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

The federal workforce purge begins

OMB confirms sweeping layoffs across major agencies as unions sue and the shutdown grinds on

The Trump administration began large-scale firings of federal workers this week as part of an aggressive strategy to pressure Democrats during the ongoing government shutdown, marking one of the most sweeping workforce purges in modern U.S. history. According to the Office of Management and Budget, “substantial” layoffs are underway across at least seven federal departments, including Treasury, Health and Human Services, Education, Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Early estimates suggest more than 4,000 employees are being terminated under “reduction in force” (RIF) procedures, with thousands more facing potential dismissal if the budget impasse continues. The RIFs have begun. — Russ Vought (@russvought) October 10, 2025 The White House framed the move as a necessary step to “restore accountability” and eliminate “politically motivated obstruction” within the federal bureaucracy. OMB Director Russ Vought confirmed the action publicly, posting, “The RIFs have begun.” Administration officials argue that many affected positions are tied to programs misaligned with the president’s priorities. Critics, including labor unions and civil service advocates, have called the firings unlawful and politically driven. The American Federation of Government Employees and other unions plan to challenge the dismissals in court, citing violations of due process and long-standing federal employment protections. Even Congressional politicians are joining the conversation. While few details have been shared about Russell Vought’s latest layoffs, there is no question this is poorly timed and yet another example of this administration’s punitive actions toward the federal workforce. The termination of federal employees in a shutdown will further hurt… — Sen. Lisa Murkowski (@lisamurkowski) October 10, 2025 The cuts go far beyond typical furloughs associated with past shutdowns, raising questions about service disruptions, long-term staffing gaps, and the precedent it sets for future administrations. Analysts warn that permanent layoffs could cripple key agencies and deepen dysfunction in an already strained federal system. The government remains in partial shutdown as negotiations over a funding bill stall on Capitol Hill. Meanwhile, confusion continues over whether terminated employees will receive retroactive pay once the shutdown ends — an issue that could soon add another legal battle to the widening crisis. Read more about the 2025 Shutdown Federal agencies go MAGA amid shutdown Democrats are winning the health care shutdown war How the government shutdown is hitting the health care system The post The federal workforce purge begins appeared first on Salon.com.

Republicans Try to Weaken 50-Year-Old Law Protecting Whales, Seals and Polar Bears

One of the U.S.’s longest standing pieces of environmental legislation, credited with helping save rare whales from extinction, is the subject of an effort for cutbacks from Republican lawmakers who now feel they have the political will to do so

