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.

Park rangers battle Australians seeking rare earth minerals in old Mojave gold mine

News Feed
Friday, February 28, 2025

MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE, Calif. — Deep in the Mojave National Preserve lies an old open pit mine where workers dug and drilled for gold and silver from the late 1800s to the 1990s. Miners are back at the Colosseum Mine today — but now they’re also looking for rare earth minerals used in advanced technologies.The National Park Service is trying to stop it — at least until the agency can review and sign off on the activities. It claims that the mining company, Australia’s Dateline Resources Ltd., is operating the Colosseum Mine without authorization, giving federal officials little ability to minimize environmental damage in an area ecologists say is rich with rare plants.The mining company says it has the right to work the mine under a plan its prior operators submitted to the Bureau of Land Management more than 40 years ago. Several elected officials are backing the company against the Park Service, pointing to the national security importance of developing America’s capacity to produce rare earth minerals, which are used in smartphones, advanced weapons and electric vehicles. China dominates the market. “Any discussion of the mine should start with its importance to national security due to its potential to contain rare earth materials,” San Bernardino County Supervisor Paul Cook said in an email. “To my knowledge, it’s the single best opportunity in the United States to bring American rare earth production online in a timely manner and help break the Chinese Communist Party’s global monopoly.” Environmentalists are watching closely, saying the conflict will be an early indicator of the Trump administration’s policies toward commercial exploitation of public lands.“How the Trump administration responds to the situation with Colosseum Mine will be an indicator as to how they respond to threats to our public lands in general over the next four years,” said Chance Wilcox of the National Parks Conservation Assn. “Will they favor an unauthorized foreign mine or will they better support the institution that protects America’s treasured landscapes?” Chance Wilcox with the National Parks Conservation Assn. looks out over Clark Mountain. Ecologists say the range has the second-highest concentration of rare plants of any range in California. (Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times) The Colosseum Mine sits near California’s border with Nevada, about 10 miles west of Primm. Gold was first discovered there in the late 1860s and mining for it continued intermittently until 1939, later resuming in the 1980s and ‘90s. The rocky shelf road leading to the mine winds through every layer of the Mojave. Desert tortoise habitat gives way to yucca- and cholla-studded hills, followed by stands of pinyon pine, juniper and white fir, interspersed with bursts of buckwheat, Mormon tea and desert lavender.“Stunning — it’s one of the most spectacular spots in the Mojave,” Wilcox said on a recent afternoon as he stood on an overlook and took in views of the Clark Mountains’ lush peaks. He turned and pointed to a yawning, barbed wire-ringed pit sitting beneath denuded hills. “Without the mine, all of this would’ve looked the same.”As gold prices soared in the 1980s, the BLM and San Bernardino County agreed to allow the mineral rights holders to resume gold mining following review under the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.Mining began again in late 1987 and ceased in 1992, with milling operations coming to an end the following year, according to an Environmental Protection Agency site visit report. By then, the mine was owned by Lac Minerals Ltd., which took over responsibility for groundwater inspection and monitoring required by the local water quality control board. The Mojave National Preserve was established in 1994, transferring oversight from the BLM to the Park Service. The Park Service notified Colliseum Inc., a subsidiary of Lac Minerals, that it could continue operations until environmental reclamation was completed, according to a 1995 letter from then-field director Stanley Albright.After that, the letter said, the operators would have to submit a new proposed plan of operations to cover a years-long monitoring phase. Dateline Resources took over in 2021, telling shareholders that a review of U.S. Geological Service data had revealed radiometric anomalies on the southern end of its mining claims suggesting the presence of rare earth elements. The anomalies were similar to those documented at the nearby Mountain Pass Rare Earth Mine, which is the only domestic producer of rare earth elements and provides about 16% of the world’s supply, the release noted.While the company would focus primarily on the potential for gold at the mine, it would also include rare earth elements in its planned exploration program, it announced.The National Park Service declined to make officials available for an interview or to provide information about its discussions with the mine owners. The agency said in a statement that it is working with the Department of the Interior and the mine owners to ensure that laws are followed and the resources of the Mojave National Preserve are protected.But hundreds of pages of letters and emails exchanged by park officials, the mine owners, their legal representatives, and county and federal officials, released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the National Parks Conservation Assn. and shared with The Times, reveal a dispute dating back several years.The National Park Service’s first contact with Dateline took place in May of 2022, when a law enforcement ranger encountered a contractor demobilizing a diamond-core drilling rig from the mine, according to correspondence from park officials. The contractor told the Park Service he’d been conducting an exploratory drilling operation for Dateline subsidiary Colosseum Rare Metals, the correspondence states. The National Park Service and owners of the Colosseum Mine in San Bernardino County have been involved in a years-long dispute. (Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times) Park Service staff later inspected the road leading to the mine and found damage from the unpermitted movement of equipment and unauthorized roadwork, according to letters from park officials. Heavy earthmoving equipment had been driven off road, large perennial shrubs were uprooted and an acre under active