GoGreenNation news

The pangolin: An armored, insect-controlling mammal

News Feed

Monday, October 13, 2025

Watch this video to learn more about the amazing pangolin. Image via A. J. T. Johnsingh/ WWF-India/ NCF/ Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0). Deep within the tropical forests of Asia and Africa lives a creature that seems to have stepped out of an ancient legend. With its body covered in scales, surprisingly long tongue and curious way of walking, the pangolin is one of the most unique animals on the planet. Yet despite its striking appearance, very few have seen one in the wild. And even fewer understand its vital role in maintaining the ecological balance of its habitat. Unfortunately, the pangolin faces a serious threat. Poaching and illegal trafficking have made it the most trafficked mammal in the world. How can such an unknown animal be on the brink of extinction? To protect it, we must first get to know it. Discover why the pangolin is a truly one-of-a-kind creature. The pangolin has an almost impenetrable armor The pangolin is easily recognized by its body covered in tough scales made of keratin, the same substance found in human fingernails and rhinoceroses’ horns. These scales form a natural armor that serves as its main defense mechanism. When threatened, the pangolin curls up into a nearly impenetrable ball, protecting its most vulnerable parts. There are eight recognized species of pangolin, four in Asia and four in Africa. Although they vary in size and color, they share certain physical characteristics. They have elongated bodies, short legs with strong claws, and some species have prehensile tails. They lack teeth, which may seem like a disadvantage, but they are perfectly adapted to their insect-based diet. To stay safe, pangolins curl up into a ball, covering themselves with their hard, protective scales. Image via U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters/ Wikipedia (CC BY 2.0). How pangolins get around This animal has a curious way of walking. Although it’s a quadruped (with four legs), it often walks mainly on its hind legs, using its front legs only partially. This is because its front legs have very long, sharp claws. They use them to tear open termite mounds and anthills. To avoid wearing down or damaging these claws while moving, many pangolins walk with their wrists bent or even in a semi-upright position, relying more on their back legs. There are also arboreal (tree-dwelling) species of pangolins. These pangolins use their long, curved claws to climb tree bark. They also have prehensile tails that help them grip branches and maintain balance. Their bodies are muscular and flexible, allowing them to move easily among branches. Pangolins have strong, curved claws on their front legs, which they use for tearing open ant and termite nests. Their front legs are shorter and more muscular for digging, while their longer hind legs support walking, often with the front claws tucked under to protect them. Image via pma/ iNaturalist (CC BY 4.0). Pangolin vs. armadillo: How similar are they? At first glance, many people confuse pangolins with armadillos due to their armor-like bodies. However, these similarities are a perfect example of convergent evolution. This is when different species develop similar traits due to similar ecological needs, even though they are not closely related. Armadillos are native to the Americas, while pangolins live in Asia and Africa. Genetically and evolutionarily, they are quite distant: the armadillo belongs to the order Cingulata, along with sloths and anteaters, while the pangolin is the only member of its order (Pholidota), making it even more unique. Another major difference is their body covering. Pangolin scales are made of keratin, while the armadillo’s shell is bony and more rigid. Additionally, armadillos are strong swimmers and expert diggers, whereas pangolins are agile climbers, although some species also dig burrows. So, despite their outward similarity, they differ greatly in behavior, habitat and evolution. Many species of pangolins are excellent climbers. They use their strong claws and prehensile tails to grip branches and navigate trees with ease, especially in forested environments. What makes the pangolin special? Unlike other mammals, the pangolin has a slow metabolism and nocturnal habits, making it even harder to spot. It is a peaceful, solitary and very shy animal that prefers the quiet of forests or savannas to live its life undisturbed. The pangolin is a specialized insectivore, feeding almost exclusively on ants and termites. Its tongue can be longer than its own body! It uses its tongue to explore underground tunnels and consume insects at high speed. Plus, it produces sticky saliva to catch its prey effectively. Pangolins also play an important ecological role in their environment. They can consume up to 70 million insects per year, helping to control pests and maintain ecosystem balance. It’s a natural cleaner, essential for environmental health. Pangolins eat large numbers of ants and termites, helping to keep the environment balanced and naturally controlling pest populations. What are baby pangolins like? Despite their scaly appearance, pangolins are mammals, and their young are born alive after a gestation period of four to five months, depending on the species. Usually, the mother gives birth to a single baby, though in rare cases there may be two. At birth, the young weigh between 0.18 and 0.99 pounds (80 to 450 grams) and are already covered in scales, although they are soft and pinkish at first. Over the following days, the scales harden, forming the protective armor that defines the species. Pangolin babies are born with their eyes open and have a remarkable ability to cling to their mother from the start. During the first weeks of life, the baby stays very close to the mother. When the mother moves, the baby clings tightly to her tail, and when resting, she curls up around the baby to shield it with her body and scales. This maternal behavior is essential for the baby’s survival, as it relies completely on its mother for nourishment and protection. In the early months, it feeds exclusively on her milk, although later it begins to eat ants and termites. Sadly, both baby and adult pangolins face serious threats. Illegal trafficking – driven by the demand for their scales and meat in Asian and African markets – has put all pangolin species at risk of extinction. This is especially critical because pangolins reproduce very slowly, making population recovery extremely difficult. Mother pangolins protect their babies by curling around them, forming a protective ball with their tough, scaly bodies. The most trafficked mammal in the world: the tragedy of illegal trade Despite their shy and peaceful nature, pangolins have drawn the wrong kind of attention: they are the most trafficked mammal in the world. It is estimated that millions have been captured over recent decades, particularly in Asia, due largely to unfounded myths about their supposed medicinal properties. In some Asian cultures – especially in China and Vietnam – there is a false belief that their scales can cure diseases such as asthma, arthritis or even cancer, despite a total lack of scientific evidence. Additionally, their meat is considered a rare delicacy and a status symbol. These myths have led to indiscriminate hunting of the pangolin. This trafficking has pushed all eight pangolin species to the brink of extinction. Some, such as the Chinese and Sunda pangolins, are already critically endangered. Habitat loss, uncontrolled hunting and a lack of public awareness about their ecological importance are worsening the crisis. Sadly, pangolins are the most heavily trafficked mammals in the world, suffering from illegal trade and poaching for their scales and meat. Image via Shukran888/ Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0). What’s being done to protect them? In 2016, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) completely banned international trade of pangolins. Additionally, conservation organizations and governments are promoting protection programs, environmental education and rehabilitation of rescued animals. Still, pangolins need more than laws; they need respect, awareness and action. Only through collaboration between communities, governments and global citizens can we ensure that this enigmatic forest guardian does not disappear forever. And you? Had you heard of the pangolin before reading this? Perhaps now you’ll see it with different eyes, not as a rarity, but as a symbol of the biodiversity we are either about to lose … or save. These animals are irresistibly cute and walk like tiny T. rexes, balancing on their hind legs with their front claws held up like little arms! Bottom line: Covered in armor and curled in mystery, the pangolin is an endangered species in Asia and Africa. Learn more about them here. Read more: Anteaters are vacuum-like animals: Lifeform of the week Sloths are our calm and smiley lifeform of the week Spiky porcupines are our lifeform of the weekThe post The pangolin: An armored, insect-controlling mammal first appeared on EarthSky.