BOOTHBAY HARBOR, Maine (AP) — Republican lawmakers are targeting one of the U.S.'s longest standing pieces of environmental legislation, credited with helping save rare whales from extinction.Conservative leaders feel they now have the political will to remove key pieces of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, enacted in 1972 to protect whales, seals, polar bears and other sea animals. The law also places restrictions on commercial fishermen, shippers and other marine industries.A GOP-led bill in the works has support from fishermen in Maine who say the law makes lobster fishing more difficult, lobbyists for big-money species such as tuna in Hawaii and crab in Alaska, and marine manufacturers who see the law as antiquated.Conservation groups adamantly oppose the changes and say weakening the law will erase years of hard-won gains for jeopardized species such as the vanishing North Atlantic right whale, of which there are less than 400, and is vulnerable to entanglement in fishing gear.Here's what to know about the protection act and the proposed changes. Why does the 1970s law still matter “The Marine Mammal Protection Act is important because it’s one of our bedrock laws that help us to base conservation measures on the best available science,” said Kathleen Collins, senior marine campaign manager with International Fund for Animal Welfare. “Species on the brink of extinction have been brought back.”It was enacted the year before the Endangered Species Act, at a time when the movement to save whales from extinction was growing. Scientist Roger Payne had discovered that whales could sing in the late 1960s, and their voices soon appeared on record albums and throughout popular culture.The law protects all marine mammals, and prohibits capturing or killing them in U.S. waters or by U.S. citizens on the high seas. It allowed for preventative measures to stop commercial fishing ships and other businesses from accidentally harming animals such as whales and seals. The animals can be harmed by entanglement in fishing gear, collisions with ships and other hazards at sea.The law also prevents the hunting of marine mammals, including polar bears, with exceptions for Indigenous groups. Some of those animals can be legally hunted in other countries. Changes to oil and gas operations — and whale safety Republican Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska, a state with a large fishing industry, submitted a bill draft this summer that would roll back aspects of the law. The bill says the act has “unduly and unnecessarily constrained government, tribes and the regulated community” since its inception.The proposal states that it would make changes such as lowering population goals for marine mammals from “maximum productivity” to the level needed to “support continued survival.” It would also ease rules on what constitutes harm to marine mammals.For example, the law currently prevents harassment of sea mammals such as whales, and defines harassment as activities that have “the potential to injure a marine mammal.” The proposed changes would limit the definition to only activities that actually injure the animals. That change could have major implications for industries such as oil and gas exploration where rare whales live.That poses an existential threat to the Rice's whale, which numbers only in the dozens and lives in the Gulf of Mexico, conservationists said. And the proposal takes specific aim at the North Atlantic right whale protections with a clause that would delay rules designed to protect that declining whale population until 2035.Begich and his staff did not return calls for comment on the bill, and his staff declined to provide an update about where it stands in Congress. Begich has said he wants "a bill that protects marine mammals and also works for the people who live and work alongside them, especially in Alaska.” Fishing groups want restrictions loosened A coalition of fishing groups from both coasts has come out in support of the proposed changes. Some of the same groups lauded a previous effort by the Trump administration to reduce regulatory burdens on commercial fishing.The groups said in a July letter to House members that they feel Begich's changes reflect “a positive and necessary step" for American fisheries' success.Restrictions imposed on lobster fishermen of Maine are designed to protect the right whale, but they often provide little protection for the animals while limiting one of America's signature fisheries, Virginia Olsen, political director of the Maine Lobstering Union, said. The restrictions stipulate where lobstermen can fish and what kinds of gear they can use. The whales are vulnerable to lethal entanglement in heavy fishing rope.Gathering more accurate data about right whales while revising the original law would help protect the animals, Olsen said.“We do not want to see marine mammals harmed; we need a healthy, vibrant ocean and a plentiful marine habitat to continue Maine’s heritage fishery,” Olsen said.Some members of other maritime industries have also called on Congress to update the law. The National Marine Manufacturers Association said in a statement that the rules have not kept pace with advancements in the marine industry, making innovation in the business difficult. Environmentalists fight back Numerous environmental groups have vowed to fight to save the protection act. They characterized the proposed changes as part of the Trump administration's assault on environmental protections.The act was instrumental in protecting the humpback whale, one of the species most beloved by whale watchers, said Gib Brogan, senior campaign director with Oceana. Along with other sea mammals, humpbacks would be in jeopardy without it, he said.“The Marine Mammal Protection Act is flexible. It works. It's effective. We don't need to overhaul this law at this point,” Brogan said. What does this mean for seafood imports The original law makes it illegal to import marine mammal products without a permit, and allows the U.S. to impose import prohibitions on seafood products from foreign fisheries that don’t meet U.S. standards.The import embargoes are a major sticking point because they punish American businesses, said Gavin Gibbons, chief strategy officer of the National Fisheries Institute, a Virginia-based seafood industry trade group. It’s critical to source seafood globally to be able to meet American demand for seafood, he said.The National Fisheries Institute and a coalition of industry groups sued the federal government Thursday over what they described as unlawful implementation of the protection act. Gibbons said the groups don't oppose the act, but want to see it responsibly implemented.“Our fisheries are well regulated and appropriately fished to their maximum sustainable yield,” Gibbons said. “The men and women who work our waters are iconic and responsible. They can’t be expected to just fish more here to make up a deficit while jeopardizing the sustainability they’ve worked so hard to maintain.”Some environmental groups said the Republican lawmakers’ proposed changes could weaken American seafood competitiveness by allowing imports from poorly regulated foreign fisheries.This story was supported by funding from the Walton Family Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

EPA to undergo layoffs amid shutdown fight

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is among the agencies where federal workers will be laid off by the Trump administration in the ongoing federal government shutdown. Employees in the EPA’s Resource Conservation and Sustainability Division received an email indicating that the agency would be undertaking a reduction in force (RIF).  That division undertakes recycling initiatives and...

