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.

California voted to ban new diesel trucks at ports. Why did L.A. and Long Beach just add 1,000 more?

News Feed
Thursday, June 13, 2024

More than 1,000 diesel-powered cargo trucks — which should’ve been banned from serving California ports — were granted access to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach due to inaction from the Biden administration, according to harbor records.In April 2023, the California Air Resources Board voted to ban fossil fuel-powered big rigs from obtaining new registrations to serve the state’s 12 major seaports, a landmark rule that was slated to go into effect on Jan. 1. But one year later, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not granted a waiver for California’s so-called Advanced Clean Fleets rule. As a result, state air regulators have been unable to enforce the regulation, which has allowed trucking companies and independent operators to continue adding diesel-snorting big rigs that can pollute port communities for up to a decade. Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science. Since the start of the year, more than 1,200 trucks have obtained new registrations to move cargo at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, according to data obtained by the Los Angeles Times. About 92% of the newly registered trucks had diesel-powered engines, which are known to emit cancer-causing particles and planet-warming carbon emissions. The Advanced Clean Fleets rule is one of eight clean-air policies that California regulators are still waiting for the Biden administration to sign off on. Collectively, these rules were expected to prevent 11,000 premature deaths and provide $116 billion in health benefits over the next three decades, according to the American Lung Assn. But that assumed the rules would be implemented on time. Seven of the eight pending policies should’ve already gone into effect. The federal inaction has resulted in delays in adopting zero-emission technologies or reducing emissions for trucks, boats, trains, construction machinery and lawn equipment. And the deferred policy implementation could have national implications, as several other states have expressed interest in adopting California’s more stringent rules rather than the EPA’s.Heading into an unpredictable election year when the presidency and both chambers of Congress are up for grabs, environmental advocates want to see these rules prioritized.“Any further delay in the waiver process really does risk that we’re going to see more diesel trucks on the roads or working at the ports,” said Will Barrett, national senior director of clean air policy with the American Lung Assn. “We’re also going to see more gasoline-powered equipment like leaf blowers and lawnmowers when those sales should have been stopped. The transition to zero-emission technology in these sectors is delayed, and because of that, we’re concerned that we’re just going to see this equipment live on, putting out more pollution for longer than it should have.”The EPA declined to comment on the addition of more diesel trucks at Southern California ports and the pending Advanced Clean Fleets waiver. The Small Off-Road Engines rule, adopted in 2021, would ban the sale of gas-powered yard equipment including leaf blowers, lawnmowers and other equipment. It was scheduled to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 887 premature deaths and provide $9 billion in public health benefits. The Commercial Harbor Craft rule, adopted in 2022, would require new ferry boats and excursion vessels to be zero-emission where feasible. It also calls for more watercraft, including commercial sportfishing boats, to replace their older engines with newer, cleaner models to reduce pollution. It was scheduled to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 531 premature deaths and provide $5 billion in health benefits. The In-Use Locomotive rule, adopted in 2023, would establish age limits for trains operating in California and gradually phase out diesel engines. The rule would guarantee all train fleets would be zero-emission no later than 2058. It was slated to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 3,233 premature deaths and provide $32 billion in public health benefits. The Advanced Clean Cars II rule, adopted in 2022, would require an increasing percentage of new cars sold to California auto dealerships to be zero-emission or plug-in hybrids. The regulation would eventually culminate in a ban on selling new, gasoline-powered cars by 2035. It is slated to go into effect in 2026. It is expected to prevent 1,287 premature deaths and provide $13 billion in public health benefits. The Advanced Clean Fleets rule, adopted in 2023, would ban fossil fuel-powered cargo trucks registering to serve California ports and railyards. It would ultimately require all cargo trucks serving the ports to be zero-emission in 2035. It also established zero-emission requirements for governmental and large commercial fleets. It was scheduled to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 2,526 premature deaths and provide $26 billion in public health benefits. The In-Use Off-Road Diesel-Fueled Fleet rule, adopted in 2022, would phase out some of the dirtiest engines from agricultural and construction equipment. It was scheduled to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 571 premature deaths and provide $6 billion in public health benefits. The Transport Refrigeration Units rule, adopted in 2022, would phase out diesel-powered refrigeration units for cargo trucks. It was slated to go into effect last year. It is expected to prevent 177 premature deaths and provide $2 billion in public health benefits. The Heavy-Duty Omnibus rule, adopted in 2020, would establish cleaner engine standards and require warranties for new heavy-duty vehicles. It was scheduled to go into effect this year. It is expected to prevent 2,480 premature deaths and provide $23 billion in public health benefits. Environmental experts say the Biden administration has been tied up with its own jam-packed federal environmental agenda, which may have slowed the review process for California’s rules. In the past year, the EPA has approved new rules for cars, heavy-duty trucks, new coal- and gas-fired power plants and methane-leaking oil wells. Those federal rules are expected to have little bearing in California, where state regulations are already more strict. Due to its notoriously poor air quality, California holds the distinction as the only state that can regulate vehicle emissions, so long as it obtains permission from the EPA. The state has used these powers to adopt groundbreaking rules, such as requiring cars to be outfitted with catalytic converters and check engine lights. “That’s the dance that’s been going on since the mid-1960s,” said Ann Carlson, a UCLA environmental law professor and former transportation czar with the Biden administration. “California leads, in part, because EPA grants its waiver. Then California pushes the rest of the country.”Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state rulemakers touted news that the sale of new zero-emission trucks had doubled in 2023 compared with the prior year, putting the state two years ahead of its goals. This mostly resulted from the sales of thousands of medium-duty pickup trucks, such as Ford’s F-150 Lightning and Rivian’s R1 lineup. Zero-emission big rigs remain a small fraction of sales and existing fleets serving state ports. All those cargo containers that come into the Port of L.A., seen here in March, have to go somewhere. For now, most will be aboard diesel-powered big rigs. (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times) Asked about the outstanding Advanced Clean Fleets rule, state officials were optimistic the Biden administration would take action.“We’re of course eagerly awaiting the U.S. EPA to grant our waiver, and we expect them to take action very soon,” said Steven Cliff, executive director of the California Air Resources Board. “We’re seeing 1 in 6 new trucks sold is zero emissions,” Cliff added, “and going forward, that’s going to benefit Californians, especially those who live near ports who have been most impacted by pollution.”Nearly 23,000 cargo trucks are registered with the Port of Los Angeles, the busiest container port in the Western Hemisphere. About 94% of those are diesel trucks, and another 5% burn natural gas. One percent are zero-emission: 271 cargo trucks are battery-electric, and nine are hydrogen fuel-cell.The Port of Los Angeles announced last year that it had reduced diesel particulate matter by 88% since 2005, due, in part, to better controls for ships and cleaner truck engines.The Advanced Clean Fleets rule was expected to rapidly accelerate zero-emission adoption, starting with the 2024 ban on fossil-fuel truck registrations. In the year leading up to that deadline, trucking companies went on a buying spree, according to public records.More than 9,000 trucks obtained new registrations at both ports in 2023 — almost triple the amount registered in 2018. The vast majority of these trucks had diesel-powered engines.The registration of diesel trucks continued into the first half of 2024. More than 1,100 diesel trucks were registered at the ports so far this year. Seventy-six electric trucks and 19 hydrogen trucks received approval to move cargo in the same time. Many truck drivers serving the ports are independent owner-operators, running their own small businesses with their big rigs instead of working for a large company with a fleet. They have expressed concerns about the high upfront costs of purchasing electric trucks, which are significantly more expensive than diesel-powered models.Mercer Transportation Co., an owner-operator transportation company, registered the most trucks so far in 2024, enrolling 131 diesel trucks at both ports, including several with engines over a decade old. Performance Team Freight Systems Inc., a Santa Fe Springs-based company, introduced the most zero-emission vehicles, with 23 electric trucks.Under the fleets rule, the existing fleet of diesel and gas trucks would be allowed to visit the ports until they reached 18 years old or a maximum of 800,000 miles traveled. Trucks that exceed 800,000 miles driven can operate for only 13 years.Agmark Transportation registered a diesel truck with an engine from the year 2000, which would not have been allowed if the EPA had granted California’s waiver.The delayed rule would also prevent any fossil-fuel truck from moving cargo at the ports in 2035. But environmental advocates would still like to know how the state plans to offset any unintended pollution and carbon emissions resulting from late implementation.“What we fully expect and strongly endorse is, when these waivers are signed and official, anything that has been done to increase pollution beyond what was designed in these programs really needs to be addressed quickly,” said Barrett, of the American Lung Assn. “If that’s the addition of hundreds of diesel trucks into the port drayage fleet, we would call on our state agencies to look at those and see what they can do to get those out of the fleet as quickly as possible.”

