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.

How Rapa Nui Lost a Tree, Only to Have It Sprout Up Elsewhere

News Feed
Tuesday, March 26, 2024

The tree that goes by toromiro has been a fragile expat for more than a half-century. Little Sophora toromiro, is far from home, no longer present on Rapa Nui, the Pacific island where it evolved. Also known as Easter Island, or Isla de Pascua in Spanish, Rapa Nui is a speck of land in the Pacific, 2,200 miles from the west coast of Chile. The tiny island encompasses just 63 square miles, and it is quite flat, with a maximum elevation of less than 1,700 feet. The last date of the toromiro’s tenure on Rapa Nui is uncertain. Some accounts say it went extinct in the wild in 1960. Others say that it was gone by 1962, when Karl Schanz, a German meteorologist, clambered down to see the tree in the crater where it had last been spotted, and it was gone. Was it removed? Did it die, tip over and return to the earth? We will never know. Although the toromiro is gone from Rapa Nui, it survives elsewhere through luck—and pluck. Over the past century, the intermittent collecting of the toromiro’s seeds and their replanting in mainland locations have given the species purchase elsewhere. Each tree is a member of a small diaspora, with only a handful surviving in about a dozen different public and private botanical gardens around the world. This is a story of survival, persistence and, perhaps in some ways, dumb luck—a tree in decline that was rescued and whose seeds were sent to other places. Mention Easter Island to almost anyone, and if they’ve heard of it, they’ve likely heard of its statues. Imprinted in the popular imagination are its enigmatic, massive stone sculptures, or moai. Curious investigators have speculated for more than two centuries about how more than 900 of these mysterious statues—the largest being more than 30 feet tall and weighing over 80 tons—might have been moved to locations around the island, traveling miles from the site where they were quarried. The toromiro, though, is an invisible tree on the island, its story known to very few, and its existence marked more by its absence than its presence. The tree does have many close relatives. The Sophora genus is speciose, as biologists say—a crowded taxon consisting of some 60 different species, including a dozen closely related oceanic ones scattered across the Pacific. The toromiro is more of a shrub than a tree, and none of its close relatives is large—at least from descriptions recorded over the past century. The northernmost outpost for the Sophora genus is in Hawaiʻi, where Sophora chrysophylla is the primary food source for the palila, a critically endangered honeycreeper. Without S. chrysophylla, known as mamane in Hawaiian, the palila would not have survived the last century as its range dwindled. The subterranean pollen record reveals that the toromiro was abundant across much of Rapa Nui, where many other now-extinct plants also thrived. Paleobotanical evidence shows that the tree’s presence on the island dates back at least 35,000 years. Its seeds are both buoyant and salt-resistant, and they probably first arrived by water, floating onto the island, probably from another Pacific island, and then it did what species do: continued its evolutionary journey in a new place to become the tree we know today. But even before the toromiro disappeared from the island, it had been without a lot of endemic companions. Fewer than 30 indigenous seed-bearing plant species have survived on Rapa Nui to the present day, and weeds, along with naturalized, cultivated shrubs, are now the main plants growing there. The toromiro did not disappear precipitously but experienced a protracted decline. Humans arrived in Rapa Nui around the 12th century, probably not long after Polynesians reached the Hawaiian archipelago. Some hundreds of years after humans’ arrival, the island experienced a painful drop in biodiversity, and its carrying capacity plummeted as the native palm forests disappeared, replaced by grasslands. Food grew scarce, and occupants fled, thinning down to around 100 Rapa Nui at one point in the 19th century. In his deterministic 2005 book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, Jared Diamond claimed the occupants were lousy land managers. His analysis of why Rapa Nui became denuded of its plant life is now out of date, as later studies have revealed the island’s complexities. To sketch the story of the weakening grip of native plant life on Rapa Nui as a predictable story of human arrogance intersecting with a small, remote and evolutionarily vulnerable spit of land is tempting, but the tale is more nuanced than that. Natives there recorded centuries-old histories of careful but intermittent conservation strategies. Some scholars have asserted that the Little Ice Age stressed resources on the island between the 16th and 19th centuries, leading to the disappearance of palms and other important contributors to the islanders’ activities and well-being. Others have pointed to prolonged droughts, while still others have continued to argue that humans were highly complicit in the island’s declining biodiversity. Were groves of palm trees decimated to create systems for rolling the giant stone carvings from quarry to coastline, where most of them have sat for many hundreds of years? Perhaps. However the palms disappeared, their loss seems to have been a factor in the tumbling downturn of the island’s other trees, including the toromiro. The palms had made up the great majority of Rapa Nui’s tree cover, some 16 million trees that blanketed about 70 percent of the island. Some controversy remains about what particular species of palm flourished, but many believe it was Paschalococos disperta, the Rapa Nui palm. Jaime Espejo, a Chilean botanist who’s written extensively about the toromiro, noted that it probably lived in the undergrowth of the palm, lodged in an ancient ecosystem that no longer exists. Paleobotanists and archaeologists studying the island spotted the widespread loss of the palms in their investigations. At the same time, they found that the number of fish bones found in waste middens around the island dropped as fishing boats could no longer be constructed in large numbers from trees. The loss of access to fish must have been a devastating turn, because the human residents’ main proteins came from the sea. Soil erosion, likely exacerbated by deforestation and agriculture, led to further losses of the tree. Hooved animals, arriving with European explorers in the 18th century, were also certain culprits in the toromiro’s decline and disappearance. In Hawaiʻi, sheep