Covered in armor and curled in mystery, the pangolin is an endangered species in Asia and Africa. Learn more about them here. The post The pangolin: An armored, insect-controlling mammal first appeared on EarthSky.

Watch this video to learn more about the amazing pangolin. Image via A. J. T. Johnsingh/ WWF-India/ NCF/ Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0).

Deep within the tropical forests of Asia and Africa lives a creature that seems to have stepped out of an ancient legend. With its body covered in scales, surprisingly long tongue and curious way of walking, the pangolin is one of the most unique animals on the planet. Yet despite its striking appearance, very few have seen one in the wild. And even fewer understand its vital role in maintaining the ecological balance of its habitat.

Unfortunately, the pangolin faces a serious threat. Poaching and illegal trafficking have made it the most trafficked mammal in the world. How can such an unknown animal be on the brink of extinction? To protect it, we must first get to know it. Discover why the pangolin is a truly one-of-a-kind creature.

The pangolin has an almost impenetrable armor

The pangolin is easily recognized by its body covered in tough scales made of keratin, the same substance found in human fingernails and rhinoceroses’ horns. These scales form a natural armor that serves as its main defense mechanism. When threatened, the pangolin curls up into a nearly impenetrable ball, protecting its most vulnerable parts.

There are eight recognized species of pangolin, four in Asia and four in Africa. Although they vary in size and color, they share certain physical characteristics. They have elongated bodies, short legs with strong claws, and some species have prehensile tails. They lack teeth, which may seem like a disadvantage, but they are perfectly adapted to their insect-based diet.

Animal covered in scales looks like a ball. None of its vulnerable parts are visible. — To stay safe, pangolins curl up into a ball, covering themselves with their hard, protective scales. Image via U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters/ Wikipedia (CC BY 2.0).

How pangolins get around

This animal has a curious way of walking. Although it’s a quadruped (with four legs), it often walks mainly on its hind legs, using its front legs only partially.

This is because its front legs have very long, sharp claws. They use them to tear open termite mounds and anthills. To avoid wearing down or damaging these claws while moving, many pangolins walk with their wrists bent or even in a semi-upright position, relying more on their back legs.

There are also arboreal (tree-dwelling) species of pangolins. These pangolins use their long, curved claws to climb tree bark. They also have prehensile tails that help them grip branches and maintain balance. Their bodies are muscular and flexible, allowing them to move easily among branches.

Dark brown animal as seen from the front. It has scales covering its body, a small head and very long claws at the front legs. — Pangolins have strong, curved claws on their front legs, which they use for tearing open ant and termite nests. Their front legs are shorter and more muscular for digging, while their longer hind legs support walking, often with the front claws tucked under to protect them. Image via pma/ iNaturalist (CC BY 4.0).

Pangolin vs. armadillo: How similar are they?

At first glance, many people confuse pangolins with armadillos due to their armor-like bodies. However, these similarities are a perfect example of convergent evolution. This is when different species develop similar traits due to similar ecological needs, even though they are not closely related.

Armadillos are native to the Americas, while pangolins live in Asia and Africa. Genetically and evolutionarily, they are quite distant: the armadillo belongs to the order Cingulata, along with sloths and anteaters, while the pangolin is the only member of its order (Pholidota), making it even more unique.