While California waits for the EPA to act, more than 1,200 trucks have obtained new registrations to move cargo at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach this year; 90% run on diesel.

More than 1,000 diesel-powered cargo trucks — which should’ve been banned from serving California ports — were granted access to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach due to inaction from the Biden administration, according to harbor records.

In April 2023, the California Air Resources Board voted to ban fossil fuel-powered big rigs from obtaining new registrations to serve the state’s 12 major seaports, a landmark rule that was slated to go into effect on Jan. 1.

But one year later, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not granted a waiver for California’s so-called Advanced Clean Fleets rule. As a result, state air regulators have been unable to enforce the regulation, which has allowed trucking companies and independent operators to continue adding diesel-snorting big rigs that can pollute port communities for up to a decade.

Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science.

Since the start of the year, more than 1,200 trucks have obtained new registrations to move cargo at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, according to data obtained by the Los Angeles Times. About 92% of the newly registered trucks had diesel-powered engines, which are known to emit cancer-causing particles and planet-warming carbon emissions.

The Advanced Clean Fleets rule is one of eight clean-air policies that California regulators are still waiting for the Biden administration to sign off on. Collectively, these rules were expected to prevent 11,000 premature deaths and provide $116 billion in health benefits over the next three decades, according to the American Lung Assn.

But that assumed the rules would be implemented on time.

Seven of the eight pending policies should’ve already gone into effect. The federal inaction has resulted in delays in adopting zero-emission technologies or reducing emissions for trucks, boats, trains, construction machinery and lawn equipment. And the deferred policy implementation could have national implications, as several other states have expressed interest in adopting California’s more stringent rules rather than the EPA’s.

