountains, Trinity Alps and other nearby ranges in the northwest corner of the state).The study reports that the regions contain large swaths of protected, high-quality habitat, but does not advocate for any or all of them to actually be used.Assuming bears couldn’t live outside the designated regions, the study estimates that California could house around 1,183 grizzlies: 115 in the Transverse Ranges, 832 in the Sierra Nevada, and 236 in the Northwest Forest. Two young grizzly bear siblings tussling in the early morning along Pelican Creek in Yellowstone National Park. (Jonathan Newton / Getty Images) Researchers priced a “well-resourced” recovery program at up to $3 million a year for the first decade. It represents .4% of the budget for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, based on 2024–25 figures, according to the study. Grizzlies often invoke fear — as an animal standing 8 feet tall with prodigious claws does — and human safety is often a top concern when discussing grizzly recovery. But the study says the statistical risk the animals pose to humans is “extremely small.” Of the estimated average fatalities caused by wildlife every year in the U.S., 96% stem from car collisions with deer, the study reports.Still, the risk isn’t zero. In North America, there are roughly 1.5 fatalities associated with bears annually, researchers said.A separate 2019 study examining brown bear (a group that includes the grizzly) attacks on humans across much of their global range between 2000 and 2015 found that attacks increased significantly over time. Researchers said the increase was likely due to several factors, including the growth of bear and human populations, leading to increased habitat overlap. They also noted that a growing number of people are recreating in areas bears live.Grizzly bears also bring benefits, including dispersing seeds and aerating soil. At large enough numbers, they can keep other species like black bears in check.Peter Tira, a spokesperson for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, said the state lacks the resources and wouldn’t be able to prioritize reintroducing grizzlies, given all its existing responsibilities.California, he said, no longer offers abundant stores of salmon that bears are believed to have once fed on or opportunities to roam on the now-highly developed coast. Given their tendency to range widely, he said there’s no reason to assume they’ll stay put in far-flung areas.“Reintroducing grizzly bears potentially into places where people live, recreate and raise livestock would likely necessitate further management of human-wildlife conflicts, which is already extremely challenging with the animal species that are here — notably mountain lions, wolves, black bears and coyotes,” Tira said in a statement.Bruce McLellan, a retired grizzly bear research ecologist and author of “Grizzly Bear Science and the Art of a Wilderness Life,” admits he initially thought the idea of reintroducing grizzlies in California was crazy — in part because of the sheer number of people who live in the state. But much of the population is jammed into the lower half of the state, he realized upon closer inspection.In British Columbia, where McLellan lives, the southern part of the province is home to most of its 5 million people — and that region now supports hundreds of grizzlies as the population has rebounded over time. People have largely acclimated to their presence, he said.“It makes me think that it’s certainly biologically possible to have grizzly bears in those remoter corners of California,” he said. Sure, he said, it would bring conflicts — an odd bear will wander down from the mountains and snatch someone’s chickens; an odd bear would have to be shot — but there are effective ways of dealing with conflict. People would need to be “bear aware” and potentially install electric fences, he said.Grizzlies are also “very adaptable,” he said, noting that they don’t need salmon or unfettered beach access to survive.“A lot of people where I live like to see grizzles in their yard,” McLellan said. “I love it.” Yet even if Californians decided they wanted bears, he believes the U.S. lacks an adequate process to make it happen.McLellan was involved in efforts to restore grizzlies in the North Cascades in Washington state and the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Area in Montana and Idaho. Yet decades of expending money and energy hasn’t brought them to fruition, he said.“I’ve been disheartened having been involved with both of them,” he said.Peter Alagona, an environmental studies professor at UC Santa Barbara who led the study, however, sees a California grizzly comeback as a way to dispel such ideas. “I think it would light a fire under people to show that we can do some things that we didn’t think we could do,” said Alagona, who in 2016 founded the California Grizzly Research Network.Alagona also said it would serve as a form of reparative justice.In a foreword for the study, Octavio Escobedo III, chairman of the Tejon Indian Tribe, highlights what he describes as “parallel paths” forcibly walked by Native Americans and grizzlies subject to state-sanctioned ideology that “drove the relentless persecution of both Indigenous people and grizzly bears.”The Tejon tribe, he writes, is among hundreds of Indigenous nations that value and revere the grizzly, and are leading efforts to conserve and coexist with the species.McInturff, the federal employee, who is also an associate professor at University of Washington, said the new study marks a turning point in the discussion by providing a compilation of the best available science.“There were a lot of speculations, a lot of assumptions, and now we actually have a body of research that we can look at to speak in an informed way about this topic,” he said.At some point, Alagona intends to present the findings of the study to the California Fish and Game Commission, which sets wildlife policy for the state.Last year, the Commission and the state Senate passed resolutions recognizing the centennial anniversary of the extirpation of the California grizzly, with the Senate declaring 2024 the “Year of the Grizzly.” This month marks the 101st anniversary.