Another major difference is their body covering. Pangolin scales are made of keratin, while the armadillo’s shell is bony and more rigid. Additionally, armadillos are strong swimmers and expert diggers, whereas pangolins are agile climbers, although some species also dig burrows. So, despite their outward similarity, they differ greatly in behavior, habitat and evolution.

Many species of pangolins are excellent climbers. They use their strong claws and prehensile tails to grip branches and navigate trees with ease, especially in forested environments.

What makes the pangolin special?

Unlike other mammals, the pangolin has a slow metabolism and nocturnal habits, making it even harder to spot. It is a peaceful, solitary and very shy animal that prefers the quiet of forests or savannas to live its life undisturbed.

The pangolin is a specialized insectivore, feeding almost exclusively on ants and termites. Its tongue can be longer than its own body! It uses its tongue to explore underground tunnels and consume insects at high speed. Plus, it produces sticky saliva to catch its prey effectively.

Pangolins also play an important ecological role in their environment. They can consume up to 70 million insects per year, helping to control pests and maintain ecosystem balance. It’s a natural cleaner, essential for environmental health.

Pangolins eat large numbers of ants and termites, helping to keep the environment balanced and naturally controlling pest populations.

What are baby pangolins like?

Despite their scaly appearance, pangolins are mammals, and their young are born alive after a gestation period of four to five months, depending on the species.

Usually, the mother gives birth to a single baby, though in rare cases there may be two. At birth, the young weigh between 0.18 and 0.99 pounds (80 to 450 grams) and are already covered in scales, although they are soft and pinkish at first. Over the following days, the scales harden, forming the protective armor that defines the species. Pangolin babies are born with their eyes open and have a remarkable ability to cling to their mother from the start.

During the first weeks of life, the baby stays very close to the mother. When the mother moves, the baby clings tightly to her tail, and when resting, she curls up around the baby to shield it with her body and scales.

This maternal behavior is essential for the baby’s survival, as it relies completely on its mother for nourishment and protection. In the early months, it feeds exclusively on her milk, although later it begins to eat ants and termites.

Sadly, both baby and adult pangolins face serious threats. Illegal trafficking – driven by the demand for their scales and meat in Asian and African markets – has put all pangolin species at risk of extinction. This is especially critical because pangolins reproduce very slowly, making population recovery extremely difficult.

Mother pangolins protect their babies by curling around them, forming a protective ball with their tough, scaly bodies.

The most trafficked mammal in the world: the tragedy of illegal trade

Despite their shy and peaceful nature, pangolins have drawn the wrong kind of attention: they are the most trafficked mammal in the world. It is estimated that millions have been captured over recent decades, particularly in Asia, due largely to unfounded myths about their supposed medicinal properties.

In some Asian cultures – especially in China and Vietnam – there is a false belief that their scales can cure diseases such as asthma, arthritis or even cancer, despite a total lack of scientific evidence. Additionally, their meat is considered a rare delicacy and a status symbol. These myths have led to indiscriminate hunting of the pangolin.

This trafficking has pushed all eight pangolin species to the brink of extinction. Some, such as the Chinese and Sunda pangolins, are already critically endangered. Habitat loss, uncontrolled hunting and a lack of public awareness about their ecological importance are worsening the crisis.

Adult pangolin curled up and young pangolin on top. — Sadly, pangolins are the most heavily trafficked mammals in the world, suffering from illegal trade and poaching for their scales and meat. Image via Shukran888/ Wikipedia (CC BY-SA 4.0).

What’s being done to protect them?

In 2016, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) completely banned international trade of pangolins. Additionally, conservation organizations and governments are promoting protection programs, environmental education and rehabilitation of rescued animals.

Still, pangolins need more than laws; they need respect, awareness and action. Only through collaboration between communities, governments and global citizens can we ensure that this enigmatic forest guardian does not disappear forever.

And you? Had you heard of the pangolin before reading this? Perhaps now you’ll see it with different eyes, not as a rarity, but as a symbol of the biodiversity we are either about to lose … or save.

These animals are irresistibly cute and walk like tiny T. rexes, balancing on their hind legs with their front claws held up like little arms!

Bottom line: Covered in armor and curled in mystery, the pangolin is an endangered species in Asia and Africa. Learn more about them here.

Anteaters are vacuum-like animals: Lifeform of the week

Sloths are our calm and smiley lifeform of the week

Spiky porcupines are our lifeform of the week

The post The pangolin: An armored, insect-controlling mammal first appeared on EarthSky.

Read the full story here.