Heading into an unpredictable election year when the presidency and both chambers of Congress are up for grabs, environmental advocates want to see these rules prioritized.

“Any further delay in the waiver process really does risk that we’re going to see more diesel trucks on the roads or working at the ports,” said Will Barrett, national senior director of clean air policy with the American Lung Assn. “We’re also going to see more gasoline-powered equipment like leaf blowers and lawnmowers when those sales should have been stopped. The transition to zero-emission technology in these sectors is delayed, and because of that, we’re concerned that we’re just going to see this equipment live on, putting out more pollution for longer than it should have.”

The EPA declined to comment on the addition of more diesel trucks at Southern California ports and the pending Advanced Clean Fleets waiver.

Environmental experts say the Biden administration has been tied up with its own jam-packed federal environmental agenda, which may have slowed the review process for California’s rules. In the past year, the EPA has approved new rules for cars, heavy-duty trucks, new coal- and gas-fired power plants and methane-leaking oil wells.

Those federal rules are expected to have little bearing in California, where state regulations are already more strict.

Due to its notoriously poor air quality, California holds the distinction as the only state that can regulate vehicle emissions, so long as it obtains permission from the EPA. The state has used these powers to adopt groundbreaking rules, such as requiring cars to be outfitted with catalytic converters and check engine lights.

“That’s the dance that’s been going on since the mid-1960s,” said Ann Carlson, a UCLA environmental law professor and former transportation czar with the Biden administration. “California leads, in part, because EPA grants its waiver. Then California pushes the rest of the country.”

Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state rulemakers touted news that the sale of new zero-emission trucks had doubled in 2023 compared with the prior year, putting the state two years ahead of its goals. This mostly resulted from the sales of thousands of medium-duty pickup trucks, such as Ford’s F-150 Lightning and Rivian’s R1 lineup.

Zero-emission big rigs remain a small fraction of sales and existing fleets serving state ports.

A tug boat makes its way through the Los Angeles Harbor against a backdrop of a ship laden with cargo containers.

All those cargo containers that come into the Port of L.A., seen here in March, have to go somewhere. For now, most will be aboard diesel-powered big rigs.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Asked about the outstanding Advanced Clean Fleets rule, state officials were optimistic the Biden administration would take action.

“We’re of course eagerly awaiting the U.S. EPA to grant our waiver, and we expect them to take action very soon,” said Steven Cliff, executive director of the California Air Resources Board.

“We’re seeing 1 in 6 new trucks sold is zero emissions,” Cliff added, “and going forward, that’s going to benefit Californians, especially those who live near ports who have been most impacted by pollution.”

Nearly 23,000 cargo trucks are registered with the Port of Los Angeles, the busiest container port in the Western Hemisphere. About 94% of those are diesel trucks, and another 5% burn natural gas. One percent are zero-emission: 271 cargo trucks are battery-electric, and nine are hydrogen fuel-cell.

The Port of Los Angeles announced last year that it had reduced diesel particulate matter by 88% since 2005, due, in part, to better controls for ships and cleaner truck engines.

The Advanced Clean Fleets rule was expected to rapidly accelerate zero-emission adoption, starting with the 2024 ban on fossil-fuel truck registrations. In the year leading up to that deadline, trucking companies went on a buying spree, according to public records.

More than 9,000 trucks obtained new registrations at both ports in 2023 — almost triple the amount registered in 2018. The vast majority of these trucks had diesel-powered engines.

The registration of diesel trucks continued into the first half of 2024. More than 1,100 diesel trucks were registered at the ports so far this year. Seventy-six electric trucks and 19 hydrogen trucks received approval to move cargo in the same time.

Many truck drivers serving the ports are independent owner-operators, running their own small businesses with their big rigs instead of working for a large company with a fleet. They have expressed concerns about the high upfront costs of purchasing electric trucks, which are significantly more expensive than diesel-powered models.

Mercer Transportation Co., an owner-operator transportation company, registered the most trucks so far in 2024, enrolling 131 diesel trucks at both ports, including several with engines over a decade old. Performance Team Freight Systems Inc., a Santa Fe Springs-based company, introduced the most zero-emission vehicles, with 23 electric trucks.

Under the fleets rule, the existing fleet of diesel and gas trucks would be allowed to visit the ports until they reached 18 years old or a maximum of 800,000 miles traveled. Trucks that exceed 800,000 miles driven can operate for only 13 years.

Agmark Transportation registered a diesel truck with an engine from the year 2000, which would not have been allowed if the EPA had granted California’s waiver.

The delayed rule would also prevent any fossil-fuel truck from moving cargo at the ports in 2035. But environmental advocates would still like to know how the state plans to offset any unintended pollution and carbon emissions resulting from late implementation.