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is among the agencies where federal workers will be laid off by the Trump administration in the ongoing federal government shutdown. Employees in the EPA’s Resource Conservation and Sustainability Division received an email indicating that the agency would be undertaking a reduction in force (RIF).  That division undertakes recycling initiatives and seeks to reduce food waste and plastic pollution. It’s not immediately clear how many people will be impacted and if any additional offices within EPA will also face layoffs.  “This notice is to inform you that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will be conducting a Reduction in Force,” said the email from Steven Cook, principal deputy assistant administrator for the Office of Land and Emergency Management.  “This action is necessary to align our workforce with the Agency’s current and future needs and to ensure the efficient and effective operation of our programs,” Cook wrote.  Asked about layoffs broadly, an EPA spokesperson told The Hill via email, "It’s unfortunate that Democrats have chosen to shut down the government and brought about this outcome. If they want to reopen the government, they can choose to do so at any time.”  The agency did not address questions from The Hill about which offices were facing cuts and how many people would be fired. It did not immediately respond to follow up questions about the resource conservation and sustainability division. Unions representing federal employees have been critical of the Trump administration’s moves.  “This is the latest way that the Trump administration is weaponizing this furlough against federal employees, stopping them from serving the American people to the best of their ability,” Nicole Cantello, president of the AFGE Local 704 union, which represents EPA staffers in the Midwest,  told The Hill. The notice comes after the Trump administration threatened to lay off federal workers if Democrats do not pass a bill to fund the government. Democrats are trying to get Republicans to pass legislation aimed at bringing down healthcare costs before they agree to fund the government. The administration has also more broadly sought to cut the federal workforce, including through earlier rounds of layoffs and buyouts. 

Tunnel Farming Helps South Dakota Farmers Extend Growing Season by up to 4 Months

Some farmers in South Dakota are using farm tunnels to extend their growing season