restoration was razed by bulldozer, the letters state.That June, the preserve’s then-superintendent, Mike Gauthier, notified Dateline managing director Stephen Baghdadi that the mine was operating without authorization. Gauthier demanded that the company cease work until it submitted an operations plan to the Park Service and won the agency’s approval. This would typically give the Park Service the opportunity to analyze the environmental effects of the proposed work and add terms and conditions to conserve park resources. A lawyer representing the company, Kerry Shapiro, responded in a November 2022 letter saying the Park Service had no basis to require permits or a new plan of operations because the activities were already authorized under existing approvals.Shapiro said the mine would seek to restart mineral extraction activities, which were consistent with the plan for the mine approved by the BLM in 1985. The Park Service authorized that plan 10 years later when it told the mine’s prior owners that they could continue existing operations until reclamation was complete, wrote Shapiro, of the law firm Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell. A warning sign at the Colosseum Mine in San Bernardino County. (Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times) A regional NPS official, Frank Lands, said in a February 2023 response to Shapiro that the 1995 temporary authorization was intended to cover just a short period so that closure of the mine could be completed. That 2023 letter explicitly revoked the authorization and ordered Colosseum Rare Metals to cease and desist any activities other than water quality monitoring.Shapiro said in a statement that Colosseum has been working for years to resolve what it feels are a series of misunderstandings by the Park Service, but that the agency’s files on the mine were destroyed by water damage, hampering these efforts. “Nevertheless, Colosseum is continuing to work to resolve these misunderstandings in its ongoing efforts in connection with this important mine site,” he said. In March of 2023, a Park Service law enforcement ranger encountered Baghdadi and a contractor on the road to the mine supervising a bulldozer and backhoe that were performing unpermitted roadwork, according to a letter the preserve’s then-acting superintendent, Kelly Fuhrmann, sent to Cook, the county supervisor. The ranger told them to stop work and remove the equipment but returned the next day to find the work had gone forward, destroying hundreds of perennial plants, the letter states.The Park Service eventually sent the mine operators and two contractors a $213,387 bill for costs and damages stemming from the incident, along with the roadwork allegedly performed the previous May. The parties met at least once to discuss settlement, but no agreement has been reached.Colosseum is actively disputing the allegations but does not comment on ongoing administrative proceedings, Shapiro said.U.S. Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia) and San Bernardino County Supervisors Dawn Rowe and Cook wrote letters in 2023 to the Park Service urging the agency to let the mine continue operating.In a statement provided to The Times, Cook wrote that the Colosseum Mine has protected mining rights that were established long before the Park Service had any jurisdiction over the land.“From my vantage point, the NPS actions over the past several years to deny rights at Colosseum Mine amount to unnecessary agency overreach,” Cook wrote.Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) said he disagreed with that legal analysis and that the mine operators should obtain approval from the Park Service. The national parks system is an intergenerational trust, and to the extent that extractive uses are allowed, there needs to be oversight to ensure such uses are sustainable, he said.“We don’t hold these public lands so that our corporate pals can just monetize them and wreck them permanently,” he said.Mining companies often tout the potential presence of rare earth elements to justify destructive practices, Huffman added. He pointed to the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska, which was scrapped in 2023 after the EPA determined its waste would harm salmon fishery areas in the Bristol Bay watershed.Wilcox of the National Parks Conservation Assn. said environmentalists are not only concerned that mining operations will damage the ecosystem, but that the disregard for the permitting and review process will also pave the way for others to do the same, particularly during a presidential administration that’s sympathetic to industry.“Essentially, this mine is managing the destruction of one of the largest units in our national parks system, which are the crown jewels of America,” Wilcox said. “We’ve never seen anything like this.” The Clark Mountains in San Bernardino County hold a wealth of rare plants, ecologists say. (Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times) The Clark mountain range is one of California’s most botanically important areas, said Jim Andre, director of UC Riverside’s Granite Mountains Desert Research Center. It’s estimated to harbor the second-highest density of rare plants of any of the state’s mountain ranges, second only to the New York Mountains directly to its south, he said.In all, about 65 plant species in the Clark Mountains are ranked as rare by the California Native Plant Society, and at least 41 of them are protected under CEQA, Andre said. By comparison, the entirety of Joshua Tree National Park — which is nearly 20 times larger — has just 45 listed plant species, he said.Andre estimates that at least half of the mountain range’s rare plant species are directly or indirectly affected by the mining activities at Colosseum.These plants tend to support specific, sometimes rare species of pollinators like bees, hummingbirds, butterflies and moths, Andre said. “They’re not just prized luxury items, they’re actually a functional part of the ecosystem,” he said.And the eastern Mojave Desert is still a frontier for species discovery, meaning that scientists don’t actually have a full picture of what could be lost, he said.“What’s concerning to me about the Colosseum Mine is that it doesn’t seem to be following a regulatory process that would provide an opportunity or requirement to even go out and do preconstruction surveys,” he said. “That’s the mystery of the activities we’re seeing right now, is that they seem to be shrugging off the due process ... and it’s happening within a national park, which is kind of astounding.”