“What we fully expect and strongly endorse is, when these waivers are signed and official, anything that has been done to increase pollution beyond what was designed in these programs really needs to be addressed quickly,” said Barrett, of the American Lung Assn. “If that’s the addition of hundreds of diesel trucks into the port drayage fleet, we would call on our state agencies to look at those and see what they can do to get those out of the fleet as quickly as possible.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Australia Targets at Least 62% Emissions Cut in the Next Decade

Australia has set a new target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by between 62% and 70% below 2005 levels by 2035

MELBOURNE, Australia (AP) — Australia on Thursday set a new target of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by between 62% and 70% below 2005 levels by 2035.Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, leader of the center-left Labor Party, will take his government’s 2035 target to the U.N. General Assembly next week.Under the Paris climate agreement signed a decade ago, nations must increase their emissions reduction targets every five years.“This is a responsible target backed by the science, backed by a practical plan to get there and built on proven technology,” Albanese told reporters.“It’s the right target to protect our environment, to protect and advance our economy and jobs and to ensure that we act in our national interest and in the interest of this and future generations,” he added.Albanese said the target was consistent with the European Union considering for themselves a reduction target range of between 63% and 70% below 1990 levels.Matt Kean, chair of the Climate Change Authority that advises the government on climate policies, said Australia’s 2035 target demonstrated a “higher ambition than most other advanced economies.”Environmental groups had argued for a reduction target exceeding 70%.But business groups had warned cuts above 70% would risk billions of dollars in exports and send companies offshore.The conservative opposition Liberal Party, which has lost the last two federal elections, is considering abandoning its own commitment to net-zero by 2050, its only reduction target.Opposition leader Sussan Ley said the 2035 target was not credible because the government would fail to meet its 2030 target.“These targets cannot be met. They are fantasy: we know, Australians know, and they’re very disappointed in this prime minister,” Ley told reporters.The government maintains Australia is on track to narrowly achieve its 2030 target.Larissa Waters, a senator leading the environmentally-focused Australian Greens, said the government’s actual target was 62%, which she described as “appallingly low.”The government was not addressing Australia’s coal and liquefied natural gas exports, which were among the world’s largest of those fossil fuels, she said.“Labor have sold out to the coal and gas corporations with this utter failure of a climate target,” Waters told the Australian Broadcasting Corp.Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry chief executive Andrew McKellar described the 2035 target as “ambitious.”“One of the biggest issues that industry faces at the moment is the costs that we incur in terms of energy. We’ve got to have a sustainable pathway forward. We’ve got to have energy security and we’ve got to have energy affordability as well,” McKellar said.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

‘It’s not just our houses’: can a Scottish village save Queen Elizabeth’s coastal path from the waves?

The people of Johnshaven have watched the sea edge closer and closer. Preserving the path is key to protecting their communityPhotographs by Murdo MacLeodWhen Charis Duthie moved to Johnshaven with her husband in 1984, she could cycle along the coastal path out of the village. Now, she meets a dead end where the sea has snatched the land and is instead greeted with a big red warning sign of what is to come: Danger Coastal Erosion.“You can see gardens that were there and now they’re gone,” she says.Johnshaven, on Scotland’s North Sea coast, will attract more visitors if it has a well maintained coastal path Continue reading...