When snow covers the frozen ground, and most South Dakota farmers have sold or stored their products for the season, the operators of Cedar Creek Gardens are still able to grow vegetables and harvest a lucrative crop.Located in a remote area southwest of Murdo, about 12 miles south of Interstate 90, the sprawling farm is one of dozens in the state that utilize what are called farm tunnels to extend the planting and growing seasons.The tunnels are fortified above-ground hoop buildings covered in plastic that capture heat from the sun, creating a greenhouse effect. Many of the tunnels at Cedar Creek are covered with two separated layers of plastic and have fans that circulate warm air between the layers, creating even warmer growing conditions.The tunnels differ from greenhouses in that crops are grown directly into the soil rather than in raised boxes or beds, and they are watered from the ground up instead of from above.Cedar Creek is run by Peggy Martin and Bud Manke, who are business partners and good friends. Martin and Manke were some of the first South Dakota farmers to install tunnels after reading about them online in the early 2000s.“At first, we were just going to grow food for our families,” Martin said. “But it’s become a passion, and they (the tunnels) have helped us grow to what we are now.”Beyond extending the growing season by up to four months each year, the controlled weather conditions and targeted water use also allow them to produce top-quality, organically grown vegetables.One-pound tomatoes that are firm, filled with nutrients and free of blemishes. Banana peppers as long as bananas and so crisp they snap. Sweet onions the size of softballs. Kale plants that top 5 feet in height. Tunnels part of a diversified operation On their farm, they grow crops on 14 acres, have about 1,400 free-range laying chickens, and Manke raises cattle. The farm is dotted with about a dozen tunnel buildings, the largest of which are up to 14 feet tall, 30 feet wide and 200 feet long.Martin said the tunnels have enabled them to expand their farm and its output over the past 25 years and help them grow into the largest South Dakota specialty farming operation west of the Missouri River.Martin, Manke and the farmhands they hire grow a wide variety of seasonal produce, including tomatoes (the primary cash crop) as well as pumpkins, melons, sweet and green onions, red and green peppers, kale, cabbage, broccoli, sugar-snap peas, radishes, lettuce and zucchini.The foods they grow and raise are sold at area farm stands and farmer’s markets but also through a weekly wholesale business that serves West River grocery stores, restaurants and a buyer’s group.The tunnels have allowed them to plant vegetables as early as March and maintain growth of some hearty varieties for picking as late as mid-December. The first frost date in their region is typically around Sept. 15, Manke said.“There can be snow out here in the wintertime and it’s 20 degrees when the sun comes up, but it can be 100 degrees inside the tunnels,” Manke said. “It can actually get too hot sometimes, so we have to be careful and open things up.” Higher productivity, higher profits Martin did the math to show how the tunnels can increase productivity and profits.In a 200-foot tunnel, they can place three rows of 100 tomato plants, each of which can produce 40 pounds of fruit, more than double a typical household tomato plant, she said. At an average of $2.25 per pound, and even with 20% waste, that single tunnel can produce $21,600 of tomatoes in a single grow-out.Rachel Lawton, the South Dakota urban conservationist for the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Natural Resources Conservation Service, runs the federal program that provides financial assistance to qualified individuals and operations that want to install tunnel farms.Lawton, based in Sioux Falls, said the tunnels aren’t suitable for high-production farms that raise thousands of bushels of corn, soybeans or wheat. But they work well for specialty crop farmers or backyard gardeners who want to produce a stable, almost year-round crop of vegetables, she said.“The season extension with high tunnels is beneficial, but it’s even more beneficial when you look at the quality of produce they’re producing while also getting protection from wind, hail, frost, chemical drift and pests,” she said.NRCS accepts applications for financial assistance in development of tunnel gardens each fall, with recipients receiving up to 75% of the cost of a project, Lawton said. In addition, successful applicants receive NRCS help in developing a wider-ranging conservation plan for their commercial farms or home gardening projects, she said. Interest in tunnels growing in South Dakota Lawton said she has seen increased interest in tunnel farming in South Dakota in recent years.In recent years, the agency has provided funding for about 10 to 15 tunnels projects a year with money from the USDA Environmental Quality Incentive Program, or EQIP.The largest tunnels, up to about 3,000 square feet, can cost more than $20,000, though smaller tunnels with fewer amenities cost far less, Lawton said. Tunnels cannot be used for equipment storage or livestock handling, and NRCS applicants must own or rent land, be U.S. citizens and make less than $900,000 a year, she said.Lawton cautioned that people who consider construction of a tunnel should be aware that they require frequent maintenance and are susceptible to damage from the elements.“As wonderful and as cool as they are, I wouldn’t say they are the solution to everything,” she said. “There can be a lot of pitfalls and a lot of work if you aren’t an experienced grower.” Martin now a ‘resident expert’ on tunnels The tunnels come in three basic sizes, from “high tunnels” that are the tallest and widest to “caterpillar tunnels” that are shorter and more narrow to “low tunnels” which are light enough to lift and change positions quickly.Lawton refers to Martin as South Dakota’s “high tunnel resident expert” because she has more high tunnels than most South Dakota farmers and because she has more than two decades of operating them.Martin likens the tunnels to “problematic 2-year-old kids” that require patience and wisdom to manage properly. “You can’t just plant them and then leave home,” she said. “If there’s bad weather coming, you have to roll down the sides and get them buttoned up.”But for those who accept the hard work and risk, the payoff in extended growing time, improved quality of products and protection of natural resources can far outweigh those drawbacks, Lawton said. Conservation benefits include soil conservation and reduced water, pesticide and electricity use, she said.“You can do multiple successions of crops, and you have a better growing environment, which essentially translates into dollars because you can grow more and sell more or grow more food for your own family,” Lawton said. “It all starts with conservation, but the end product is something that is more efficient, more productive and more financially beneficial all at the same time.”This story was originally published by South Dakota News Watch and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Scientists Watch Fungi Evolve in Real Time, Thanks to a Marriage Proposal in a Cheese Cave

A new study pinpoints a disruption in a gene that made a beloved blue cheese's rind go from green to white