The National Park Service and an Australian company are at odds over an old Mojave Desert gold mine, where the company is seeking to extract rare earth minerals.

MOJAVE NATIONAL PRESERVE, Calif. — Deep in the Mojave National Preserve lies an old open pit mine where workers dug and drilled for gold and silver from the late 1800s to the 1990s. Miners are back at the Colosseum Mine today — but now they’re also looking for rare earth minerals used in advanced technologies.

The National Park Service is trying to stop it — at least until the agency can review and sign off on the activities. It claims that the mining company, Australia’s Dateline Resources Ltd., is operating the Colosseum Mine without authorization, giving federal officials little ability to minimize environmental damage in an area ecologists say is rich with rare plants.

The mining company says it has the right to work the mine under a plan its prior operators submitted to the Bureau of Land Management more than 40 years ago.

Several elected officials are backing the company against the Park Service, pointing to the national security importance of developing America’s capacity to produce rare earth minerals, which are used in smartphones, advanced weapons and electric vehicles. China dominates the market.

“Any discussion of the mine should start with its importance to national security due to its potential to contain rare earth materials,” San Bernardino County Supervisor Paul Cook said in an email. “To my knowledge, it’s the single best opportunity in the United States to bring American rare earth production online in a timely manner and help break the Chinese Communist Party’s global monopoly.”

Environmentalists are watching closely, saying the conflict will be an early indicator of the Trump administration’s policies toward commercial exploitation of public lands.

“How the Trump administration responds to the situation with Colosseum Mine will be an indicator as to how they respond to threats to our public lands in general over the next four years,” said Chance Wilcox of the National Parks Conservation Assn. “Will they favor an unauthorized foreign mine or will they better support the institution that protects America’s treasured landscapes?”

A man stands in front of a mountain range.

Chance Wilcox with the National Parks Conservation Assn. looks out over Clark Mountain. Ecologists say the range has the second-highest concentration of rare plants of any range in California.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

The Colosseum Mine sits near California’s border with Nevada, about 10 miles west of Primm. Gold was first discovered there in the late 1860s and mining for it continued intermittently until 1939, later resuming in the 1980s and ‘90s.

The rocky shelf road leading to the mine winds through every layer of the Mojave. Desert tortoise habitat gives way to yucca- and cholla-studded hills, followed by stands of pinyon pine, juniper and white fir, interspersed with bursts of buckwheat, Mormon tea and desert lavender.