When Charis Duthie moved to Johnshaven with her husband in 1984, she could cycle along the coastal path out of the village. Now, she meets a dead end where the sea has snatched the land and is instead greeted with a big red warning sign of what is to come: Danger Coastal Erosion.“You can see gardens that were there and now they’re gone,” she says.The north-east coast of Scotland is experiencing a rapidly worsening erosion problem that will only be exacerbated by recurrent patterns of extreme weather and rising sea levels.Johnshaven, a small village with a close-knit community of 640 people about 30 miles (48km) south of Aberdeen, is particularly exposed.The village’s paths bear the scars of coastal erosion in the form of craters in the well-trodden rock, while some, such as the one Duthie points to, have disappeared altogether. The latest was taken from the village in 2023 during one of the many extreme storms that winter.Finding a solution to the problem has taken on an urgency like never before. Three years ago came the announcement of the Platinum Jubilee Path, named in honour of Queen Elizabeth II’s 70 years on the throne. The aim is for it to start in St Cyrus, four miles south of Johnshaven, and end about 90 miles further north in Cullen, a village with close associations to Robert the Bruce.With the markets that have traditionally fuelled its economy – fishing and oil and gas – dwindling, Johnshaven wants to attract more visitors through the coastal path plans. The aim is to be part of Scotland’s Great Trails, which offers a map of named, walkable trails around Scotland. Currently, there is a gap in the map along the north-east coast between Aberdeen and Dundee, and Johnshaven sits in the middle of it.For Duthie, 71, helping to fill this gap is an increasingly daunting task. She is part of a small team called the Mearns Coastal Heritage Trail (Merchat) who work to restore and create coastal paths in Aberdeenshire. But as they work in one area, the sea snatches land away in another.“A lot of what we are trying to do is to prevent erosion with rock armour, which is really the only secure method,” she says.Rock armour, sometimes known as riprap, is made up of big boulders and rocks placed along the coastline to protect against the waves.To complete areas of the trail, Merchat has had to gain funding through grant applications. The food ingredients firm Macphie has donated £30,000, and a further £40,000 has come from Aberdeenshire council’s allocation of crown estate Scotland cash from the Coastal Communities Fund, money allocated by the government to help coastal communities “flourish and strengthen their appeal as places to live, work and visit”.Caspar Lampkin, project officer for the Aberdeenshire coastal paths on Benholm and Johnshaven community council, says further help from Aberdeenshire council is likely to be minimal. “They’ve told us that they don’t have the resources to do anything,” he says.“If small villages want anything like this to happen, it has got to be locally led, because we’re not going to get much help from the government or the local council.”Since April, Duthie, Lampkin and the Merchat team have been working to establish a way to apply for designated funding. “We have now started a charity called the North East Scotland Coastal Trust [Nescat] and we are paddling very fast to get the whole thing established and get going with it,” says Duthie.Meanwhile, another issue beyond access to the beautiful scenery is becoming increasingly urgent, says Lampkin. The community council has identified 100 houses in the village at risk of flooding from the sea in the coming years if no action is taken on erosion.If it’s a high tide, it’s stormy and there’s wind, those elements blow water in the houseWhile the focus of the team’s work is meant to be on restoring the paths, he says that any funding they get will probably need to be used on rock armour in areas that could protect housing along the path.Angie Dunsire, 74, walks no more than 10 steps from her doorstep before reaching the eroding coast.She has lived in Johnshaven for 32 years on the aptly named Beach Road. She says she gets a call from the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency every time there is a risk of flooding.As Storm Floris approached in August, they called. “You have to be careful and listen,” she says. “We had a little bit [of water] in [the house] the other day because if it’s a high tide, it’s stormy and there’s wind, those elements blow it in.”Dunsire is scared of what the North Sea is capable of. In the distance there is a reminder. Sitting only three miles from Johnshaven is Miltonhaven – or what is left of it.It is reported by Duncan Fraser, in the book Portrait of a Parish, written in the 1970s about the parish of St Cyrus, that Miltonhaven was taken by the North Sea after Robert Scott of Dunninald arrived in the village in the 1700s.“What first drew his attention was the limestone rock that stretched in a reef across the bay, like a natural breakwater guarding the little village from the angry sea,” writes Fraser.Scott was from a family that built lime kilns to produce fertiliser for fields. From about 1750 Scott removed most of this limestone rock for his business, so the story goes, leaving the village exposed.By the 1790s, Fraser wrote, the waves had taken the “entire village”, which now lies underwater 100 yards from the shore.In an effort to right some of those so easily visible wrongs from the past, the stretch of path along Johnshaven’s Beach Road will be the first focus for rock armour with any funding the community can muster. But rock armour is expensive – about £1,000 for a small truckload – so it’s likely there won’t be much left over for path building.“People say, well it’s just your houses why go to all this expense?” says Dunsire. “Well it’s not just our houses it’s the road that goes right through the village to the park and further on.“We’re supposed to be using the coastal path and extending that. What is the point if this [the land and road along the coast] goes?”A Scottish government spokesperson says it has provided local authorities with £11.7m to support coastal change adaptation, while Aberdeenshire council says its overall budget for coast protection is £75,000 and there are no plans for any new protection works in Johnshaven. It says support and advice has been given in the setting up of Nescat and that it is not aware of any issues with the part of Beach Road that is council owned.

State-Funded Gun Range in South Dakota Nearly Finished, Expected to Open in November

The South Dakota Game, Fish & Parks Department hopes to have a mostly state-funded gun range near Rapid City ready for public use in early November