Scientists Watch Fungi Evolve in Real Time, Thanks to a Marriage Proposal in a Cheese Cave A new study pinpoints a disruption in a gene that made a beloved blue cheese’s rind go from green to white Sara Hashemi - Daily Correspondent October 10, 2025 3:27 p.m. The mold growing on batches of Bayley Hazen Blue cheese changed from green to white between 2016 and the present day. Benjamin Wolfe In 2016, Benjamin Wolfe, a microbiome scientist at Tufts University, was scheming. He’d convinced his former advisor, Rachel Dutton, to drive with him to Jasper Hill Farm in Greensboro, Vermont, to collect samples of a cheese called Bayley Hazen Blue. But the visit was about more than the sweet, creamy dairy product: It was a ruse so that Dutton’s boyfriend could propose at the farm, where they had first met. The surprise proposal went ahead as planned, and the biologist got his samples—scrapes from the cheese wheels’ rinds. He stored them in a freezer in his lab for years. “I’m notorious for not throwing samples away just in case we might need them,” he says in a statement. The cheese collected in 2016 was coated in a “very avocado-limey-green color,” Wolfe recalls to Elizabeth Preston at the New York Times. But a few years later, when graduate student Nicolas Louw went to pick up new samples at the farm, the rinds of the newer cheeses were completely white. The recipe hadn’t changed. Neither had the caves where the farm ages its blue cheese. Perhaps the mold had changed instead, the scientists surmised. “This was really exciting, because we thought it could be an example of evolution happening right before our eyes,” Wolfe says in the statement. “Microbes evolve. We know that from antibiotic resistance evolution [and] pathogen evolution, but we don’t usually see it happening at a specific place over time in a natural setting.” Did you know? A fungus among us According to a report from the American Academy of Microbiology, “Cheese is one of the few foods we eat that contains extraordinarily high numbers of living, metabolizing microbes.” Fungi are just the start—cheeses gain their flavors and textures from yeast (a type of fungus) and other microbes, like bacteria. Genetic analysis revealed the cheese rinds’ color change happened because of a disruption in ALB1, a gene involved in the production of melanin, which is known for its role in protection from ultraviolet (UV) radiation. In humans, melanin produces eye color as well as hair and skin pigmentation. In cheeses, melanin affects the appearance of the rind. It makes sense that fungi growing in a cave would shed a gene designed to produce melanin as it evolved, since it doesn’t need protection from ultraviolet light, Louw explains in the statement. The phenomenon, known as “relaxed selection,” is common in species that experience the removal of an environmental stressor. “By breaking that pathway and going from green to white, the fungi are essentially saving energy to invest in other things for survival and growth,” Louw says. The findings, published in the journal Current Biology last month, are a “perfect example of evolution in action,” Sam O’Donnell, a fungal genomicist at the University of Wisconsin–Madison who wasn’t involved in the work, tells the New York Times. Understanding how the Penicillium solitum fungi in the cheese evolve can also have other benefits. In the statement, the researchers say the work could be used to help prevent lung infections caused by other molds in the same family—or even help bolster global food security. “Around 20 percent of staple crops are lost pre-harvest due to fungal rot, and an additional 20 percent are lost to fungi post-harvest,” Louw says in the statement. “That includes the moldy bread in your pantry and rotting fruit on market shelves.” Being able to manage mold could help solve that issue. Next, Wolfe and his team will explore making new types of cheese with different tastes and textures based on their findings. They’ve already collaborated with the farm on a fresh brie with the white mold and found it tastes “nuttier and less funky,” Wolfe says in the statement. The cheeses will continue to be refined on the farm. “Seeing wild molds evolve right before our eyes over a period of a few years helps us think that we can develop a robust domestication process, to create new genetic diversity and tap into that for cheesemaking,” Wolfe adds. As for Dutton? She said yes. “We are very grateful to [her husband] for his elaborate marriage proposal,” the researchers note in the acknowledgments section of their paper. “It is because of his marriage proposal that the 2016 samples were collected.” Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

White House Begins Mass Firing of Federal Employees Amid Shutdown War

Russell Vought, the White House budget director, announced that the administration has begun firing federal workers en masse.Vought warned last week that “consequential” layoffs were forthcoming amid the ongoing government shutdown. On Friday, he tweeted, “The RIFs have begun,” referring to “reductions in force.”Vought, as anticipated, is now using the government shutdown to cull the federal workforce, fulfilling Trump’s recent vow to cut “vast numbers of people out,” as well as slash programs that he says Democrats “like.”An unnamed White House official told MSNBC’s Vaughn Hillyard, “We expect thousands of people to unfortunately be laid off due to the government shutdown.” CNN’s Alayna Treene reports that a White House official said that fired workers have begun receiving notices and, “It will be substantial.”Agencies poised to be affected, according to Politico, include the Departments of the Interior, Treasury, Commerce, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency.Reacting to Vought’s four-word social media announcement, the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 820,000 government workers, shot back: “The lawsuit has been filed.” The AFL-CIO told Vought, “America’s unions will see you in court.”This story has been updated.