“Stunning — it’s one of the most spectacular spots in the Mojave,” Wilcox said on a recent afternoon as he stood on an overlook and took in views of the Clark Mountains’ lush peaks. He turned and pointed to a yawning, barbed wire-ringed pit sitting beneath denuded hills. “Without the mine, all of this would’ve looked the same.”

As gold prices soared in the 1980s, the BLM and San Bernardino County agreed to allow the mineral rights holders to resume gold mining following review under the California Environmental Quality Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

Mining began again in late 1987 and ceased in 1992, with milling operations coming to an end the following year, according to an Environmental Protection Agency site visit report. By then, the mine was owned by Lac Minerals Ltd., which took over responsibility for groundwater inspection and monitoring required by the local water quality control board.

The Mojave National Preserve was established in 1994, transferring oversight from the BLM to the Park Service. The Park Service notified Colliseum Inc., a subsidiary of Lac Minerals, that it could continue operations until environmental reclamation was completed, according to a 1995 letter from then-field director Stanley Albright.

After that, the letter said, the operators would have to submit a new proposed plan of operations to cover a years-long monitoring phase.

Dateline Resources took over in 2021, telling shareholders that a review of U.S. Geological Service data had revealed radiometric anomalies on the southern end of its mining claims suggesting the presence of rare earth elements.

The anomalies were similar to those documented at the nearby Mountain Pass Rare Earth Mine, which is the only domestic producer of rare earth elements and provides about 16% of the world’s supply, the release noted.

While the company would focus primarily on the potential for gold at the mine, it would also include rare earth elements in its planned exploration program, it announced.

The National Park Service declined to make officials available for an interview or to provide information about its discussions with the mine owners. The agency said in a statement that it is working with the Department of the Interior and the mine owners to ensure that laws are followed and the resources of the Mojave National Preserve are protected.

But hundreds of pages of letters and emails exchanged by park officials, the mine owners, their legal representatives, and county and federal officials, released in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the National Parks Conservation Assn. and shared with The Times, reveal a dispute dating back several years.

The National Park Service’s first contact with Dateline took place in May of 2022, when a law enforcement ranger encountered a contractor demobilizing a diamond-core drilling rig from the mine, according to correspondence from park officials. The contractor told the Park Service he’d been conducting an exploratory drilling operation for Dateline subsidiary Colosseum Rare Metals, the correspondence states.

A trail down to a mine.

The National Park Service and owners of the Colosseum Mine in San Bernardino County have been involved in a years-long dispute.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

Park Service staff later inspected the road leading to the mine and found damage from the unpermitted movement of equipment and unauthorized roadwork, according to letters from park officials. Heavy earthmoving equipment had been driven off road, large perennial shrubs were uprooted and an acre under active restoration was razed by bulldozer, the letters state.

That June, the preserve’s then-superintendent, Mike Gauthier, notified Dateline managing director Stephen Baghdadi that the mine was operating without authorization. Gauthier demanded that the company cease work until it submitted an operations plan to the Park Service and won the agency’s approval. This would typically give the Park Service the opportunity to analyze the environmental effects of the proposed work and add terms and conditions to conserve park resources.

A lawyer representing the company, Kerry Shapiro, responded in a November 2022 letter saying the Park Service had no basis to require permits or a new plan of operations because the activities were already authorized under existing approvals.

Shapiro said the mine would seek to restart mineral extraction activities, which were consistent with the plan for the mine approved by the BLM in 1985. The Park Service authorized that plan 10 years later when it told the mine’s prior owners that they could continue existing operations until reclamation was complete, wrote Shapiro, of the law firm Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell.

A warning sign at the Colosseum mine.

A warning sign at the Colosseum Mine in San Bernardino County.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

A regional NPS official, Frank Lands, said in a February 2023 response to Shapiro that the 1995 temporary authorization was intended to cover just a short period so that closure of the mine could be completed. That 2023 letter explicitly revoked the authorization and ordered Colosseum Rare Metals to cease and desist any activities other than water quality monitoring.