consume that archipelago’s species of Sophora. Another creature implicated in the destruction of much of both Rapa Nui’s and Hawaiʻi’s plant life was the Polynesian rat (Rattus exulans), as well as the bigger ship rat (Rattus rattus) and Norwegian rat (Rattus norvegicus). These rats, landing on new island homes and able to reproduce quickly, found abundant food in the form of native seeds, plants and invertebrates—and no predators. They laid waste to plant life with shocking speed. An aerial view of a toromiro in Barcelona, Spain Daderot via Wikimedia CC0 Early European accounts and pollen records tell us that by about 1600, forests in the island’s craters had disappeared, and, with that, the toromiro declined into long-term scarcity and then extirpation. The New Zealand anthropologist Steven Fischer has noted that the last forest was probably cut for firewood around 1640, making wood the most valuable commodity on the island. Driftwood became precious. So scarce was wood, Fischer observes, that the pan-Polynesian word rakau, meaning “tree,” “timber” or “wood,” came to mean “riches” or “wealth” in the old Rapa Nui language—a meaning not present in any other use of the word elsewhere in Polynesia, including in Tahiti, Tonga, Hawaiʻi and New Zealand. It’s ironic that after the deforestation of the island’s trees, new linguistic meanings sprouted out of the island’s impending botanical doom. Amid these centuries-long difficulties, but long before the toromiro disappeared, a wood-based culture thrived. The Rapa Nui had a particular passion for carving; beyond their giant stone statues, they favored the toromiro for its durable and fine-grained wood and reddish hue. Although primarily used for ritual objects, the toromiro was also serviceable for building material in houses, household utensils, statuettes and paddles. These artifacts survive in museums around the world. Some of them are hundreds of years old, and they might provide unexpected addenda to our understandings of the tree’s deeper history, offered up through dendrochronological analysis. Studying the annual growth rings in the wood could provide details we lack: the pace of growth of the wood, environmental pressures acting on the tree, its ultimate size and many of the other clues revealed through laboratory work with wood specimens. Part of our lack of knowledge about the tree’s wood is because it has always been uncommon on the island, at least since Western contact. Rapa Nui came with inherent geographic disadvantages for plant survival, including few sheltered habitats with steep hillsides or deep ravines in which toromiro could remain hidden away from humans. The three volcanic craters on the island are the only such hiding places. In 1911, the Chilean botanist Francisco Fuentes noted that the toromiro was rare, only to be found in Rano Kau, the largest of the craters. The Swedish botanist Carl Skottsberg, who also worked on Hawaiian flora, visited Rano Kau in 1917 and found only a single specimen. A compelling global exploration of nature and survival as seen through a dozen species of trees. The final contact with the tree on its native soil occurred when the Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl collected seeds from the last surviving example. This was likely the same tree that Skottsberg had found in the shelter of Rano Kau. The egg-shaped crater is about a mile across and has its own microclimate, largely out of the winds and weather, and protected from grazing ungulates by a rock formation. Foot traffic remained down in the last century, as little else lives in the crater that can be harvested or cut down. Innumerable swampy pockets of water make the area difficult to traverse. A beautiful, multicolored, shallow lake of open water and floating mats of peat cover much of the bottom of the crater. There, the tiny toromiro held on. Heyerdahl, who had already been traveling around the Pacific Ocean in the 1940s, became famous, or infamous, for floating a radical new theory: that the islands in the Pacific had been populated initially by American Indians from the mainland of South America, rather than by people from Asia or from other Polynesian islands. In 1947, he launched an expedition with a primitive raft named Kon-Tiki and made a 5,000-mile journey, heading west from Peru. What’s often lost in the voluminous writings about Heyerdahl and his oceanfaring obsessions was his interest in Rapa Nui. Björn Aldén, a Swedish botanist with the Gothenburg Botanical Garden, became friends with Heyerdahl and has worked to return the toromiro to its native land. In a letter to Björn, Heyerdahl decried the “tankelöse treskjaerere,” or “thoughtless woodcutters.” He noted how good it felt to have helped to save the species by collecting a handful of seeds that hung from the tree’s sole remaining branch. Heyerdahl couldn’t recount the exact date, or even the year, but thought it was sometime in late 1955 or early 1956. Heyerdahl handed the seeds off to paleobotanist Olaf Selling in Stockholm. They went to Gothenburg from there. Locals have a strain of national pride in Gothenburg for their role in the tree’s cultivation and survival. But recently, researchers in Chile discovered that another botanist preceded Heyerdahl in getting seeds off the island. Efraín Volosky Yadlin, an Argentinian-born immigrant, participated in the first agronomic studies on Rapa Nui. Sent there by the Chilean Ministry of Agriculture in the early 1950s, Volosky Yadlin collected seeds, apparently from the same tree that Heyerdahl would come upon a few years later, and proceeded to carry out his own propagation tests on the toromiro. Now the tree remains far afield, surviving in about a dozen locations around the world, mostly in botanical gardens including in Chile, in London and in southern France. Ultimately, researchers want to return the toromiro to Rapa Nui. But the tree still confronts challenges to surviving on its native ground, including a lack of genetic diversity and degraded soil on Rapa Nui. Past efforts to reestablish the tree have failed, but botanists are doing their best to overcome these hurdles. More studies will help researchers understand just what it will take to help the tree take root back on Rapa Nui and successfully end a long and difficult voyage. Excerpted from Twelve Trees: The Deep Roots of Our Future by Daniel Lewis. Published by Avid Reader Press / Simon & Schuster. Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. Get the latest Science stories in your inbox. A Note to our Readers Smithsonian magazine participates in affiliate link advertising programs. If you purchase an item through these links, we receive a commission.