Russell Vought, the White House budget director, announced that the administration has begun firing federal workers en masse.Vought warned last week that “consequential” layoffs were forthcoming amid the ongoing government shutdown. On Friday, he tweeted, “The RIFs have begun,” referring to “reductions in force.”Vought, as anticipated, is now using the government shutdown to cull the federal workforce, fulfilling Trump’s recent vow to cut “vast numbers of people out,” as well as slash programs that he says Democrats “like.”An unnamed White House official told MSNBC’s Vaughn Hillyard, “We expect thousands of people to unfortunately be laid off due to the government shutdown.” CNN’s Alayna Treene reports that a White House official said that fired workers have begun receiving notices and, “It will be substantial.”Agencies poised to be affected, according to Politico, include the Departments of the Interior, Treasury, Commerce, Education, Energy, Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency.Reacting to Vought’s four-word social media announcement, the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 820,000 government workers, shot back: “The lawsuit has been filed.” The AFL-CIO told Vought, “America’s unions will see you in court.”This story has been updated.

Under Trump, E.P.A. Explored if Abortion Pills Could Be Detected in Wastewater

Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency found that they could develop methods to identify traces of the medication if necessary — a practice long sought by the anti-abortion movement.

Senior officials at the Environmental Protection Agency directed a team of scientists over the summer to assess whether the government could develop methods for detecting traces of abortion pills in wastewater — a practice sought by some anti-abortion activists seeking to restrict the medication now used in over 50 percent of abortions.The highly unusual request appears to have originated from a letter sent from 25 Republican members of Congress to Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, asking the agency to investigate how the abortion drug mifepristone might be contaminating the water supply.“Are there existing E.P.A.-approved methods for detecting mifepristone and its active metabolites in water supplies?” the lawmakers asked at the end of the public letter, sent on June 18, an effort led by Senator James Lankford and Representative Josh Brecheen, both of Oklahoma. “If not, what resources are needed to develop these testing methods?”Scientists who specialize in chemical detection told the senior officials that there are currently no E.P.A.-approved methods for identifying mifepristone in wastewater — but that new methods could be developed, according to two people familiar with the events, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information.Abortion pills have emerged as a major focus for the anti-abortion movement since the fall of Roe v. Wade, as growing numbers of women in states with abortion bans have turned to websites and underground networks that send the pills through the mail, allowing them to circumvent the laws.The widespread availability of abortion pills — which women usually take at home in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy — has inspired many anti-abortion activists to push for new approaches to curtail their use. That has included a campaign by one prominent group to raise awareness about environmental harms they say are caused when the medication and fetal remains enter the sewage system.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

Gavin Newsom signs law overhauling local zoning to build more housing

After weeks of waiting, California’s governor signed a bill that will allow mid-rise apartment buildings near major transit stops in California’s biggest metro areas.