Records Show Gene Hackman's Wife Researched Symptoms of Illness in Days Before Her Death

Authorities have released a lengthy investigation report detailing some of the last emails and internet searches done by Gene Hackman's wife in the days before her death

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Authorities on Tuesday released a lengthy investigation report detailing some of the last emails and internet searches done by Gene Hackman’s wife in the days before her death, indicating that she was scouring the internet for information on flu-like symptoms and breathing techniques. Betsy Arakawa died in February of hantavirus pulmonary syndrome — a rare, rodent-borne disease that can led to a range of symptoms that include flu-like illness, headaches, dizziness and severe respiratory distress, investigators have said. Gene Hackman is believed to have died about a week later of heart disease with complications from Alzheimer’s disease.The partially mummified remains of Hackman, 95, and Arakawa, 65, were found in their Santa Fe home on Feb. 26, when maintenance and security workers showed up at the home and alerted police. According to the report released Tuesday, a review of the open bookmarks on Arakawa's computer Feb. 8 and the morning of Feb. 12 indicated she was actively researching medical conditions related to COVID-19 and flu-like symptoms. The searches included questions about whether COVID could cause dizziness or nosebleeds. She also had mentioned in an email to her masseuse that Hackman had woken up Feb. 11 with flu or cold-like symptoms but that a COVID test was negative and she would have to reschedule her appointment for the next day “out of an abundance of caution.” Arakawa's last search was the morning of Feb. 12 for a health care provider in Santa Fe.Investigators also reviewed a call history to the Hackmans' home phone along with voicemails and security footage from stores that Arakawa had visited on Feb. 11.Authorities also are expected to release more redacted police body camera footage from inside the home as sheriff's deputies and investigators tried to piece together what had happened to the couple. The written report describes them going through rooms of the home and finding nothing out of the ordinary and no signs of forced entry. The materials were being released as the result of a recent court order that mandated any depictions of the deceased couple would have to be blocked from view. All photos, video and documents from the investigation had been restricted from release by an earlier, temporary court order.The Hackman estate and family members had sought to keep the records sealed to protect the family’s constitutional right to privacy.A report obtained from the New Mexico Department of Health showed an environmental assessment of the Hackman property found rodent feces in several outbuildings but not inside the living quarters. A live rodent, dead rodent and a rodent nest were found in three detached garages.Nestled among the piñon and juniper hills overlooking Santa Fe, the Hackman home is not unlike others in area as mice are common within the surrounding landscape.One of the couple’s three dogs also was found dead in a crate in a bathroom closet near Arakawa, while two other dogs were found alive. A state veterinary lab tied the dog’s death to dehydration and starvation.An attorney for the estate, Kurt Sommer, argued during a hearing last month that the couple had taken great pains to stay out of the public light during their lifetimes and that the right to control the use of their names and likenesses should extend to their estate in death. Estate representative Julia Peters also emphasized the possibly shocking nature of photographs and video in the investigation and the potential for their dissemination by media. The Associated Press, CBS News and CBS Studios intervened in the matter, saying in court filings that they would not disseminate images of the couple’s bodies and would blur images to obscure them from other records.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Tree Rings Bear Witness to Illegal Gold Mining Operations in the Amazon, New Study Finds

Mercury concentrations in fig trees could provide useful information about mining activity in the rainforest over time

Tree Rings Bear Witness to Illegal Gold Mining Operations in the Amazon, New Study Finds Mercury concentrations in fig trees could provide useful information about mining activity in the rainforest over time An aerial view of dredges at an illegal gold mining area in the Amazon region of Peru. Ernesto Benavides / AFP via Getty Images Gold mining has ramped up across the Amazon rainforest in recent years, leaving devastated landscapes behind. Small-scale—and usually illegal—mining operations dredge the mineral from subsoil or river sediment. Then, to separate the gold, miners will pour liquid mercury into the soil, forming a hard coating around the coveted mineral. Then, they’ll burn off the mercury to get pure gold. This process unleashes toxic mercury into the air, making small-scale gold mining worldwide responsible for nearly two-fifths of the planet’s mercury pollution. While these operations provide an important source of income to many locals, they also poison the surrounding environment and negatively impact people’s health. That mercury also finds its way into trees, according to a study published in the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science last week. Tracking the mercury content in tree rings, the research suggests, can offer insight into mining operations over time. “We could potentially see whether mining is starting to ramp up,” says Jacqueline Gerson, an environmental engineer at Cornell University and the study’s lead author, to James Dinneen at New Scientist. Gerson and her team took core samples from the trunks of fig trees (Ficus insipida) at five sites in the Peruvian Amazon. Three of those sites were located within about 3.1 miles of towns with known mining activity, while the other two were far from any activity. Research assistants took cores from fig trees in the Peruvian Amazon to study their rings. Fernanda Machicao Mercury levels were highest in the samples collected near mining operations and lower near the more isolated towns. The levels found in the trunks reflected higher atmospheric mercury concentrations, which in that area can be readily linked to gold mining, Gerson says in a statement. The results also show that mercury concentrations rose after 2000, likely because that’s when gold mining activities started to ramp up in those towns, per the statement. “You can start to go back and see: How did it change when the mining came?” says study co-author Luis Fernandez, executive director of Wake Forest University’s Center for Amazonian Scientific Innovation, to New Scientist. “We’re starting to see that it changed a lot.” Other studies have also used tree rings to track mercury levels, but not in gold-mining regions of the tropics. “While the technique itself is not new,” Gerson adds in another statement, “we wanted to test its application in places where it’s really hard to put out monitors for atmospheric concentrations, because they’re costly and require energy or need to be changed a lot.” Mercury monitors for remote areas can cost up to $100 each, so studying tree rings is a much cheaper option. The study authors suggest their findings could be helpful to the United Nations’ Minamata Convention on Mercury, an international treaty to protect humans and the environment from the negative effects of the metal. Using tree rings can allow for regional monitoring efforts beyond the Amazon, says Gerson in a statement. Fernandez tells New Scientist that his research consortium, the Center for Amazonian Scientific Innovation, which focuses on rainforest restoration and mercury pollution, has had its funding from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) terminated. He calls that decision counter-productive. “Artisanal gold mining is something that threatens borders,” he says. “It corrupts societies. It is a global source of mercury pollution.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

No Results today.

Our news is updated constantly with the latest environmental stories from around the world. Reset or change your filters to find the most active current topics.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.