PIEDMONT, S.D. (AP) — Dust plumes rose frequently along a gravel section of Elk Vale Road on the open prairie of Meade County, South Dakota in early September where workers are vigorously trying to finish a gun range that will be among the nation’s largest.Plumbers, landscapers, equipment operators and construction crews were all busy working or driving to or from the 400-acre site. The goal, according to the South Dakota Game, Fish & Parks Department, is to have the range, located about 12 miles north of Rapid City, ready for public use on Saturday, Nov. 8.Construction on the range – now known as the Pete Lien & Sons Shooting Sports Complex – has happened quickly and is going along smoothly, far different from the long, up-and-down path the project went through in the planning and funding processes.The range proposal was raised by the GFP in 2021 with strong support from former Gov. Kristi Noem. Despite opposition by some lawmakers and neighbors, it is close to completion and is creating a buzz among shooting enthusiasts across the state and region, said John Kanta, a GFP section chief.“There’s a tremendous amount of excitement among folks who want to start using it,” he said. “Some weeks we’re hearing from people daily who are super excited to get out there and start shooting or get their events scheduled.”The $20 million range will include 160 rifle, handgun and shotgun shooting bays, a tactical shooting range for shooting and moving, and a 10,000 square-foot main building that can house events, law enforcement training and firearm education, Kanta said. Some lawmakers opposed funding mechanism Almost immediately after the range proposal was announced, both support and opposition arose within the South Dakota Legislature.While some lawmakers have supported construction as a way to serve the public and potentially generate millions of dollars in annual tourism revenue, others have been bothered by the way the project has been funded.Rep. Liz May, a Republican from Kyle, opposed the use of taxpayer money to build the range. May, who serves on the Joint Committee on Appropriations, said lawmakers defeated six separate bills or funding mechanisms brought forward by range supporters.“We kept killing it, and they kept bringing it back and bringing it back,” May told News Watch. “I’ve got nothing against guns or gun ranges. But that’s just not an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars.”May was particularly bothered when Noem allocated $13.5 million in Future Fund dollars toward construction of the range in 2024.The Future Fund consists of money collected from most South Dakota businesses as part of unemployment compensation fees. The money is required to be used for “workforce development and technical assistance programs” for workers, including those who have been laid off. Grants are made by the Governor’s Office of Economic Development and do not require legislative approval.“There was opposition from landowners and lawmakers, and they basically just ignored all that and went around the process by using those Future Funds,” May said. “With the whole thing — they really stepped outside the boundaries.” Donors step in to complete project GFP officials promised that donations would help fund the construction of the gun range, and their plan has succeeded, with more than $6.3 million either donated or pledged for the project so far.According to a GFP budget document, obtained by News Watch through a public records request, more than $3 million has been donated and another $3.3 million has been pledged over the next five years by corporations, individuals and groups that support the project.About a third of the donations have come from firearm industry businesses or groups that support shooting. The top donation of $800,000 with a commitment to give another $1.2 million in the next three years came from Pete Lien & Sons, a Rapid City concrete company that is now the namesake of the range.The next largest donation of $600,000 came from South Dakota Youth Hunting Adventures, a charity group, followed by $200,000 from Scull Construction of Rapid City and $150,000 each from firearm manufacturers Smith & Wesson and Glock.Annual ongoing expenses at the range will be about $400,000 and include three full-time employees and some seasonal workers as well as upkeep, Kanta said. Those costs will be covered by permit fees paid by some users, support from government agencies that use the range for training and possibly from some federal grant funds, he said.“No general fund money will be used,” Kanta said. Some neighbor opposition remains Joe Norman and his wife, Diane, own a home and a 7,600-acre cattle ranch in Meade County with borders that extend to within close proximity of the gun range site.Norman, 69, is one of several ranchers and landowners in the area who oppose the location of the gun range. After testifying before the Legislature and opposing the range in public meetings, he is resigned to the fact the range is about to become reality.Yet Norman remains concerned about heavy traffic on gravel roads in the area, disruption of his cattle, and the noise from the repeated firing of handguns and rifles.“If they’ve got 175 shooting bays and it’s full, that’s potentially 175 shots every minute. And if they do that for 10 to 12 hours a day, I think the noise is going to be unbelievable,” Norman told News Watch. “The roads have also gone to heck with all the construction traffic.”Initially, the range was expected to have 175 shooting bays, though that number has been reduced to 160, Kanta said.Norman said he’s already heard some shooting at the site, even though the formal opening is not until November. He’s concerned that promises to keep the noise level under 64 decibels will be difficult or impossible to monitor and enforce.Noise from the range will be reduced by the natural topography of the land and by berms and baffling that will help stifle sound, Kanta said. Shooters will aim to the east and northeast where there are no structures for miles, and lead bullets will be captured and contained within federal environmental guidelines, he said.As part of an agreement with Meade County, a 3-mile section of Elk Vale Road leading to the range will also be paved in the coming months to reduce dust from vehicles.Norman said he’s disappointed that, in his opinion, the concerns of neighbors were largely ignored by the GFP, state officials and lawmakers who supported the range and were determined to find a way to get it funded and built.“We were fighting the governor, the lieutenant governor and legislators,” he said. “It feels like the GFP responses have all been smoke and mirrors.” Excitement building for new shooting option Despite its strong firearm culture, South Dakota has a fairly limited number of gun ranges. And one argument from range supporters was that more controlled shooting sites were needed to prevent gun owners from leaving messes and creating nuisances at unofficial shooting sites in the Black Hills.The GFP operates 20 public shooting sites, though most are for archery and only seven allow firearm discharges. Those that allow firearms include North Point in Lake Andes, Oahe Downstream in Fort Pierre, Louis Smith near Mobridge, Brule Bottom north of Chamberlain and South Shore in Codington County.This interactive map on the GFP website includes location and consumer information for 67 public and private shooting range sites in the state, though many have limited access or are for archery only.A few ranges are outdoors and allow easy public access, such as the Fall River Gun Club near Hot Springs and the Watertown Area Shooting Complex. A few ranges are indoors, including at Gary’s Gun Shop in Sioux Falls.The large size, wide range of shooting options and quality of amenities at the new state range will make it a destination for shooting enthusiasts across the state and nation and possibly even internationally, said Mark Blote, a co-owner of First Stop Gun & Coin in Rapid City.Blote visited the range site in early September and was impressed with the progress. Excitement over the range’s opening is palpable in the firearms community and in the local tourism industry, he said.“I think it’s going to be great for the gun folks in our area. But it’s truly a world-class facility, so it will do a lot for the economy,” Blote said. “It’s going to bring in a lot of competitions, which will help the hotels and restaurants.”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 – Sept. 2025

Montgomery Hills’ leafy neighborhoods contrast with busy Georgia Ave.

Where We Live | Five communities share the benefits and challenges of suburban life near an urban thoroughfare.