In summary After weeks of waiting, California’s governor signed a bill that will allow mid-rise apartment buildings near major transit stops in California’s biggest metro areas. Ever since the Legislature narrowly passed Senate Bill 79 last month, legislation that will pave the way for more apartment buildings around major public transit stops in the state’s biggest metro areas, the California political universe has been impatiently awaiting Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature or veto in a heated statewide game of “will he, won’t he.” Today, he did.  Newsom’s sign off on the bill means that apartment developers will soon be able to pack more homes into neighborhoods within half a mile of major rail, subway, and bus rapid transit stops, overriding local zoning restrictions and any possible objections of surrounding neighbors. Buildings immediately surrounding these transit hubs will be entitled to max out as high as nine stories, with those further out topping out at roughly four. “The world looks to California for leadership — it’s time to build modern, connected communities that fulfill California’s promise, meeting the needs of today and the next generation,” the governor wrote in a signing statement. The signature caps off a legislative year full of housing policy overhauls that even just a few years ago would have seemed unthinkable. It also reaffirms the governor’s political alignment with the “Yes In My Backyard” movement, which has been championing the cause of building more housing in the face of a statewide housing shortage for nearly a decade. This summer Newsom signed YIMBY-backed legislation to exempt most urban apartment projects from review under one of the state’s signature environmental protection laws. “Go YIMBYs,” Newsom said when signing that bill into law.  Senate Bill 79 is, indeed, a signature victory for the movement. The bill’s author, San Francisco Sen. Scott Wiener, a Democrat, introduced an earlier version of the policy in 2018 with the support of the then still relatively new political organization California YIMBY. This year’s version, which narrowly passed both the Senate and Assembly last month with few votes to spare, marks Wiener’s fourth attempt. Learn more about legislators mentioned in this story. Scott Wiener Democrat, State Senate, District 11 (San Francisco) “In California we talk a lot about where we don’t want to build homes, but rarely do we talk about where we do—until now,” said Wiener in a statement. “SB 79 unwinds decades of overly restrictive policies that have driven housing costs to astronomical levels, forcing millions of people away from jobs and transit and into long commutes from the suburbs or out of the state entirely. It has been a long road to tackling these decades-old problems, but today’s signing marks a new day for affordable housing in California.” Newsom’s signature comes as a grave disappointment for many local governments and neighborhood groups, particularly in Southern California. Last month, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass urged Newsom to veto the bill, saying that it would “erode local control, diminish community input on planning and zoning, and disproportionately impact low-resource neighborhoods.” Irate homeowner groups and state legislators raised concerns that mandating higher levels of housing density would “fundamentally reshape” suburban-style neighborhoods. The “upzoning” policy was meant to be a two-fer: Allow for much more housing construction as a way to alleviate the state’s housing shortage and its resulting affordability crisis, while also steering more residents towards cash-strapped public transportation systems.  Despite the ferocity of the opposition, the bill that Newsom signed is considerably more modest than the version introduced at the beginning of the year. After 13 separate rounds of amendments, the law will be restricted to just eight highly urbanized counties — Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange, Santa Clara, Alameda, Sacramento, San Francisco and San Mateo — and apply only to select transportation stops (train, subway, light rail and high-frequency buses routes with designated lanes). The law will also give local governments alternative means to comply with their own local programs, require a certain share of units constructed under the bill to be set aside at below-market rents and go into effect on a delayed schedule in certain lower income neighborhoods. Even in that more muted form, the law is one of most consequential changes to statewide zoning rules in modern California history.  Over the last weeks, Newsom has come under sustained pressure from both supporters and opponents. Advocates for historic preservation, tenant rights, local control and affluent neighborhood groups, along with Republican gubernatorial candidate Steve Hilton and former reality TV star Spencer Pratt, have rallied their respective audiences to inundate the governor’s office with calls and emails urging a veto. Supporters — among them national political commentators, billionaire megadonor Tom Steyer and every corner of the organized YIMBY online universe — have urged their supporters to do the opposite.  Popular interest in the outcome of the bill seemed to escape the confines typical of California legislative debate. Earlier this week, an online betting pool popped up (the odds were always good for Newsom’s signature). The topic even came up during the governor’s guest appearance on the recent livestream of the popular online gamer known as “ConnorEatsPants.”  Responding to a stream of public comments from his audience packed with incessant inquiries about the bill, the streamer prompted Newsom: “I don’t know what this is, but they’re saying you need to talk about SB 79.”

Study: Commercial Lion Farming in South Africa Could Be Harming, Not Helping, Wild Lions

As we’ve seen with tigers and other threatened species, captive lion breeding may stimulate consumer demand and put additional pressure on wild populations across African home ranges. The post Study: Commercial Lion Farming in South Africa Could Be Harming, Not Helping, Wild Lions appeared first on The Revelator.