Shapiro said in a statement that Colosseum has been working for years to resolve what it feels are a series of misunderstandings by the Park Service, but that the agency’s files on the mine were destroyed by water damage, hampering these efforts.

“Nevertheless, Colosseum is continuing to work to resolve these misunderstandings in its ongoing efforts in connection with this important mine site,” he said.

In March of 2023, a Park Service law enforcement ranger encountered Baghdadi and a contractor on the road to the mine supervising a bulldozer and backhoe that were performing unpermitted roadwork, according to a letter the preserve’s then-acting superintendent, Kelly Fuhrmann, sent to Cook, the county supervisor. The ranger told them to stop work and remove the equipment but returned the next day to find the work had gone forward, destroying hundreds of perennial plants, the letter states.

The Park Service eventually sent the mine operators and two contractors a $213,387 bill for costs and damages stemming from the incident, along with the roadwork allegedly performed the previous May. The parties met at least once to discuss settlement, but no agreement has been reached.

Colosseum is actively disputing the allegations but does not comment on ongoing administrative proceedings, Shapiro said.

U.S. Rep. Jay Obernolte (R-Hesperia) and San Bernardino County Supervisors Dawn Rowe and Cook wrote letters in 2023 to the Park Service urging the agency to let the mine continue operating.

In a statement provided to The Times, Cook wrote that the Colosseum Mine has protected mining rights that were established long before the Park Service had any jurisdiction over the land.

“From my vantage point, the NPS actions over the past several years to deny rights at Colosseum Mine amount to unnecessary agency overreach,” Cook wrote.

Rep. Jared Huffman (D-San Rafael) said he disagreed with that legal analysis and that the mine operators should obtain approval from the Park Service. The national parks system is an intergenerational trust, and to the extent that extractive uses are allowed, there needs to be oversight to ensure such uses are sustainable, he said.

“We don’t hold these public lands so that our corporate pals can just monetize them and wreck them permanently,” he said.

Mining companies often tout the potential presence of rare earth elements to justify destructive practices, Huffman added. He pointed to the proposed Pebble Mine in Alaska, which was scrapped in 2023 after the EPA determined its waste would harm salmon fishery areas in the Bristol Bay watershed.

Wilcox of the National Parks Conservation Assn. said environmentalists are not only concerned that mining operations will damage the ecosystem, but that the disregard for the permitting and review process will also pave the way for others to do the same, particularly during a presidential administration that’s sympathetic to industry.

“Essentially, this mine is managing the destruction of one of the largest units in our national parks system, which are the crown jewels of America,” Wilcox said. “We’ve never seen anything like this.”

A desert landscape with a mountain the background.

The Clark Mountains in San Bernardino County hold a wealth of rare plants, ecologists say.

(Myung J. Chun/Los Angeles Times)

The Clark mountain range is one of California’s most botanically important areas, said Jim Andre, director of UC Riverside’s Granite Mountains Desert Research Center. It’s estimated to harbor the second-highest density of rare plants of any of the state’s mountain ranges, second only to the New York Mountains directly to its south, he said.

In all, about 65 plant species in the Clark Mountains are ranked as rare by the California Native Plant Society, and at least 41 of them are protected under CEQA, Andre said. By comparison, the entirety of Joshua Tree National Park — which is nearly 20 times larger — has just 45 listed plant species, he said.

Andre estimates that at least half of the mountain range’s rare plant species are directly or indirectly affected by the mining activities at Colosseum.

These plants tend to support specific, sometimes rare species of pollinators like bees, hummingbirds, butterflies and moths, Andre said. “They’re not just prized luxury items, they’re actually a functional part of the ecosystem,” he said.

And the eastern Mojave Desert is still a frontier for species discovery, meaning that scientists don’t actually have a full picture of what could be lost, he said.

“What’s concerning to me about the Colosseum Mine is that it doesn’t seem to be following a regulatory process that would provide an opportunity or requirement to even go out and do preconstruction surveys,” he said. “That’s the mystery of the activities we’re seeing right now, is that they seem to be shrugging off the due process ... and it’s happening within a national park, which is kind of astounding.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Reform of NZ’s protected lands is overdue – but the public should decide about economic activities

Changes to New Zealand’s conservation laws could delist up to 60% of protected areas. There are better ways to balance ecological values with economic gains.