Photos courtesy of

Related News

A Foot-Tall Elephant? 'Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age' on Apple TV Reveals Surprising Creatures

Apple TV has launched “Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age,” a five-part series that brings the Pleistocene era to life with stunning visuals

It was an incredible time when the Earth was going through immense systemic changes and was filled with often nightmarish creatures — carnivorous kangaroos, 14-foot-tall bears and armadillos bigger than cars. Sid the sloth's eyes would bulge even more.A hyper-realistic picture of life during that Pleistocene era emerges with Apple TV's five-part, computer-driven “Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age,” which takes place millions of years after the dinosaurs’ extinction.“Nobody’s made a natural history representation of these creatures behaving and interacting in the way that we have in this series,” says Mike Gunton, co-executive producer and senior executive at the storied BBC Natural History Unit. This is the third chapter in the “Prehistoric Planet” series, blending cinematic storytelling with photorealistic visual effects and the latest scientific knowledge to give viewers a treat: Nostrils flare, fur is rustled by howling winds and eyelashes twitch. “Within one second of turning the show on, I do not want people to think, ‘Oh, it’s a CGI show.’ I want them to think, ‘Oh my gosh, what’s that animal? Where did they film that?'” Gunton says.The filmmaking style mimics the visual vocabulary of documentary nature shows like “Planet Earth” or “Blue Planet” but conjures up animals dead for millions of years with the latest digital innovations. “Even five years ago, we couldn’t have done it,” says Gunton. “Even in the time we’ve been making it, the acceleration of the power of the visual effects has been absolutely noticeable.”The series is narrated by Golden Globe- and Olivier Award-winner Tom Hiddleston, with an original score by Hans Zimmer, Anže Rozman and Kara Talve from Bleeding Fingers Music.Jon Favreau is co-executive producer and came at the series after directing the live-action/CGI “The Jungle Book” in 2016 with Idris Elba, Lupita Nyong’o and Scarlett Johansson, and 2019's “The Lion King,” with a voice cast including Donald Glover and Chiwetel Ejiofor. “I was very struck by the photorealism we were able to achieve in both of those projects and this seemed like a really good application for using realism in both animation and environmental design and render to create the illusion that you’re actually looking at something real and to apply it to dinosaurs and ice age megafauna,” he says.Gunton, who has produced such nature shows as “Hidden Kingdoms” and “The Green Planet,” turned to the topic of the ice age more than three years ago after wrapping up two dino-filled previous chapters and quickly learned he had a lot to learn. “I was thinking, ‘Well, this is all going to be ice and woolly mammoths and mastodons and saber-tooth tigers,” he says. What he found out was there wasn’t just one ice age but a series of eight, and while as much as a quarter of Earth’s landmass was covered by ice, the rest was becoming arid and desert, changing animals' evolution.There were Diprotodons, rhino-sized relatives of wombats and the largest marsupials of all time. There were giant short-faced kangaroos and 14-foot-tall bears. One of the cutest creatures is a dwarf Stegodon, which resembled a 3-foot elephant. The filmmakers added its baby, standing just 12 inches, and we meet him playing with a butterfly. “A swishing trunk and tail means a Stegodon wants to play,” says Hiddleston. But the little guy gets into trouble when a gang of 6-foot giant storks come hunting. Mom, thankfully, comes to the rescue. “In a world where birds can eat elephants, you should never stray too far from Mother,” Hiddleston concludes.“These animals feel alive,” says Gunton. “That comes from spending 35, nearly 40 years filming animals, watching animals, knowing how they react to each other and also knowing how to photograph these kind of behaviors.”While the look of the series is cutting edge, Favreau points out that it was crafted with artists and traditional technological techniques, not AI, and that helps it connect.“At the end of the day, to be working side by side with artists, animators, filmmakers — there is something that creates a very specific and personal and emotional connection with tremendous specificity, which is still something that eludes the other technologies.”During the ice age, sea levels dropped, creating land bridges and connecting North and South America to create a kind of animal superhighway, with creatures going in both directions and encountering new rivals and food.The filmmakers leaned on the visual effects company Framestore and consulted over 50 ice age specialists to create the series, often using puppets to get the shots right before removing them and adding the visual effects. Fossil records are better than with dinosaurs because many of the ice age creatures were captured in the permafrost.“We see that the species that were most able to adapt still survive to this day, and there are many that didn’t,” says Favreau. “We’re capturing a moment here where there was transition in relatively short amount of time. Even though it would be thousands of years, it’s still a blink of an eye in the history of our planet.”“Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age,” tells little vignettes for each animal, showing how they hunt or mate, travel and play. Gunton says he's not interested in making an endless loop of predators chasing prey. He'd rather show how a pregnant woolly mammoth lost in a blizzard can be protected by her herd.“I think that audiences are more engaged in complexity of relationships and what animals do and how they behave with each other,'' he said. “The voyeuristic kill doesn’t interest me particularly, and I don’t think it interests most of the audience.”Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Animals