I recently co-authored a new peer-reviewed study that has delivered another blow to South Africa’s controversial commercial captive lion industry, finding no solid evidence that breeding lions in captivity benefits wild populations and warning that it may be doing the opposite. Our study, a collaboration with researchers from Blood Lions and World Animal Protection, paints a troubling picture of an industry that has exploded over the past three decades to around 350 facilities holding nearly 8,000 lions — alongside thousands of other big cats — for exhibition and breeding, tourism experiences, “canned” or captive trophy hunting, and the trade in bones and body parts. We examined 126 scientific papers and 37 organizational reports published between 2008 and 2023, flagging three major concerns: Currently there is no proof that the commercial industry aids conservation. Captive breeding may increase demand for lion parts. Links between legal and illegal trade could be strengthened. Bottle feeding and cub petting are popular revenue streams for captive predator facilities. Cubs are separated from their mothers at a young age, forcing the females back into estrus while visitors pay to interact with the cubs. © Blood Lions, used with permission. From cub-petting selfies to walking with lions, “canned” hunts, and the (now illegal) export of lion skeletons, the commercial predator industry is big business. The industry claims that commercial lion farming relieves pressure on wild lions; our study shows that it could actually fuel the demand for lion products and open the door to increased wildlife trafficking. Can Commercial Breeding Meet Consumer Demand? While proponents of commercial wildlife utilization assert that wildlife farming offers an effective means to meet the demand for wildlife commodities and relieve pressure on wild populations, our analysis of previous work by researchers and conservationists shows that this approach may be counterproductive. Farming wildlife may, in fact, put increased pressure on wild populations by promoting demand for wildlife products. This increases the risk of wildlife poaching and laundering through existing legal channels. It has also been noted that captive wildlife stock is sometimes renewed with animals from the wild to bring in fresh genes and prevent inbreeding or to breed for specific traits, such as dark manes. Countering arguments that farming wild animals is a logical means to protect wild populations, conservationists and researchers have highlighted that such mistaken assumptions may endanger wild populations. Other species have already demonstrated that commercial farming of wild species — such as tigers for bones and other body parts, bears for bile, and Southeast Asian porcupines for meat consumption — have all put increased pressure on wild populations. Consumer demand studies that have highlighted a preference for products sourced from wild-caught animals based on perceptions of medicinal strength or meat quality. Overall these studies highlight the faulty logic inherent in justifying the commercial breeding of wild animals as a supply-side approach. A lion skeleton prepared for export to be used in Traditional Chinese Medicine and trinkets. © Blood Lions, used with permission. There’s still a lot we don’t know. In our paper we highlighted the urgent need for scientific, peer-reviewed research to better understand consumer demand, economic comparisons between wild and farmed products, the genetics of captive lions, and the scale of illicit trade to get a more complete picture of the impact of commercial lion farming on wild lions. South African Wild Lion Populations Remain Stable, But What About Other Range States? In 2018 an assessment for African lions stated that the export of captive-bred lion trophies, live captive-bred lions for zoological or breeding purposes, and/or the trade of lion skeletons from the captive population would not harm South Africa’s wild lion population. The commercial captive lion industry has repeatedly failed to account for severe welfare issues, including malnourishment, obesity, overbreeding, inbreeding, poor keeping conditions, and health concerns. © Blood Lions, used with permission. But while wild lion populations in South Africa remain stable, our new research clearly highlights the risks associated with a commercial captive lion industry and the already vulnerable wild lion populations and other big cat species across other range states. Dr. Louise de Waal, director of Blood Lions and one of the paper’s authors, says South Africa’s stable wild lion population could change if the captive industry keeps growing: “We need to err on the side of caution globally, but in particular in African lion range states, to stop facilitating further emergence of commercial captive predator breeding and trade. This is particularly relevant when considering the increased wildlife trafficking opportunities between the African continent and Southeast Asia through, for example, the expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative, a global infrastructure development strategy by the Chinese government.” Welfare Concerns Continue The industry also has a long record of animal welfare violations. Some of the most recent cases include a successful conviction for animal cruelty after starved lions were discovered at a farm in May 2023. In another National Council of Societies for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (NSPCA) welfare case in 2025, horrific animal cruelty and neglect were uncovered at a notorious predator facility, where at least 80 tigers were kept for commercial purposes, one of whom had resorted to self-mutilation to relieve stress and pain from untreated injuries. Commercial captive-keeping conditions fail to provide adequate living conditions for sentient apex predators, including the ability to hunt and roam freely. © Blood Lions, used with permission. These aren’t isolated incidents. Douglas Wolhuter, national chief inspector and manager of the NSPCA Wildlife Protection Unit, reported that they had conducted 176 inspections of captive lion facilities across South Africa from 2022 to 2024. Wolhuter outlined that in most cases, captive predators were denied even the bare basics like access to clean drinking water, proper food, shelter, environmental enrichment, hygienic living conditions, and appropriate veterinary care, including treatment of parasitic infestations. Many of the captive predator- and lion-breeding facilities required repeat visits due to unaddressed noncompliances. Their inspections resulted in 64 warnings, 10 formal Animal Welfare Notices, and 21 warrants granted in 2022 alone. That year, as a result, 23 severely compromised lions had to be euthanized. Our research, combined with these on-the-ground realities, provides another catalyst for South Africa’s Minister of Forestry, Fisheries, and the Environment, Dr. Dion George, to take urgent action by implementing a moratorium on breeding and a time-bound phaseout plan. It also signals the serious need for caution: Lion farming in South Africa isn’t saving wild lions. It could even be accelerating their decline, particularly in already vulnerable lion range states across other African countries. Previously in The Revelator: In South Africa, Tigers and Other Captive Predators Are Still Exploited for Profit. Legislation Offers Pitiful Protection The post Study: Commercial Lion Farming in South Africa Could Be Harming, Not Helping, Wild Lions appeared first on The Revelator.

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.