Getty ImagesThe government’s proposed reforms of the rules governing public conservation land aim to dismantle any potential obstacle to “unleashing economic growth” in protected areas. Currently, about a third of New Zealand’s land is under protection. This ranges from national parks (11.6%) to stewardship areas (9.4%) and conservation parks (5.7%). Twelve other designations make up the rest. Some commercial activities are permitted – including guided walks, aircraft-based sightseeing, ski fields and animal grazing – and approved by the Department of Conservation as “concessions”. The proposed changes to the Conservation Act include a review of land designation. The government could delist or swap up to 60% of the current area under protection. Conservation Minister Tama Potaka said he can’t indicate which designations or locations would be delisted. Nor can he say what percentage of conservation lands would be affected – and where – because changes will be driven by demand for land. The minister only committed to leaving untouched the designations that are difficult to change: national parks, wilderness areas, reserves and world heritage sites. The question of whether more economic benefits can be obtained from protected areas is legitimate. New Zealand does need a radical reform of its conservation areas and legislation. There is potential for better social and economic outcomes. But the proposal consolidates ministerial discretion to unprecedented levels and the government follows a misguided fast-track approach to permitting economic activities such as mining. This could take native biodiversity into dangerous territory. Outdated conservation laws New Zealand holds tight to an outdated approach known as “fortress conservation”. This limits commercial opportunities to specific areas, mostly concentrated around established facilities (roads, hotels) and the edges of designated lands. Even when regulating other activities such as energy generation or agriculture, the idea has been to “sacrifice” some spaces and keep as much land as possible “locked up”. A key reason was that people didn’t know enough about the ecological values of the land. As a proxy, lawmakers relied on the subjective concepts of wilderness values and intrinsic values to justify strict protections over most lands. Insufficient scientific input meant authorities have relied on “ecologically blind” zoning frameworks, such as a planning tool known as the recreation opportunity spectrum. This divides lands according to recreational opportunities and visitor needs. But there is a better path forward – one that allows public decision making and honours international commitments, while achieving better ecological and economic benefits. Towards regulations informed by science This alternative approach is grounded in three key principles. First, it uses gap analysis to identify which ecosystems and species are underprotected. Second, it relies on regulations shaped by ecological knowledge and conservation priorities. Third, it applies the principles of proportionality and precaution, meaning that regulatory responses should match the severity, reversibility and likelihood of environmental harm. Currently, New Zealand’s regulatory framework does not reflect this. New Zealand has signed the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. This means at least 30% of conservation lands must be representative of most, if not all, native ecosystems by 2030. At present, coastal, lowland and dryland ecosystems are under-represented. In contrast, alpine and montane environments, are represented way above the recommended threshold (20% of the remaining cover for that ecosystem). If up to 60% of conservation lands were to be swapped or delisted without prioritising representativeness, vulnerability and rarity, the ecological losses may be immense and irreversible. Rethinking protection categories My research develops a broader reform approach. It also reflects growing international consensus on the need for science-informed conservation planning. I argue New Zealand should set up region-specific and nationwide fora, such as citizen assemblies or consensus conferences. Conversations should focus on specific topics, informed by scientists and iwi. Vulnerable or under-represented ecosystems currently require stronger protection. Deliberations should indicate which activities should be limited or excluded to better protect such areas. We must also consider vulnerability to climate change. Scientists expect that ecosystems may migrate outside protected areas. Consensus should be built around what qualifies as a “significantly over-represented” native ecosystem. Where ecosystems are already well protected and resilient, the public should discuss whether re-designation, land exchanges or even disposals may be appropriate. If lands are retained, consensus should be sought on the economic uses that can maintain ecological health. If the public doesn’t support land delisting or swaps, alternative strategies must be developed to improve ecological representativeness. Sustainable funding mechanisms should also be identified to support these efforts. The Department of Conservation should work with independent scientists and iwi to develop a new zoning framework to guide commercial concessions and recreational access. This framework should capture the principles highlighted above. When applied to each area, it should also enable the mapping of the ecological values feasible to protect. This would help select bespoke regulatory options. In turn, it would balance biodiversity and economic outcomes for each context. Guidance for these steps should be incorporated in a new national strategy, aligned with domestic goals such as the biodiversity strategy and international commitments. New Zealand has the expertise for smart reforms. New Zealanders have the passion for nature and patience required to engage in deliberations. But will politicians have the wisdom to avoid a totally unnecessary mutilation of conservation lands, for undefined biodiversity gains? Valentina Dinica does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