Extinction

Food

AI Is Coming for Your Toddler’s Bedtime Story

I began this morning, as I do every morning, by reading my daughter a book. Today it was Arthur Dorros’ Abuela, illustrated by Elisa Kleven. Abuela is a sweet story about a girl who imagines that she and her grandmother leap into the sky and soar around New York City. Dorros does an elegant job weaving Spanish words and phrases throughout the text, often allowing readers to glean their meaning rather than translating them directly. When Rosalba, the bilingual granddaughter, discovers she can fly, she calls to her grandmother, “Ven, Abuela. Come, Abuela.” Her Spanish-speaking grandmother replies simply, “Sí, quiero volar.” Their language use reflects who they are—a move that plenty of authors who write for adults fail to make. Abuela was one of my favorite books growing up, and it’s one of my 2-year-old’s favorites now. (And yes, we’re reading my worn old copy.) She loves the idea of a flying grandma; she loves learning bits of what she calls Fanish; she loves the bit when Rosalba and Abuela hitch a ride on an airplane, though she worries it might be too loud. Most of all, though, she loves Kleven’s warm yet antic illustrations, which capture urban life in nearly pointillist detail. Every page gives her myriad things to look for and gives us myriad things to discuss. (Where are the dogs? What does Rosalba’s tío sell in his store? Why is it scary when airplanes are loud?) I’ve probably read Abuela 200 times since we swiped it from my parents over the summer, and no two readings have been the same. I don’t start all my days with books as rich as Abuela, though. Sometimes, my daughter chooses the books I wish she wouldn’t: ones that have wandered into our house as gifts, or in a big stack someone was giving away, and that I have yet to purge. These books have garish, unappealing computer-rendered art. Some of them have nursery rhymes as text, and the rest have inane rhymes that don’t quite add up to a story. One or two are Jewish holiday-oriented, and a couple more are tourist souvenirs. Not a single one of these books has a named author or illustrator. None of their publishers, all of which are quite small, responded to my requests for interviews, but I strongly suspect that these books were written and generated by AI—and that I’m not supposed to guess. The maybe-AI book that has lasted the longest in our house is a badly illustrated Old MacDonald Has a Farm. Its animals are inconsistently pixelated around the edges; the pink circles on its farmer’s cheeks vary significantly in size from page to page, and his hands appear to have second thumbs instead of pinkies. All of these irregularities are signs of AI, according to the writer and illustrator Karen Ferreira, who runs an author coaching program called Children’s Book Mastery. On her program’s site, she warns that because AI cannot create a series of images using the same figures, it generates characters that are—even if only subtly—dissimilar from page to page. Noting this in our Old MacDonald, I checked to see whether it was copyrighted, because the US copyright office has ruled out copyright for images created by machine learning. Where other board books have copyright symbols and information—often the illustration and text copyright holders are different—this one reads only, “All rights reserved.” It’s unclear what these “rights” refer to, given that there is no named holder; it’s possible that the publisher is gesturing at the design, but equally possible that the statement is a decoy with no legal meaning. What makes a good children’s book, and how much does it matter if a children’s book is good? I have many objections to maybe-AI books like this one. They’re ugly, whereas all our other children’s books are whimsical, beautiful, or both. They aren’t playful or sly or surprising. Their prose has no rhythm, in contrast to, let’s say, Sandra Boynton’s Barnyard Dance! and Dinosaur Dance!, which have beats that inspire toddlers to leap up and perform. (The author-illustrator Mo Willems has said children’s books are “meant to be played, not just to be read.”) They don’t give my daughter much to notice or me much to riff on, which means she gets sick of them quickly. If she chooses one, she’s often done with it in under a minute. It gives me a vague sting of guilt to donate such uninspiring books, but I still do, since the only other option is the landfill. I imagine they’ll end up there anyway. But I should admit that I also dislike the books that trigger my AI radar—that uncanny-valley tingle you get when something just seems inhuman—out of bias. I am a writer and translator, a person whose livelihood is entirely centered and dependent on living in a society that values human creativity, and just the thought of a children’s book generated by AI upsets me. Some months ago, I decided I wanted to know whether my bias was right. After all, there are legions of bad children’s books written and illustrated (or stock photo–collaged) by humans. Are those books meaningfully and demonstrably different from AI ones? If they are, how big a threat is AI to quality children’s publishing, and does it also threaten children’s learning? In a sense, my questions—not all of which are answerable—boil down to this: What makes a good children’s book, and how much does it matter if a children’s book is good? I’m not the only one worried about this. My brother- and sister-in-law, proud Minnesotans, recently sent us a book called Count On Minnesota—state merch, precisely the sort of thing that’s set my AI alarms ringing in the past—whose publisher, Gibbs Smith, includes a warning on the back beside the copyright notice: “No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner for the purpose of training artificial intelligence technologies and systems.” Count On Minnesota is nearly wordless and has no named author, but the names of its artist and designer, Nicole LaRue and Brynn Evans, sit directly below the AI statement, reminding readers who will be harmed if Count On Minnesota gets scraped to train large vision models despite its copyright language. In this sense, children’s literature is akin to the many, many other fields that generative AI threatens. There’s a danger that machines will take authors’ and illustrators’ jobs, and the data sets on which they were trained have already taken tremendous amounts of intellectual property. Larry Law, executive director of the Great Lakes Independent Booksellers Association, told me that his organization’s member stores are against