Before the toromiro disappeared from the island, at least two men grabbed seeds from the last remaining plant and brought them home

The tree that goes by toromiro has been a fragile expat for more than a half-century. Little Sophora toromiro, is far from home, no longer present on Rapa Nui, the Pacific island where it evolved. Also known as Easter Island, or Isla de Pascua in Spanish, Rapa Nui is a speck of land in the Pacific, 2,200 miles from the west coast of Chile. The tiny island encompasses just 63 square miles, and it is quite flat, with a maximum elevation of less than 1,700 feet.

The last date of the toromiro’s tenure on Rapa Nui is uncertain. Some accounts say it went extinct in the wild in 1960. Others say that it was gone by 1962, when Karl Schanz, a German meteorologist, clambered down to see the tree in the crater where it had last been spotted, and it was gone. Was it removed? Did it die, tip over and return to the earth? We will never know. Although the toromiro is gone from Rapa Nui, it survives elsewhere through luck—and pluck. Over the past century, the intermittent collecting of the toromiro’s seeds and their replanting in mainland locations have given the species purchase elsewhere. Each tree is a member of a small diaspora, with only a handful surviving in about a dozen different public and private botanical gardens around the world. This is a story of survival, persistence and, perhaps in some ways, dumb luck—a tree in decline that was rescued and whose seeds were sent to other places.


Mention Easter Island to almost anyone, and if they’ve heard of it, they’ve likely heard of its statues. Imprinted in the popular imagination are its enigmatic, massive stone sculptures, or moai. Curious investigators have speculated for more than two centuries about how more than 900 of these mysterious statues—the largest being more than 30 feet tall and weighing over 80 tons—might have been moved to locations around the island, traveling miles from the site where they were quarried. The toromiro, though, is an invisible tree on the island, its story known to very few, and its existence marked more by its absence than its presence.

The tree does have many close relatives. The Sophora genus is speciose, as biologists say—a crowded taxon consisting of some 60 different species, including a dozen closely related oceanic ones scattered across the Pacific. The toromiro is more of a shrub than a tree, and none of its close relatives is large—at least from descriptions recorded over the past century. The northernmost outpost for the Sophora genus is in Hawaiʻi, where Sophora chrysophylla is the primary food source for the palila, a critically endangered honeycreeper. Without S. chrysophylla, known as mamane in Hawaiian, the palila would not have survived the last century as its range dwindled.