EPA to undergo layoffs amid shutdown fight

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

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

More than half of world’s bird species in decline, as leaders meet on extinction crisis

Biodiversity losses are growing, the IUCN reports as summit opens, but green turtle’s recovery ‘reminds us conservation works’More than half of all bird species are in decline, according to a new global assessment, with deforestation driving sharp falls in populations across the planet.On the eve of a key biodiversity summit in the UAE, scientists have issued a fresh warning about the health of bird populations, with 61% of assessed species now recording declines in their numbers. Continue reading...

More than half of all bird species are in decline, according to a new global assessment, with deforestation driving sharp falls in populations across the planet.On the eve of a key biodiversity summit in the UAE, scientists have issued a fresh warning about the health of bird populations, with 61% of assessed species now recording declines in their numbers.From Schlegel’s asity in Madagascar to the tail-bobbing northern nightingale-wren in Central America, many bird species have lost habitat to expanding agriculture and human development. Just nine years ago, 44% of assessed bird species had declining populations, according to the red list of endangered species from the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).Dr Ian Burfield, BirdLife’s global science coordinator, who helped oversee the assessment, said: “That three in five of the world’s bird species have declining populations shows how deep the biodiversity crisis has become and how urgent it is that governments take the actions they have committed to under multiple conventions and agreements.”It comes as hundreds of conservationists gather in Abu Dhabi on Friday for the IUCN’s congress, where the fate of many of the world’s most at-risk wildlife species will be discussed. In the face of global headwinds on environmental action, scientists are urging governments to deliver on recent pledges to better protect nature.Birds play an important role in ecosystems, helping to pollinate flowers, disperse seeds and control pests. Hornbills – which are found across the tropics – can spread up to 12,700 large seeds a day in a square kilometre.Dr Malin Rivers, head of conservation prioritisation at the Botanic Gardens Conservation International, said: “The fates of birds and trees are intertwined: trees depend on birds for regeneration and birds depend on trees for survival.”The green sea turtle’s recovery “reminds us that conservation works”, said the IUCN director general, Dr Grethel Aguilar. Once classified as endangered, it is now viewed as a species of least concern due to conservation efforts. The turtles’s numbers have grown by 28% since the 1970s thanks to greater protection for nest sites in Ascension Island, Brazil, Mexico and Hawaii.A Pacific green sea turtle cruising off Hawaii. The recovery of the species shows what global conservation efforts can achieve, experts say. Photograph: Chris Strickland/AlamyRoderic Mast, co-chair of IUCN’s species survival commission marine turtle specialist group, said the green turtle’s recovery was “a powerful example of what coordinated global conservation over decades can achieve to stabilise and even restore populations of long-lived marine species”.But there was bad news for Arctic seals, which scientists warn are drifting closer to extinction due to global heating. The loss of sea ice has seen population numbers for bearded and harp seals fall sharply. Thinning sea ice means that the Artic seals are finding it more difficult to find areas to rest and breed. They are a critical prey species for polar bears, which researchers fear will also be affected by the loss.Dr Kit Kovacs, Svalbard programme leader at the Norwegian Polar Institute, said: “Each year in Svalbard, the retreating sea ice reveals how threatened Arctic seals have become, making it harder for them to breed, rest and feed.“Their plight is a stark reminder that climate change is not a distant problem – it has been unfolding for decades and is having impacts here and now.”Find more age of extinction coverage here, and follow the biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield in the Guardian app for more nature coverage.

Would a ban on genetic engineering of wildlife hamper conservation?