AI-created books—and, as a matter of policy, refuse to stock anything they suspect or know was generated by a large language or vision model—because “as an association, we value artists and authors and publishers and fundamentally believe that AI steals from artists.” Still, Law and many of GLIBA’s members are comfortable using AI to streamline workflow. So are many publishers. Both corporate publishing houses and some reputable independent ones are at least beginning to use AI to create the marketing bibles called tip sheets and other internal sales documents. According to industry sources I spoke to on background, some corporate publishers are also testing large language and vision models’ capacities to create children’s books, but their attempts aren’t reaching the market. The illustrations aren’t good enough yet, and it’s still easier to have a human produce text than to make a person coach and edit a large language model. “Kids are weird! They’re joyfully weird, and if you spend time with them and are able to get that weirdness and that playfulness out of them, you can really understand why a moralizing book really comes across as gross.” Other publishers, meanwhile, are shying away. Dan Brewster, owner of Prologue Bookshop in Columbus, Ohio—a shop with an explicit anti-AI policy—told me, “The publisher partners we work with every day have not done anything to make me suspect them” of generating text or illustrations with AI; many, he added, have told him, “‘You’re never going to see that from us.’” (Whether that’s true, of course, remains to be seen.) In contrast, Brewster has grown more cautious in his acquisitions of self-published books and those released by very small independent presses. He sees these as higher AI risks, as does Timothy Otte, a co-owner and buyer at Minneapolis’ Wild Rumpus, a beloved 33-year-old children’s bookstore. Its legacy and reach, he says, means they “get both traditionally published authors and self-published authors reaching out asking you to stock their book. That was true before AI was in the picture. Now, some of those authors that are reaching out, it is clear that what they’re pitching to me was at least partly, if not entirely, generated by AI.” Otte always says no, both on the grounds Law described and because the books are no good. The art often has not just inconsistencies, but errors: Rendering models aren’t great at getting the right number of toes on a paw. The text can be equally full of mistakes, as children’s librarian Sondra Eklund writes in a horrified blog post about acquiring a book about rabbits from children’s publisher Bold Kids, only to discover that she’d bought an AI book so carelessly produced that it informs readers that rabbits “can even make their own clothes…and can help you out with gardening.” (Reviews of Bold Kids’ hundreds of books on Amazon suggest that its rabbit book isn’t the only one with such issues. Bold Kids did not respond to repeated efforts to reach them for comment.) The text of more edited AI books, meanwhile, tends to condescend to young readers. Otte often sees books whose authors have “decided that there is a moral that they want to give to children, and they have asked a large language model to spit out a picture book that shows a kid coming up against some sort of problem and being given a moral solution.” In his experience, that isn’t what children want or how they learn. “Kids are weird!” Otte says. “They’re joyfully weird, and if you spend time with them and are able to get that weirdness and that playfulness out of them, you can really understand why a moralizing book really comes across as gross. The number of times I’ve seen kids make a stank face at a book that’s telling them how to be!” AI could be no menace at all to picture-book classics, but it could make high-quality contemporary board books go extinct. But is a lazy, moralizing AI book any worse than a lazy, moralizing one written by a person? When I put this question to Otte, the only distinction he could come up with was the “ancillary ethical concerns of water usage and the environmental impact that a large language model currently has.” Other book buyers, though, pointed out that while AI can imitate a particular writer or designer’s style or mash multiple perspectives together, it cannot have a point of view of its own. Plenty of big publishers create picture books and board books—which are simple, sturdy texts printed on cardstock heavy enough to be gnawed on by a teething 8-month-old—in-house, using stock photos and releasing them without an author’s name. Very rarely is the result much good, and yet each publisher does have its own visual signature. If you’re a millennial, you can likely close your eyes and summon the museum-text layout of the pages in a DK Eyewitness book. It’s idiosyncratic even if it’s not particularly special. To deny our children even that is to assume, in a sense, that they have no point of view: that they can’t tell one book from another and wouldn’t care if they could. Frankly, though, I’m less concerned with the gap between bad AI and bad human than I am with the yawning chasm between bad AI and good human, since bad children’s books by humans are the ones more likely to become rarer or cease existing. If rendering models get good enough that corporate publishers stop asking humans to slap together, let’s say, stock-photo books about ducks, those books could, in theory, vanish. That doesn’t mean Robert McCloskey’s canonical, beautiful Make Way for Ducklings will go out of print. But it’s much less expensive to publish a book that was written years ago than it is to pay an author and illustrator for something new. It’s also less expensive to print a picture book like Make Way for Ducklings than a board book, with its heavier paper and nontoxic (again: gnawing baby) inks. AI could be no menace at all to picture-book classics, but it could make high-quality contemporary board books go extinct. Only instinct and imagination can tell you what Sandra Boynton means when she writes in ‘Dinosaur Dance!’ that “Iguanodon goes dibbidy DAH.” It doesn’t help that everyone from parents to publishers is susceptible to undervaluing board books. It’s very difficult to argue that the quality of a picture book doesn’t matter, since they are the ones that most children use to learn to read. But it’s easy to dismiss board books, which are intended for children not only too young to read, but too young to even follow a story. Can’t we just show a baby anything? According to Dr. John Hutton, a pediatrician and former children’s bookstore owner who researches the impact reading at home has on toddlers’ brain function and development, we shouldn’t. In fact, we should avoid reading our kids anything that bores us. Beginning in utero, one of the greatest benefits of shared reading is bonding, and unsurprisingly, Hutton has found that the more engaged parents are in the book they’ve chosen, the greater its impact on that front. But reading to babies is also important, he explained, because the more words a child hears, the greater their receptive and expressive vocabularies (that is, the words they know and can say) will be. This, starting around age 1, lets parents and children discuss the books they’re reading, a process that Hutton told me “builds social cognition and later dovetails with empathy.” It does this by training children’s brains to connect language to emotion—and to do so through imagination. Hutton presented this as vital neurological work. “Nothing in the brain comes for free,” he told me, “and unless you practice empathy skills—connecting, getting along, feeling what others are feeling—you’re not going to have as well-developed neural infrastructure to be able to do that.” It’s also a social equalizer. Research has shown that reading aloud exposes children whose parents have lower income levels or educational backgrounds to more words and kinds of syntax than they might otherwise hear—and, Hutton notes, this isn’t a question of proper syntax. Rather, what matters here is creativity. Some of the best board books out there bend or even invent language—only instinct and imagination can tell you what Boynton means when she writes in Dinosaur Dance! that “Iguanodon goes dibbidy DAH”—and this teaches their little listeners how to do the same. Of course, not all good board books’ strength is linguistic. Ideally, Hutton says, a book’s text and illustrations should “recruit both the language and visual parts of your brain to work together to understand what’s going on.” From ages 6 months to 18 months, my daughter was enamored with books from Camilla Reid and Ingela Arrhenius’ Peekaboo series, which have minimal text, cheery yet sophisticated illustrations, and a pop-up or slider on each page. My daughter loved it when I read Peekaboo Pumpkin to her, but she also loved learning to manipulate it herself. It was visually and tactilely appealing enough to become not just a book, but a toy—and it was sturdy enough to do so. She’s got plenty of other books with pop-ups, but Peekaboo Pumpkin and Peekaboo Lion are the only ones she hasn’t more or less destroyed. Reid and Arrhenius publish with Nosy Crow, a London-based independent press. I reached out to ask if the company was concerned about AI threatening its business and got an emphatic no from its preschool publishing director and senior art director, Tor England and Zoë Gregory. England immediately highlighted the physical durability of Nosy Crow’s books. “We believe in a book as an object people want to own,” she said, rather than one meant to be disposable. They invest in them accordingly: England and Gregory visit Arrhenius in Sweden to discuss new ideas and often spend two or three years working on a book. Neither fears that AI could compete with the quality of such painstaking work, which, for the most part, is entirely analog. Some of Nosy Crow’s books do make sounds, though—something I generally hate, but I make an exception for the shockingly realistic toddler giggle in What’s That Noise? Meow! Gregory told me that while working on that book, she couldn’t find a laugh she liked in the sound libraries Nosy Crow normally uses, so she went home, set her iPhone to record, and tickled her daughter. A good board book could become one more educational advantage that accrues disproportionately to the elite. But somebody shopping on Amazon won’t hear that giggle. Nor can an online shopper identify a shoddily printed book, which may well be cheaper than Nosy Crow’s but will certainly withstand less tugging and chewing before it falls apart. A risk that Otte and the other buyers I spoke to identified—and while it serves booksellers’ interests to say this, it is also an entirely reasonable projection—is that while independent bookstores and well-curated libraries will continue to stock high-quality books like Nosy Crow’s, Amazon, which is both the largest book retailer and the largest self-publishing service in the nation, will grow ever fuller of AI dreck. If corporate publishers turn to AI to write and illustrate their board books, this strikes me as very likely to occur. It would mean that parents with the time and resources to browse in person would be likely to provide significantly higher-quality books to their pre-reading-age children than parents searching for “train book for toddlers” online. A good board book could become one more educational advantage that accrues disproportionately to the elite. In Empire of AI, journalist Karen Hao writes that technology revolutions “promise to deliver progress [but have a] tendency instead to reverse it for people out of power, especially the most vulnerable.” She argues that this is “perhaps truer than ever for the moment we now find ourselves in with artificial intelligence.” The key word here is perhaps. As of now, AI children’s books are on the fringes of publishing. Large publishers can choose to keep them that way. Doing so would be a statement of conviction that the quality and humanity of children’s books matter, no matter how young the child in question is. When I asked Hutton, the pediatrician, what worried him most about AI books, he mentioned the example of “lazy writing” they set, which he fears might disincentivize both hard work and creativity. He also pointed to an often-cited MIT study showing that writing with ChatGPT dampened creativity and less fully activated the brain—that is, it’s bad for the authors, not just the readers. Then he said, “You know, there are things we can do versus things we should do as a society, and that’s where we struggle, I think.” On this front, I hope to see no more struggle. We should not give our children, whose brains are vulnerable and malleable, books created by computers. We shouldn’t give them books created carelessly. That’s up to parents and teachers, yes—but it’s also up to authors, illustrators, designers, and publishers. Gregory told me that “there’s a lot of love and warmth and heart” that goes into the books she works on. Rejecting AI is a first step toward a landscape of children’s publishing where that’s always true.