The subterranean pollen record reveals that the toromiro was abundant across much of Rapa Nui, where many other now-extinct plants also thrived. Paleobotanical evidence shows that the tree’s presence on the island dates back at least 35,000 years. Its seeds are both buoyant and salt-resistant, and they probably first arrived by water, floating onto the island, probably from another Pacific island, and then it did what species do: continued its evolutionary journey in a new place to become the tree we know today. But even before the toromiro disappeared from the island, it had been without a lot of endemic companions. Fewer than 30 indigenous seed-bearing plant species have survived on Rapa Nui to the present day, and weeds, along with naturalized, cultivated shrubs, are now the main plants growing there.

The toromiro did not disappear precipitously but experienced a protracted decline. Humans arrived in Rapa Nui around the 12th century, probably not long after Polynesians reached the Hawaiian archipelago. Some hundreds of years after humans’ arrival, the island experienced a painful drop in biodiversity, and its carrying capacity plummeted as the native palm forests disappeared, replaced by grasslands. Food grew scarce, and occupants fled, thinning down to around 100 Rapa Nui at one point in the 19th century. In his deterministic 2005 book Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed, Jared Diamond claimed the occupants were lousy land managers. His analysis of why Rapa Nui became denuded of its plant life is now out of date, as later studies have revealed the island’s complexities. To sketch the story of the weakening grip of native plant life on Rapa Nui as a predictable story of human arrogance intersecting with a small, remote and evolutionarily vulnerable spit of land is tempting, but the tale is more nuanced than that. Natives there recorded centuries-old histories of careful but intermittent conservation strategies. Some scholars have asserted that the Little Ice Age stressed resources on the island between the 16th and 19th centuries, leading to the disappearance of palms and other important contributors to the islanders’ activities and well-being. Others have pointed to prolonged droughts, while still others have continued to argue that humans were highly complicit in the island’s declining biodiversity. Were groves of palm trees decimated to create systems for rolling the giant stone carvings from quarry to coastline, where most of them have sat for many hundreds of years? Perhaps.

However the palms disappeared, their loss seems to have been a factor in the tumbling downturn of the island’s other trees, including the toromiro. The palms had made up the great majority of Rapa Nui’s tree cover, some 16 million trees that blanketed about 70 percent of the island. Some controversy remains about what particular species of palm flourished, but many believe it was Paschalococos disperta, the Rapa Nui palm. Jaime Espejo, a Chilean botanist who’s written extensively about the toromiro, noted that it probably lived in the undergrowth of the palm, lodged in an ancient ecosystem that no longer exists. Paleobotanists and archaeologists studying the island spotted the widespread loss of the palms in their investigations. At the same time, they found that the number of fish bones found in waste middens around the island dropped as fishing boats could no longer be constructed in large numbers from trees. The loss of access to fish must have been a devastating turn, because the human residents’ main proteins came from the sea.

Soil erosion, likely exacerbated by deforestation and agriculture, led to further losses of the tree. Hooved animals, arriving with European explorers in the 18th century, were also certain culprits in the toromiro’s decline and disappearance. In Hawaiʻi, sheep consume that archipelago’s species of Sophora. Another creature implicated in the destruction of much of both Rapa Nui’s and Hawaiʻi’s plant life was the Polynesian rat (Rattus exulans), as well as the bigger ship rat (Rattus rattus) and Norwegian rat (Rattus norvegicus). These rats, landing on new island homes and able to reproduce quickly, found abundant food in the form of native seeds, plants and invertebrates—and no predators. They laid waste to plant life with shocking speed.

Aerial of Sophora Toromiro
An aerial view of a toromiro in Barcelona, Spain Daderot via Wikimedia CC0

Early European accounts and pollen records tell us that by about 1600, forests in the island’s craters had disappeared, and, with that, the toromiro declined into long-term scarcity and then extirpation. The New Zealand anthropologist Steven Fischer has noted that the last forest was probably cut for firewood around 1640, making wood the most valuable commodity on the island. Driftwood became precious. So scarce was wood, Fischer observes, that the pan-Polynesian word rakau, meaning “tree,” “timber” or “wood,” came to mean “riches” or “wealth” in the old Rapa Nui language—a meaning not present in any other use of the word elsewhere in Polynesia, including in Tahiti, Tonga, Hawaiʻi and New Zealand. It’s ironic that after the deforestation of the island’s trees, new linguistic meanings sprouted out of the island’s impending botanical doom.

Amid these centuries-long difficulties, but long before the toromiro disappeared, a wood-based culture thrived. The Rapa Nui had a particular passion for carving; beyond their giant stone statues, they favored the toromiro for its durable and fine-grained wood and reddish hue. Although primarily used for ritual objects, the toromiro was also serviceable for building material in houses, household utensils, statuettes and paddles. These artifacts survive in museums around the world. Some of them are hundreds of years old, and they might provide unexpected addenda to our understandings of the tree’s deeper history, offered up through dendrochronological analysis. Studying the annual growth rings in the wood could provide details we lack: the pace of growth of the wood, environmental pressures acting on the tree, its ultimate size and many of the other clues revealed through laboratory work with wood specimens.

Part of our lack of knowledge about the tree’s wood is because it has always been uncommon on the island, at least since Western contact. Rapa Nui came with inherent geographic disadvantages for plant survival, including few sheltered habitats with steep hillsides or deep ravines in which toromiro could remain hidden away from humans. The three volcanic craters on the island are the only such hiding places. In 1911, the Chilean botanist Francisco Fuentes noted that the toromiro was rare, only to be found in Rano Kau, the largest of the craters. The Swedish botanist Carl Skottsberg, who also worked on Hawaiian flora, visited Rano Kau in 1917 and found only a single specimen.

A compelling global exploration of nature and survival as seen through a dozen species of trees.

The final contact with the tree on its native soil occurred when the Norwegian explorer Thor Heyerdahl collected seeds from the last surviving example. This was likely the same tree that Skottsberg had found in the shelter of Rano Kau. The egg-shaped crater is about a mile across and has its own microclimate, largely out of the winds and weather, and protected from grazing ungulates by a rock formation. Foot traffic remained down in the last century, as little else lives in the crater that can be harvested or cut down. Innumerable swampy pockets of water make the area difficult to traverse. A beautiful, multicolored, shallow lake of open water and floating mats of peat cover much of the bottom of the crater. There, the tiny toromiro held on.

Heyerdahl, who had already been traveling around the Pacific Ocean in the 1940s, became famous, or infamous, for floating a radical new theory: that the islands in the Pacific had been populated initially by American Indians from the mainland of South America, rather than by people from Asia or from other Polynesian islands. In 1947, he launched an expedition with a primitive raft named Kon-Tiki and made a 5,000-mile journey, heading west from Peru.