Cars stream off the Beltway onto Georgia Avenue in Silver Spring, Maryland, where traffic is inching past stoplights and attempting to turn from shopping centers, gas stations and churches. Sidewalks have no buffer with the road, but there are few pedestrians and even fewer trees or plants. Horns blare when confused drivers travel the wrong way in reversible lanes.Subscribe for unlimited access to The PostYou can cancel anytime.SubscribeBut the five leafy neighborhoods that abut either side of this mile-long stretch of Georgia Avenue belie the cacophony of traffic noise and endless concrete. And while residents prize the peaceful communities on their streets once they leave Georgia Avenue, they find it difficult to traverse the retail hub they center on.“There’s no relief from the traffic, no median, no trees. There are utility poles popping up in the middle of the sidewalk. It’s extremely inconvenient and ugly,” said Gus Bauman, who has lived in a Dutch Colonial house a few blocks to the west of Georgia Avenue for 48 years. Bauman was head of the Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission from 1989 to 1993 and is an attorney focusing on land use and related environmental issues.The commercial area of Georgia Avenue from the Beltway south to Spring Street just north of downtown Silver Spring is known as Montgomery Hills. Most of the neighborhoods that border it all start with Woodside: Woodside Forest, Woodside Park, North Woodside and Woodside itself. Linden, itself the name of a tree, is the fifth community. At one point they all carried the name Montgomery Hills as well, but as resident Geoff Gerhardt notes, “it just became too much of a mouthful to say North Woodside Montgomery Hills.” Gerhardt has lived in a 1928 Craftsman bungalow in the neighborhood since 2011. The neighborhoods were established from the 1920s through the 1950s and have a diverse range of single-family houses and some newer townhouses.“I think the heart of the issue is Montgomery Hills really being ignored for years and years. It’s that when you look at the civic associations in the residential neighborhoods surrounding it, nobody really claims that as their own,” said Michelle Foster, who lives in Woodside Park and founded the group Friends of Montgomery Hills about a decade ago.Foster, who had been an urban planner in New York City, first moved to Reston, Virginia, but felt more at home in Silver Spring, moving into her center-hall Colonial house in 1994.“The opportunity to have a single-family home but be able to be in downtown Silver Spring really easily, to be able to walk and have community resources super close by, was important,” she said. “It was really diverse, and I mean that from all perspectives, from income and race and housing styles, it kind of had it all. So I’ve always said I think this is the absolute perfect place, and I just can’t imagine living anywhere else.”However, that doesn’t mean the perfection doesn’t have problems. Foster discovered that the neighborhood elementary school, Woodlin, is across Georgia Avenue, meaning it wasn’t really walkable for her son, and inconvenient for friends he made just across the road.In addition to an Aldi grocery store and CVS, mainly small, independently owned restaurants and businesses line both sides of Georgia, including Lime & Cilantro, which opened last year and quickly claimed a spot on Post restaurant critic Tom Sietsema’s 40 best area restaurants list. But even though some businesses are just a few blocks away, many people end up driving. “And when you’re already in your car, you often decide to just leave the neighborhood altogether,” Foster notes.At the same time, transportation options in the community are a bonus, said RLAH real estate agent Cari Jordan, who lives in another Silver Spring neighborhood. “It’s a commuter’s dream, with the Beltway right there as well as the Forest Glen Metro station,” she said. The Purple Line train under construction will have a station at the far edge of the North Woodside neighborhood.But help for Georgia Avenue is in the works. Friends of Montgomery Hills primarily focuses on working with the Maryland State Highway Administration for improvements. The state’s Georgia Avenue Safety and Accessibility Project has been planned for years but has moved slowly. In fact, Bauman remembers holding meetings in his living room back in the 1970s to help sketch out ideas.The project focuses on the road from just a block north of the Beltway by the Forest Glen Metro station down to 16th Street, a stretch of about three-quarters of a mile that carries about 71,500 vehicles a day. Improvements now in the works call for removing the center reversible lane, replacing it with a landscaped median and new left turn lanes. A two-way bike lane will be added to the west side of Georgia, continuing onto 16th Street to the end of the neighborhood at Second Avenue. The Beltway exit and entrance areas on Georgia Avenue will be improved, and new or upgraded sidewalks on both sides of Georgia will be added, as well as a pedestrian crossing with a signal.As a first step, the State Highway Administration is now working on relocating utility poles. A Shell gas station was demolished, and the Montgomery Hills car wash, which operated for 51 years, was closed in March and will be removed to make way for planned improvements. Actual road construction is expected to begin in 2028.“The partnership with the community has been critical to moving this project forward, and we look forward to coming back to celebrate its completion,” State Highway Administrator Will Pines said during a Sept. 4 event held on Georgia Avene to announce full funding of the project. The draft fiscal year 2026-2031 transportation budget allocates $50.8 million for the project.While having the project move ahead is a win, coalescing the community is also an accomplishment, said Gerhardt. He is also vice president of Friends of Montgomery Hills and helps coordinate the community’s Street Fest every one to two years, which draws more than 1,000 residents. The event includes tables for community organizations, food from local restaurants, and remarks by area elected officials. The next Street Fest will take place in spring 2026.“It’s a fun event. It’s placemaking, but for us it’s also an important advocacy function,” he said.For Bauman, Snider’s, the independent grocery store that has been in Montgomery Hills since 1946, proximity to the Metro and tree-lined streets with diverse housing are all important attributes to the community.“I have found over the half-century I’ve been here, people say to me, ‘Aren’t you going to move to Bethesda or Potomac?’ I say: ‘Why would I do that? It’s so easy living here.’ What people do here, they don’t move. They just build additions.”Home sales: From Sept. 1, 2024, to Sept. 1, 2025, 60 houses sold, ranging from a three-bedroom, three-bathroom home that needed extensive renovation for $465,000 to a five-bedroom, four-bathroom Colonial built in 1900 on nearly one acre for $1.65 million. Four houses are now on the market, ranging from a three-bedroom, two-bathroom rambler for $711,000 to a five-bedroom, three-bath split level for $1.115 million.Schools: Woodlin Elementary, Sligo Middle, Einstein High School (part of the Downcounty Consortium)Parks: Montgomery Hills Neighborhood Park with basketball and tennis courts and a playground; Woodside Urban Park with a playground, skateboard area and indoor handball and volleyball courts; Sligo Creek Park, which forms the eastern border of the community.