Some conservation groups are calling for an effective ban on genetic modification, but others say these technologies are crucial for preserving biodiversity

The idea of genetically modifying wild lions divides opinionAndrewfel/Shutterstock Should we genetically modify wild lions? Of course not, might be your instant response. But what if lions were being wiped out by a devastating disease introduced by people? What if the genetic change was a tiny tweak that makes them immune to this disease, of the sort that might evolve naturally given enough time and enough dead lions? These kinds of questions are dividing conservationists, and matters are about to come to a head. In the coming week, at a meeting of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) – the world’s leading conservation organisation – delegates will vote on a motion that would “pause” any form of genetic engineering of wildlife, including the introduction of modified microbes. “I have no idea how the vote will go,” says Piero Genovesi at the Institute for Environmental Protection and Research in Italy, who helped draft an open letter opposing the proposed motion. An IUCN moratorium on synthetic biology would have no legal force, but it could still have far-reaching effects. For instance, many conservation organisations might stop funding work involving genetic engineering, and some countries could make such a ban part of national laws. “The moratorium would certainly be problematic on many levels,” says Ben Novak at Revive & Restore, a US-based non-profit that aims to use biotechnologies to rescue endangered and extinct species. Why is this happening now? In a word, CRISPR. In 2014, it was shown that CRISPR gene-editing technology can be used to create gene drives – basically, a piece of DNA that gets passed down to all offspring, rather than the usual half. This means a gene drive can spread even if it is harmful and could, in theory, be used to wipe out invasive species. Gene drives could also be used to spread beneficial traits, such as disease resistance. At a conference in Hawaii in 2016, there was talk of using gene drives to get rid of the invasive mosquitoes that have wiped out half of Hawaii’s native bird species, says Genovesi. Some conservationists were enthusiastic; others were horrified. That triggered the events leading to the proposed moratorium. “Gene drives are being pushed quite strongly by some as the panacea for dealing with all sorts of environmental problems,” says Ricarda Steinbrecher at EcoNexus, a research organisation that is among those backing a moratorium. But the broad wording of the proposed motion applies to far more than gene drives. It would rule out most de-extinction efforts, for instance, and could also be seen as banning live vaccines. Steinbrecher says a moratorium is a pause, not a permanent block, and that there could be another vote to end it “when we have more data”. But some of those backing the ban are campaign groups opposed to any genetic engineering, so it is hard to see what would change their minds. “I am afraid it could be a very long ban,” says Genovesi. Take the idea of using gene editing to make wild animals resistant to diseases. Steinbrecher says gene editing could have unintended side effects. But the evidence we have suggests the risks are low – which is why several gene-edited foods are already being eaten, and why the first CRISPR treatment for people got approved last year. The same benefits-versus-risks considerations apply with conservation. Is it really better to stand by and watch coral reefs being wiped out by global warming than to, say, release genetically engineered algal symbionts that give corals more heat tolerance? A key issue is scalability, says Novak. Divers transplanting corals by hand are never going to save reefs. “This is where synthetic biology tools are vital,” he says. “The overall goals of restoring 30 per cent of land to nature, of saving species, etc, will not be attainable without synthetic biology.” Ultimately, this is about competing visions of nature. Some see nature as pristine and sacrosanct, and are appalled by the idea of any genetic meddling. But humans have been transforming nature ever since we wiped out most megafauna. We are already unintentionally meddling genetically by imposing all kinds of selection pressures. Hunting, pollution, pesticides, invasive species and introduced diseases are forcing many plants and animals to change to survive. Some elephant populations are nearly tuskless, for instance. Of course, this doesn’t mean that more meddling will make things better. There are indeed serious risks to releasing gene drives – for instance, gene drives designed to wipe out invasive species might spread to the native range of the target species. But researchers are very aware of the risks. And there are ways to reduce them, for instance by making gene drives self-limiting so they cannot just spread indefinitely. “We are facing a dramatic crisis of biodiversity,” says Genovesi. “We shouldn’t close the door to new tools that could help us combat some of the major threats.” Conservation and rewilding in the Central Apennines: Italy Journey into Italy’s Central Apennines region for a fascinating introduction to the concept and practicalities of rewilding.

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.