What’s often lost in the voluminous writings about Heyerdahl and his oceanfaring obsessions was his interest in Rapa Nui. Björn Aldén, a Swedish botanist with the Gothenburg Botanical Garden, became friends with Heyerdahl and has worked to return the toromiro to its native land. In a letter to Björn, Heyerdahl decried the “tankelöse treskjaerere,” or “thoughtless woodcutters.” He noted how good it felt to have helped to save the species by collecting a handful of seeds that hung from the tree’s sole remaining branch. Heyerdahl couldn’t recount the exact date, or even the year, but thought it was sometime in late 1955 or early 1956. Heyerdahl handed the seeds off to paleobotanist Olaf Selling in Stockholm. They went to Gothenburg from there.

Locals have a strain of national pride in Gothenburg for their role in the tree’s cultivation and survival. But recently, researchers in Chile discovered that another botanist preceded Heyerdahl in getting seeds off the island. Efraín Volosky Yadlin, an Argentinian-born immigrant, participated in the first agronomic studies on Rapa Nui. Sent there by the Chilean Ministry of Agriculture in the early 1950s, Volosky Yadlin collected seeds, apparently from the same tree that Heyerdahl would come upon a few years later, and proceeded to carry out his own propagation tests on the toromiro.

Now the tree remains far afield, surviving in about a dozen locations around the world, mostly in botanical gardens including in Chile, in London and in southern France. Ultimately, researchers want to return the toromiro to Rapa Nui. But the tree still confronts challenges to surviving on its native ground, including a lack of genetic diversity and degraded soil on Rapa Nui. Past efforts to reestablish the tree have failed, but botanists are doing their best to overcome these hurdles. More studies will help researchers understand just what it will take to help the tree take root back on Rapa Nui and successfully end a long and difficult voyage.

Excerpted from Twelve Trees: The Deep Roots of Our Future by Daniel Lewis. Published by Avid Reader Press / Simon & Schuster. Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved.

Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

A Note to our Readers
Smithsonian magazine participates in affiliate link advertising programs. If you purchase an item through these links, we receive a commission.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Nicoya’s Bicentennial: 200 Years of Costa Rican Unity Celebrated

As a Costa Rican historian reflecting on the bicentennial of Nicoya’s annexation, I am struck by the profound impact this event has had on our nation’s trajectory. The voluntary decision made by the people of Nicoya to join Costa Rica on July 25, 1824, stands as a testament to the power of self-determination and the […] The post Nicoya’s Bicentennial: 200 Years of Costa Rican Unity Celebrated appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

As a Costa Rican historian reflecting on the bicentennial of Nicoya’s annexation, I am struck by the profound impact this event has had on our nation’s trajectory. The voluntary decision made by the people of Nicoya to join Costa Rica on July 25, 1824, stands as a testament to the power of self-determination and the complex interplay of cultural, economic, and political forces that shape a nation’s destiny. The Historical Context and Decision of 1824 To truly appreciate the significance of Nicoya’s annexation, we must first understand the historical context in which this decision was made. In the early 19th century, Central America was undergoing a period of significant political upheaval. The dissolution of the Federal Republic of Central America left many regions, including Nicoya, in a state of uncertainty regarding their political future. The Nicoya Peninsula, which had historically been part of the Partido de Nicoya under Nicaraguan administration, found itself at a crossroads. The region’s geographical proximity to Costa Rica, coupled with growing economic ties and cultural affinities, led its inhabitants to consider a bold move: voluntary annexation to Costa Rica. On that fateful day in July 1824, the Cabildo (town council) of Nicoya, representing the will of its people, made the historic decision to join Costa Rica. This act, known as the “Annexation of the Party of Nicoya,” was not merely a political maneuver but a reflection of the people’s aspirations and their assessment of where their future prosperity lay. It’s important to note that this decision was not without controversy. Nicaragua, understandably, opposed the move and continued to claim the territory for many years. However, the principle of uti possidetis juris, which was widely accepted in Latin America at the time, supported Costa Rica’s claim based on the people’s expressed will. The annexation was officially recognized by the Federal Congress of Central America on December 9, 1825, further legitimizing Costa Rica’s sovereignty over the region. This recognition was crucial in solidifying the annexation and paving the way for Nicoya’s integration into Costa Rican society. The Immediate Aftermath and Integration Challenges The years following the annexation were marked by both excitement and challenges. For Costa Rica, the addition of Nicoya represented a significant expansion of its territory and resources. The peninsula brought with it vast tracts of fertile land, extensive coastlines, and a population with its own unique cultural heritage. However, integrating Nicoya into the Costa Rican state was not without its difficulties. The region’s distance from the central valley, where most of Costa Rica’s population and political power was concentrated, posed logistical and administrative challenges. Efforts to extend government services, establish educational institutions, and develop infrastructure in the newly acquired territory required substantial investment and political will. Moreover, the cultural differences between the people of Nicoya and those of central Costa Rica necessitated a period of mutual adaptation. The Nicoyan people brought with them traditions, dialects, and customs that enriched Costa Rica’s cultural tapestry but also required sensitive handling to ensure harmonious integration. Long-term Impact on Costa Rica’s Development As we look back over the past two centuries, it becomes clear that the annexation of Nicoya has had a profound and lasting impact on Costa Rica’s development in numerous ways. Economic Contributions Economically, the Nicoya Peninsula has been a significant contributor to Costa Rica’s growth. In the 19th and early 20th centuries, the region became known for its cattle ranching, with vast haciendas driving the local economy. The fertile plains of what is now Guanacaste province became crucial for agriculture, particularly for crops like rice, sugarcane, and tropical fruits. In more recent decades, the beautiful beaches and rich biodiversity of the Nicoya Peninsula have made it a cornerstone of Costa Rica’s booming tourism industry. Destinations like Tamarindo, Nosara, and Santa Teresa have become internationally renowned, attracting visitors from around the world and contributing significantly to the national economy. Cultural Enrichment Culturally, the integration of Nicoya has added depth and diversity to Costa Rican identity. The region’s strong indigenous heritage, blended with colonial Spanish influences, has given rise to unique traditions that are now celebrated as integral parts of Costa Rican culture. From the distinctive musical styles and dances to culinary traditions and local handicrafts, the cultural contributions of Nicoya have become sources of national pride. The sabanero (cowboy) culture of Guanacaste, for instance, with its distinctive dress, music, and lifestyle, has become an iconic representation of Costa Rican heritage. Annual celebrations like the Annexation Day festivities in Nicoya showcase these cultural elements, reminding all Costa Ricans of the rich legacy brought by this historical union. Political and Social Implications Politically, the annexation of Nicoya has had lasting implications for Costa Rica. It significantly expanded the country’s territory, altering its geopolitical position in Central America. The additional coastline not only provided economic opportunities but also increased Costa Rica’s strategic importance in the region. The integration of Nicoya’s population into the Costa Rican political system has also influenced national politics over the years. Leaders from the region have risen to prominence in Costa Rican politics, bringing with them perspectives shaped by their unique historical and cultural background. Socially, the annexation has contributed to Costa Rica’s reputation as a nation built on peaceful decision-making and democratic values. The voluntary nature of Nicoya’s joining Costa Rica has become a point of pride, often cited as an example of the country’s commitment to self-determination and peaceful resolution of territorial matters. Challenges and Controversies While the annexation of Nicoya is generally celebrated in Costa Rica, it’s important for us as historians to acknowledge that it has not been without its challenges and controversies. The historical dispute with Nicaragua over the territory lingered for many years, occasionally straining diplomatic relations between the two countries. While the issue is considered settled today, it serves as a reminder of the complex nature of territorial changes in the post-colonial era. Within Costa Rica, there have been occasional tensions related to the distribution of resources and political attention between the central valley and the more distant Guanacaste province. Some critics have argued that the region, despite its economic contributions, has not always received its fair share of government investment and development focus. Additionally, the rapid development of coastal areas for tourism in recent decades has raised concerns about environmental preservation and the maintenance of local cultural identities. Balancing economic development with cultural and environmental conservation remains an ongoing challenge. Celebrating Two Centuries of Integration As we mark the bicentennial of Nicoya’s annexation in 2024, Costa Rica is engaged in a nationwide celebration of this historic event. The anniversary serves multiple purposes: honoring the wisdom of those who made the decision two centuries ago, celebrating the contributions of the region to our national identity, and reflecting on the journey of integration that has unfolded over the past 200 years. Festivities are taking place across the country, with particular emphasis in Guanacaste province. Cultural events, parades, academic symposiums, and official ceremonies are being organized to commemorate this significant milestone. These celebrations not only honor the past but also provide an opportunity for Costa Ricans to reflect on the nation’s multicultural heritage and reaffirm the bonds that unite different regions of the country. The bicentennial also offers a moment for national introspection. It prompts us to consider how we can continue to strengthen national unity while respecting and preserving regional identities. It challenges us to address ongoing disparities in development and opportunity between different parts of the country. Looking to the Future As we reflect on two centuries of unity, we must also look to the future. The story of Nicoya’s annexation and integration into Costa Rica holds valuable lessons for our nation as we face the challenges of the 21st century. It reminds us of the importance of inclusive decision-making, the strength that comes from diversity, and the need for continuous effort to maintain national unity. It challenges us to ensure that the benefits of development are shared equitably across all regions of the country. Moreover, as Costa Rica continues to play a role on the international stage, the history of Nicoya’s peaceful annexation serves as a powerful example of how territorial issues can be resolved through democratic means and mutual agreement. The annexation of Nicoya 200 years ago was more than a mere expansion of territory. It was a decision that profoundly shaped the Costa Rica we know today – geographically, economically, culturally, and politically. As we celebrate this bicentennial, we honor not just a historical event, but two centuries of shared history, challenges overcome, and a collective identity forged. The legacy of this decision continues to influence our nation, reminding us of the power of unity and the enduring strength of democratic choices in shaping a nation’s destiny. The post Nicoya’s Bicentennial: 200 Years of Costa Rican Unity Celebrated appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Farmworkers Push Kroger’s Shareholders for Heat and Labor Protections