120 Land and Environmental Defenders Killed or Disappeared in Latin America Last Year, Report Finds

A report by Global Witness reveals that at least 146 land and environmental defenders have been killed or gone missing worldwide in 2024

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — At least 146 land and environmental defenders were killed or have gone missing around the world in 2024, with more than 80% of those cases in Latin America, according to a report released Wednesday by watchdog group Global Witness.The London-based organization said the region once again ranked as the most dangerous for people protecting their homes, communities and natural resources, recording 120 of the total cases. Colombia remained the deadliest country, with 48 killings — nearly a third of cases worldwide — followed by Guatemala with 20 and Mexico with 18. The number of killings in Guatemala jumped fivefold from four in 2023, making it the country with the highest per capita rate of defender deaths in the world. Brazil registered 12 killings, while Honduras, Chile and Mexico each recorded one disappearance.“There are many factors that contribute to the persistent high levels of violence in Latin American countries, particularly Colombia,” Laura Furones, lead researcher of the report, told The Associated Press. “These countries are rich in natural resources and have vast areas of land under pressure for food and feed production. Conflict over the extraction of such resources and over the use of such land often leads to violence against defenders trying to uphold their rights.”Since 2012, Global Witness has documented more than 2,250 killings and disappearances of land and environmental defenders worldwide. Nearly three-quarters occurred in Latin America, including close to 1,000 cases since 2018, when the region adopted the Escazu Agreement — a treaty designed to protect environmental defenders. The pact requires governments to guarantee access to environmental information, ensure public participation in environmental decision-making and take timely measures to prevent and punish attacks against those who defend the environment.“The Escazu Agreement provides a crucial tool for Latin America and the Caribbean,” said Furones. “But some countries have still not ratified it, and others that have are proving slow to implement and resource it properly. Stopping violence against defenders will not happen overnight, but governments must ramp up their efforts toward full implementation.”The report noted that Indigenous peoples bore a disproportionate share of the violence. They accounted for around one-third of all lethal attacks worldwide last year despite making up only about 6% of the global population. Ninety-four percent of all attacks on Indigenous defenders documented in the report occurred in Latin America. In Colombia’s southwestern Cauca region, Indigenous youth are working to ensure they will not be the next generation of victims. Through community “semilleros,” or seedbeds, children and teenagers train in environmental care, cultural traditions and territorial defense — preparing to take on leadership roles in protecting land that has come under pressure from armed groups and extractive industries. “We are defenders because our lives and territories are under threat,” said Yeing Aníbal Secué, a 17-year-old Indigenous youth leader from Toribio, Cauca, who spoke to AP in July. These initiatives show how communities are organizing at the grassroots to resist violence, even as Colombia remains the deadliest country for defenders.Small-scale farmers were also heavily targeted, making up 35% of the victims in the region. Most killings were tied to land disputes, and many were linked to industries such as mining, logging and agribusiness. Organized crime groups were suspected of being behind at least 42 cases, followed by private security forces and hired hitmen. Colombia one of the worst hit The Amazonian department of Putumayo in southern Colombia illustrates many of the risks faced by defenders. With its strategic location bridging the Andes and the Amazon, the region is rich in forests, rivers and cultural knowledge. But it also sits at the crossroads of armed conflict, extractive projects and illicit economies. Armed groups have long used the Putumayo River as a trafficking route toward Brazil and Ecuador, where weak controls make it easier to move cocaine, minerals and laundered money.An environmental defender there, who asked to remain anonymous out of fear of reprisals, told AP this has created one of the most hostile climates in the country.“Defending rights here means living under permanent threat,” the source said. “We face pressure from illegal mining, oil projects tied to armed groups, deforestation and coca cultivation. Speaking out often makes you a military target.”Andrew Miller of the nonprofit Amazon Watch said transnational criminal networks involved in drug, gold and timber trafficking have become a major force behind threats — and often deadly attacks — against environmental defenders.“The security situation for defenders across the Amazon is increasingly precarious,” Miller said.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

Suggested Viewing

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.