Farmworkers took this a step further at Kroger’s annual shareholder meeting in late June, directing their plea for stronger human rights to the major financiers whose dividends depend on the under-recognized labor of farmworkers. They called upon the company’s shareholders—whose top investors are Vanguard, BlackRock, and Berkshire Hathaway—to support a proposal that Kroger publish a […] The post Farmworkers Push Kroger’s Shareholders for Heat and Labor Protections appeared first on Civil Eats.

For years, U.S. farmworkers have been pressuring Kroger, the nation’s largest supermarket, to come to the table to establish stronger labor protections on the farms supplying its fruits and vegetables. Specifically, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers (CIW), a worker rights organization in Florida, has repeatedly asked Kroger to join its Fair Food Program, which has implemented the strongest heat protections in the nation. Farmworkers took this a step further at Kroger’s annual shareholder meeting in late June, directing their plea for stronger human rights to the major financiers whose dividends depend on the under-recognized labor of farmworkers. They called upon the company’s shareholders—whose top investors are Vanguard, BlackRock, and Berkshire Hathaway—to support a proposal that Kroger publish a “just transition” report examining “how the risks to workers are changing due to rising temperatures” in its agricultural supply chain. In a speech at the meeting, Gerardo Reyes Chavez, a former farmworker and current organizer with CIW, painted a picture for shareholders of the stark reality faced by U.S. farmworkers laboring under record-breaking temperatures—with no mandatory right to shade, water, or breaks in most states. The proposal, introduced by Domini Impact Investments, one of Kroger’s shareholders, adds pressure to the company to address these growing risks. “Kroger’s current supplier policies contain vague expectations and do not include binding obligations that effectively keep workers safe.” “We must establish the gravity, indeed, the dire urgency of this resolution. The stakes of a just transition for Kroger are nothing less than life or death for the farmworkers who put food on all our tables,” Chavez said in his address to the shareholders. “Even just taking a break to drink water has been met with harassment and violence from a supervisor. I know this because it is the reality I myself have lived as a farmworker.” Kroger did not respond to a request for comment by press time. Meanwhile, earlier this month, the Biden administration unveiled a heat protection rule, the first federal standard of its kind, which would require employers develop an emergency plan for heat illness and provide outdoor workers with shade, water, rest breaks, and training to manage and identify heat risks. But its pathway to implementation is murky. The rule likely won’t be finalized until the end of the year. Also, it may be halted under a Trump administration, and it will likely be challenged in court by industries already fighting it. Currently, only four states—California, Oregon, Washington, and Colorado—have mandated similar rules to protect farmworkers from extreme heat. In the meantime, the consequences are dire: Farmworkers are 35 times more likely to die of heat stress compared to workers in other industries. The investors supporting the proposal claim that Kroger’s existing policies are failing to protect workers from climate risks and other human rights abuses, pointing to the death of a worker at Kroger’s distribution center from heat stress in 2023. Investors also cited Kroger’s track record of supplying from multiple farms linked to modern-day slavery, including sourcing from a watermelon farm in Florida where workers—held against their will in a barbed-wire encampment—escaped by hiding in the trunk of a car. “Kroger’s current supplier policies contain vague expectations and do not include binding obligations that effectively keep workers safe. For monitoring, Kroger relies on social audits or voluntary self-assessments, which have been widely critiqued and discredited for their failure to deliver human rights outcomes and remediate harms,” states the proposal. Instead, the proposal encourages Kroger to join the CIW’s Fair Food Program, which it describes as “the only farmworker program with a demonstrated track record of success in protecting farmworkers in U.S. agriculture from climate-related risks.” (Previously, Domini Impact Investments filed a proposal asking Kroger to join the Fair Food Program as a pilot program, but it was determined to be against SEC rules.) The Fair Food Program offers binding labor protections through a contract between farmworkers, farmers, and major food retailers, which is monitored by an independent council that operates a 24/7 trilingual complaint line. The program has been widely recognized for rooting out some of the most persistent abuses, including sexual assault and forced labor, that often plague corporate supply chains. The shareholder proposal asks Kroger to examine how its current policies compare to the Fair Food Program. The investors’ proposal also took issue with the company’s “siloed approach” to environmental issues without considering workers. For instance, “Kroger’s recently released nature-based strategy, developed to reduce pesticides with the goal to protect pollinators and biodiversity, does not make any mention of farmworkers who apply pesticides,” shareholders noted in the proposal. It’s estimated that pesticide exposure unintentionally kills around 11,000 people per year, particularly farmers and farmworkers. In the end, despite Chavez’s plea, just over 80 percent of shareholders voted against the proposal; while 460 million shareholders voted against the proposal, 98 million voted for it. Prior to the annual meeting, Kroger’s board of directors had advised its shareholders to vote against adopting the proposal, according to SEC filings. “We will continue to encourage Kroger to join the Fair Food Program, because we think it will deliver meaningful human rights outcomes.” “The company already provides robust annual reporting on sustainability and social impact topics and engages stakeholders to inform content,” stated Kroger’s board of directors, citing the company’s existing environmental, social, and governance (ESG) strategy. “People are at the heart of Kroger’s purpose-driven approach and shared-value ESG strategy: Thriving Together. As outlined in our ESG report, we aim to advance positive impacts across three strategic pillars—people, planet, and systems.” Mary Beth Gallagher, the director of engagement with Domino Impact Investments, the company behind the shareholder proposal, was still encouraged by the percentage of shareholders who voted in favor of adopting her proposal. “It signals that enough of their investor base sees this as a risk that they should be managing differently,” she told Civil Eats. “We will continue to encourage Kroger to join the Fair Food Program, because we think it will deliver meaningful human rights outcomes,” Gallagher said. “It will protect against this risk, and it will strengthen its human rights programs and performance.” Read More: As the Climate Emergency Grows, Farmworkers Lack Protection from Deadly Heat Florida Banned Farmworker Heat Protections. A Groundbreaking Partnership Offers a Solution. Nighttime Harvest Protect Farmworkers From Extreme Heat, but Bring Other Risks Major Farmworker Union Endorses Vice President Kamala Harris. The United Farm Workers, the largest farmworker union in the U.S., endorsed Vice President Kamala Harris just hours after she announced her campaign for U.S. president. “Kamala Harris stood with farmworkers as CA’s attorney general, as U.S. senator, and as vice president. There is work to be done, and we’re ready. Sí, se puede!” said the union on the social platform X. The endorsement came hours after President Joe Biden’s departure from the race on July 21. Read More: What a Surge in Union Organizing Means for Food and Farm Workers How Four Years of Trump Reshaped Food and Farming U.S. Farmers Turn to Drinking When Stressed. A new study from the University of Georgia found that one in five U.S. farmers use excessive alcohol to cope with high levels of stress. “It really is a public health issue because there are drastic, traumatic outcomes associated with not being able to ask for that care, using alcohol to cope, and then feeling hopeless,” Christina Proctor, the study’s lead author, said in a press release. She identified mental health care stigma and lack of rural healthcare access as barriers to farmers receiving the care they need. Read More: Can Farmers Help Each Other Navigate Mental Health Crises? Climate Anxiety Takes a Growing Toll on Farmers The post Farmworkers Push Kroger’s Shareholders for Heat and Labor Protections appeared first on Civil Eats.

Ballot measure to build billionaire-funded city in California withdrawn

Firm behind ‘California Forever’, a proposed green city for up to 400,000 people on farmland, pulls back from voteThe company behind the highly criticized “California Forever” project, a plan backed by Silicon Valley billionaires to build a green city for up to 400,000 people on California farmland, withdrew the ballot measure for the election in November, according to a letter released Monday.The decision followed a discussion between Mitch Mashburn, chair of the board of supervisors in Solano county, and Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader and chief executive of California Forever. Continue reading...

The company behind the highly criticized “California Forever” project, a plan backed by Silicon Valley billionaires to build a green city for up to 400,000 people on California farmland, withdrew the ballot measure for the election in November, according to a letter released Monday.The decision followed a discussion between Mitch Mashburn, chair of the board of supervisors in Solano county, and Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader and chief executive of California Forever.The company will instead seek approval through the county’s standard processes and proceed through the usual county process for negotiating and executing a development agreement.“I think it signals Jan Sramek’s understanding that while the need for more affordable housing and good paying jobs has merit, the timing has been unrealistic,” said Mashburn.Solano county supervisors were scheduled to vote on whether to approve California Forever’s plan to rezone 17,500 acres of farmland near Fairfield for the city or let voters decide in November.The move to withdraw the measure comes a week after a report by Solano county stated that the proposed city would likely cost the county billions of dollars, create substantial financial deficits, reduce agricultural production, harm climate resilience and potentially threaten local water supplies.Sramek said California Forever would work with the county on the environmental report and development agreement over the next two years, aiming for approval from county supervisors in 2026.“We take our time to make informed decisions that are best for the current generation and future generations,” said Mashburn. “We want to make sure that everyone has the opportunity to be heard and get all the information they need before voting on a General Plan change of this size.”California Forever, which spent more than $800m buying in excess of 60,000 acres of mostly agricultural land, had released its own study claiming the new city would generate billions in economic activity and tens of thousands of jobs. Their marketing materials depicted a Mediterranean-style community with walkable neighborhoods and a mix of businesses.The proposal, funded by billionaire venture capitalists Marc Andreessen, Michael Moritz, Reid Hoffman, a LinkedIn co-founder, and businesswoman Laurene Powell Jobs, has faced controversy since Flannery Associates, its real estate arm, sued holdout landowners for $510m, accusing them of conspiring to inflate prices.Controversy over the secretive approach also had residents skeptical from the beginning. Silicon Valley elites had been quietly buying northern California farmland to develop a 27-square-mile plot between Travis Air Force Base and Rio Vista, currently zoned for agriculture.“We believe that Solano county has the opportunity to forge a new path towards the California Dream for this generation and generations to come,” said Sramek. “We also believe that we must move forward with urgency – because delays are not just a statistic.”The county’s report estimated that infrastructure such as roads, schools and parks for the project would cost taxpayers $6.4bn for the first phase and nearly $50bn to complete the new city.On Monday, Mashburn said that a vote without this type of environmental report “politicized the project and forced the community to take sides.”A poll conducted by Impact Research in July said 65% of Solano county voters “support bringing more good paying jobs, affordable homes, and clean energy to East Solano”.Sramek emphasized the importance of regaining California’s historic promise of optimism and opportunity, which he says has waned in recent decades due to stagnation in development. More than half of respondents also agreed that the development project was moving too fast and preferred an environmental report.

Could AI robots with lasers make herbicides — and farm workers — obsolete?

A shift from harmful herbicides to intelligent robots would have far-reaching consequences for California's $50-billion agriculture industry.

SALINAS, Calif. —  The smell of burnt vegetation wafted through a lettuce field here one recent summer morning as nearly 200 farmers, academics and engineers gathered to witness the future of automated agriculture. Thirteen hulking machines with names like “Weed Spider” and “Mantis” crawled through rows of romaine. One used artificial intelligence cameras to scan the crops and spray them with herbicides. Another zapped weeds with lasers. Yet another deployed robotic arms to cultivate and pick through the foliage. “It’s a hurdle for people to get over, but the reality is, the numbers don’t lie,” said Tim Mahoney, a field representative for Carbon Robotics, a Seattle-based company that created one of the machines on display — a 9,500-pound apparatus known as the LaserWeeder. A robot cuts weeds around romaine lettuce during field day hosted by UC Davis researchers in Salinas recently. (Nic Coury / For The Times) The massive machine uses deep-learning AI models to scan fields and identify weeds in real time before vaporizing them with more than 30 high-powered lasers, all while protecting the crop. The company says it reduces farming costs, increases yields and improves soil health while avoiding the need for chemical herbicides. “This is the future,” Mahoney said as the LaserWeeder moved through the lettuce, leaving small wisps of smoke in its wake. Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science. The high-tech field day comes at a moment when Californians are strongly reconsidering their relationship with traditional herbicides and pesticides. Chemicals such as paraquat, dacthal and glyphosate — also known as RoundUp — have for decades been used to eliminate weeds and pests from the state’s crops, but are increasingly associated with cancer, Parkinson’s disease, kidney disease, respiratory ailments and birth defects, among other potential health risks.Steven Fennimore, a weed researcher and professor of plant sciences at UC Davis, said the industry’s technological shift arrives as state regulators are “weeding out the old stuff.” Assembly Bill 1963 — a bill seeking to ban the use of paraquat in California — is working its way through the state Legislature and will be heard by the Senate Appropriations committee in August. What’s more, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation last year released a roadmap for sustainable pest management that aims to transition the state away from harmful chemicals and toward safer, organic alternatives by 2050. Carbon Robotics’ LaserWeeder rolls along a field during a recent demonstration. (Nic Coury / For The Times) Fennimore, who organized the field day in Salinas, said many of the state’s most popular herbicides and pesticides have been around for more than half a century and come with considerable baggage despite their effectiveness. Dacthal was first registered for use in the United States in 1958, paraquat in 1964 and glyphosate in 1974.Machines enhanced with AI and robotics can help solve many of the same problems without the use of antique sprays and pollutants, he said.“We’re not getting a lot of new pesticides because the path to commercialization is a whole lot different than it was in 1958 — it’s much more expensive, the toxicology has to be pristine, you can’t injure wildlife in any way,” Fennimore said. “So the machine vision products that are weeding are very much welcome, very much needed.” Mahoney, of Carbon Robotics, said the company is selling about one $1.4-million LaserWeeder per week, with more than 80 on the market worldwide already. Some customers run it 24 hours a day, including one grower who has it programmed for more than 40 individual crops, he said. He added that the weeder can zap 6,500 weeds per minute, compared with the roughly 40 weeds per minute that can be picked by hand.“It’s kind of like a Swiss Army knife,” Mahoney said. A shift from herbicides and manual labor to intelligent robots would have far-reaching consequences for California’s $50-billion agriculture industry and local economies.The potential loss of hand crews is raising concerns. In Monterey County, where Salinas is located, agriculture accounts for nearly a quarter of all jobs and represents the largest employment sector by far, ahead of both government and tourism, according to county data. Some experts fear the new technology could eliminate farm positions without offering suitable replacements. “It’s going to be a whole mixed bag of complications,” said Barbara Meister, a consultant with the Salinas Inclusive Economic Development Initiative, who also attended the field day. “This weeder is an example of replacing human labor with mechanical labor,” Meister said as she pointed to one of the machines. “So for us, we’re thinking about, does this technology enhance labor, replace labor, or create new job opportunities?” Chris Benner, director of the Institute for Social Transformation at UC Santa Cruz, likened the new tools to the mechanical tomato harvester, which displaced some 30,000 farm jobs when it was first introduced in the 1950s, but also ushered in a new era of industrialized food production. Romaine lettuce grows in a Salinas agricultural field. (Nic Coury / For The Times) “We need more efficiencies in agriculture to improve profit margins and be able to pay workers in the field more, but that’s ultimately going to displace some people,” Benner said. “What do we do, in that context, to support people who need new training into other types of jobs? The social challenges are much harder than the technical training challenges.” But agriculture is also facing a shortage of labor. Multiple farmers at the field day said they’re having a tough time finding workers to pick weeds and crops — a tedious and challenging job that often offers only short seasons and minimum wage. The work can also be dangerous, especially when it involves applying potentially toxic chemicals to plants, or toiling in extreme heat. Pete Anecito, a director of farming with Sábor Farms, said his team is already running a LaserWeeder around the clock, which is being used on spinach mixes and other high-density plantings. It performs the work of roughly two human crews in a 24-hour period, he said.“All of them lend themselves to different applications that are going to save us time and money,” Anecito said as he checked out the new machines. “These are great trials out here. We need to see what it does to the operation.”While experts continue to weigh the labor implications, the environmental benefits of the technology are much clearer, according to Fennimore. “We’re not using herbicides, not using pesticides, not using fumigants,” he said. He noted that one machine his team is working on — a smart steamer that sterilizes soil — can be used near schools, where people don’t want “nasty chemical stuff.”In fact, a coalition of environmental groups, social justice organizations and teachers sued Monterey County agriculture officials and state pesticide regulators in April, alleging the use of restricted pesticides in close proximity to three elementary schools.“This stuff does serious damage, sometimes permanent damage, and the worst part is it can take decades — if ever — for our regulators to act on this, and that’s the pattern we have to disrupt,” said Mark Weller, a campaign director with Californians for Pesticide Reform, one of the groups involved in the suit. The use of such chemicals can amount to a form of environmental racism, he said, because the people most likely to be exposed to and sickened by herbicides and pesticides are often low-income people, Latinos, migrant farm workers and other vulnerable populations. Farmers study a weed control device during a recent field day in Salinas. Lasers and other technologies are being marketed as a replacement for harmful herbicides. (Nic Coury / For The Times) Weller noted that there are more than 130 pesticides used in California that are not approved in the European Union, including paraquat, which is banned in about 60 countries. However, the group’s call for pesticide reform is not focused on artificial intelligence, but rather organic agriculture and integrated weed management strategies, many of which are outlined in the state’s 2050 roadmap. Among the strategies Weller recommended are inter-row hoeing, which helps suppress weeds; thermal weeding, which uses heat to kill weeds; and bio-herbicides, which use microorganisms for weed control. UC Davis’ Steve Fennimore, right, listens to speakers during a field day hosted by university researchers to preview new farming technology. (Nic Coury / For The Times) There is also growing interest in replacing herbicides and pesticides at the molecular level. One recent study published in the journal Nature highlighted the ways in which nanotechnology typically used in the medical field could be used to deliver pesticides, herbicides and fungicides to specific biological targets in plants where infections and other issues can occur. “There’s a whole field of integrated weed management that existed before pesticides, and exists all across the world,” Weller said. “So it’s increasingly frustrating to hear ‘Big Ag’ and the regulators saying there’s no substitute.”Indeed, many agricultural companies are resistant to change since their products are still effective and profitable, Fennimore said. Syngenta, a leading manufacturer of paraquat, raked in a reported $32 billion in sales in 2023, according to its annual report.The industry is also filled with deep pockets and powerful lobbyists, which can make it difficult to bring about significant change. But while the companies that created the original products may feel threatened by new AI innovations, “it really doesn’t matter what they think,” Fennimore said.“The ag-chem companies — they understand that they’re really not not parties to this development,” he said. “And they they see the old chemistry under fire and it causes them lots of worry.”Still, AI farming technology has a ways to go, according Brad Hanson, an herbicide researcher with the UC Davis Department of Plant Sciences. Robots and lasers that work on 30,000 acres of lettuce or broccoli may be not yet be applicable or economical for millions of acres of soybeans, he said. However, their appeal is growing.“There’s interest and there’s opportunity,” he said. “[With] high labor costs, environmental and toxicity issues with poured herbicides, regulatory challenges more broadly in California, this kind of thing is becoming important — and will become even more important.”At the field day in Salinas, it was clear that innovation is marching steadily forward.In one row, growers used a joystick to operate a Lego-like, $25,000 modular robot on wheels that can be coded for use as a cultivator, a seeder, a data collector, or whatever else is needed on the field, according its creator, a group called Farm-NG.Nearby, a metal behemoth from the company Laudando & Associates looked like a Tesla Cybertruck as it combed through a field deploying lasers for weeding and thinning. Next to it, a smart cultivator from Stout Industrial displayed its use of AI vision and mechanical blades to remove weeds from around the crops. Following each display, a crowd of growers and researchers squatted in the rows to examine the machine’s work, murmuring among themselves about charred leaves or disrupted dirt. Representatives from each company touted their product’s benefits over a megaphone. A spokesman from Greentech Robotics, which created the WeedSpider, said the 2,000-pound machine was using LIDAR sensors to create a 3-D elevation profile of the field in real time, which could be used for mechanical weeding, thinning or precision spraying. The device can service up to 28 acres a day, he said.And, like most AI tools, it is constantly learning as it goes.“Every machine out in the field is always improving,” he said, as the robot’s mechanical arms sifted through the soil behind him. Newsletter Toward a more sustainable California Get Boiling Point, our newsletter exploring climate change, energy and the environment, and become part of the conversation — and the solution. You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

Labour has left farmers facing agriculture budget ‘cliff edge’, says NFU

Union says members being ‘kept up at night’ over failure to commit to continue payments at current rate Farmers are facing a “cliff edge” as the Labour government refuses to commit to maintaining the agriculture budget, the president of the National Farmers’ Union has said.The issue is one of the first pressures Labour is facing over its tight fiscal rules, along with a rebellion on the party’s refusal to remove the two-child benefit cap. Continue reading...

Farmers are facing a “cliff edge” as the Labour government refuses to commit to maintaining the agriculture budget, the president of the National Farmers’ Union has said.The issue is one of the first pressures Labour is facing over its tight fiscal rules, along with a rebellion on the party’s refusal to remove the two-child benefit cap. Conservative MPs have said they plan to challenge the government on its failure to commit to the agricultural budget, which Labour says it will not comment on until after the spending review later this year.Since the UK left the EU, it is no longer in the European common agricultural policy, which ensured steady payments for farmers directly linked to how much land they managed. Instead, each devolved nation has its own government payments scheme.The previous government committed to spending £2.4bn a year on payments for farmers, mostly linked to environmental improvements made on their land, to replace area-based payments similar to those in the EU scheme. However, this assurance ends at the end of the calendar year.Farmers will not hear about whether these payments will continue at current rates until the spending review in the autumn, a spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs told the Guardian. This means they will have just a couple of months to plan their finances for the coming year. Government payments are even more important in years with bad weather, such as the severe floods in 2023-24, because they can partially make up for crop and livestock losses.Speaking at the NFU summer reception, its president, Tom Bradshaw, said his members were “being kept up at night” by the “cliff edge” that was coming as land-based payments were being phased out without certainty about the wider budget.He said he was working with the Wildlife Trusts and WWF to pressure the government to keep or increase the budget. “We know that there’s a lot of other environmental organisations that are also arguing or calling for an increased budget,” he said. “We will work with them and I believe there is a budget, but securing it for the future and in a ringfenced manner, and knowing how much it is, is crucially important.”The NFU announced in 2019 that the farming sector would reach net zero emissions by 2040. But Bradshaw said this target would in all likelihood not be met because of a “lost five years” under the Conservative government. “There has never been a coordinated strategic policy in place for the decarbonisation of food production,” he said. “We’ve always been reliant on the government to meet that 2040 target and we have had a lost five years.”He said reasons for the NFU dropping the target included renewable energy markets not having developed at the speed predicted. Farmers have been blocked from building solar on their land, grid connections have taken years and onshore wind was in effect banned until last week.Greg Smith, the Tory MP for Mid Buckinghamshire, told the Guardian his party would hold Labour’s feet to the fire on the issue.skip past newsletter promotionOur morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionHe said: “90% of my constituency is farmed, and our manifesto promised to increase the farming budget. Labour’s barely mentioned farming and it’s of note the king’s speech did not either. Farming is a long-term business and farmers need to plan ahead so my farming constituents are very concerned that they will not have any certainty on this until the spending review.”Speaking at the reception, the farming minister, Daniel Zeichner, said he was committed to the payment schemes but he did not commit to a budget. He said: “When people have asked me about whether we’re going to make the ongoing transition to the environmental land management schemes: absolutely.”He added that “stability in the sector” was a goal of the new government.

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.