Animals

Business

Education

Beloved eagle, a school mascot, electrocuted on power lines above Bay Area elementary school

A beloved eagle, a school mascot, was electrocuted on PG&E power lines near an elementary school in the Bay Area. Could anything have been done to prevent it? How often does this happen?

MILPITAS, Calif. — As scores of students swarmed out of their Milpitas elementary school on a recent afternoon, a lone bald eagle perched high above them in a redwood tree — only occasionally looking down on the after-school ruckus, training his eyes on the grassy hills along the western horizon.The week before, his mate was electrocuted on nearby power lines operated by PG&E.Kevin Slavin, principal of Curtner Elementary School, said the eagles in that nest are so well-known and beloved here that they were made the school’s mascots and the “whole ethos of the school has been tied around them” since they arrived in 2017. What exactly happened to send Hope the eagle off the pair’s nest in the dark of night and into the live wires on the night of Nov. 3 is not known (although there’s some scandalous speculation it involved a mysterious, “interloper” female). According to a spokesperson from PG&E, an outage occurred in the area at around 9 p.m. Line workers later discovered it was caused by the adult eagle.The death, sadly, is not atypical for large raptors, such as bald and golden eagles.According to a 2014 analysis of bird deaths across the U.S., electrocution on power lines is a significant cause of bird mortality. Every year, as many as 11.6 million birds are fried on the wires that juice our televisions, HVAC systems and blow driers, the authors estimated. The birds die when two body parts — a wing, foot or beak — come in contact with two wires, or when they touch a wire and ground source, sending a fatal current of electricity through the animal’s body.Because of their massive size, eagles and other raptors are at more risk. The wingspan of an adult bald eagle ranges from 5.5 to 8 feet across; it’s roughly the same for a golden eagle.According to a report from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s National Forensics Laboratory, which analyzed 417 electrocuted raptors from 13 species between 2000 and 2015, nearly 80 percent were bald or golden eagles.Krysta Rogers, senior environmental scientist at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife Investigations Laboratory, examined the dead eagle.She found small burns on Hope’s left foot pad and the back of her right leg. She also had singed feathers on both sides of her body, but especially on the right, where Rogers said the wing looked particularly damaged. She said most birds are electrocuted on utility poles, but Hope was electrocuted “mid-span,” where the wires dip between the poles. Melissa Subbotin, a spokesperson for PG&E, said the poles and wires near where the birds nested had been adapted with coverings and other safety features to make them safe for raptors. However, it appears the bird may have touched two wires mid-span. Subbotin said the utility company spaces lines at least 5 feet apart — a precaution it and other utility companies take to minimize raptor deaths. “Since 2002, PG&E has made about 42,990 existing power poles and towers bird-safe,” Subbotin said. The company has also retrofitted about 41,500 power poles in areas where bird have been injured or killed. In addition, she said, in 2024, the company replaced nearly 11,000 poles in designated “Raptor Concentration Zones” and built them to avian-safe construction guidelines.Doug Gillard, an amateur photographer and professor of anatomy and physiology at Life Chiropractic College West in Hayward, who has followed the Milpitas eagles for years, said while there is safety equipment near the school, it does not extend into the nearby neighborhood, where Hope was killed.Gillard said a photographer who lives in the neighborhood took a photo of the eagle hanging from the wires that Gillard has seen. The Times was unable to access the photo.Not far from the school is a marshy wetland, where ducks, geese and migrating birds come to rest and relax, a smorgasbord for a pair of eagles and their young. There are also fish in a nearby lake. Gillard said one of the nearby water bodies is stocked with trout, and that late fall is fishing season for the eagles. He said an army of photographers is currently hanging around the pond hoping to catch a snapshot of the father eagle catching a fish.Rogers said the bird was healthy. She had body fat, good muscle tone and two small feathers in her gut — presumably the remnants of a recent meal. She also had an enlarged ovary and visible oviduct — an avian fallopian tube — suggesting she was getting ready for breeding, which typically happens in January or February.Slavin, the principal, said that a day or two before the mother’s death, he saw the couple preparing their nest, and saw a young female show up. “It was a very tense situation among the eagles,” he said. Gillard, the photographer, said the “girlfriend” has black feathers on her head and in her tail, suggesting she isn’t quite five years old.Gillard and Slavin say they’ve heard from residents there may have been some altercation between the mom and the interloper that sent Hope off the nest and into the wires that night.The young female remains at the scene, and is not only being “tolerated” by the father, but occasionally accompanies him on his fishing trips, Gillard said. Eagles tend to mate for life, but if one dies, the other will look for a new mate, Gillard said. If the female eagle sticks around, it will be the dad’s third partner.Photographers can identify the father, who neighbors just call “Dad,” by the damaged flexor tendon on his right claw, which makes it appear as if he is “flipping the bird” when he flies by.

Animals

Health

Water

‘Forever chemicals’ contaminate more dolphins and whales than we thought – new research

The sex and age of an animal turn out to be stronger predictors than habitat for higher PFAS levels, suggesting they accumulate over a lifetime.

Getty ImagesNowhere in the ocean is now left untouched by a type of “forever chemicals” called “per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances”, known simply as PFAS. Our new research shows PFAS contaminate a far wider range of whales and dolphins than previously thought, including deep-diving species that live well beyond areas of human activity. But most surprising of all, where an animal lives does not predict its exposure. Instead, sex and age are stronger predictors of how much of these pollutants a whale or dolphin accumulates in its body. This means chemical pollution is more persistent and entrenched in ocean food webs than we realised, affecting everything from endangered coastal Māui dolphins to deep-diving beaked and sperm whales. This graphic shows that PFAS contamination affects a range of marine mammals, from nearshore dolphins to deep-diving predators. Science of the Total Environment, CC BY-ND PFAS were originally designed to make everyday products more convenient, but they have ultimately become a widespread environmental and public health concern. Our work provides stark evidence that no part of the ocean is now beyond the reach of human pollution. What are PFAS, and why are they a problem? PFAS are a group of more than 14,000 synthetic chemicals that have been used since the 1950s in a wide range of everyday products. This includes non-stick cookware, food packaging, cleaning products, waterproof clothing, firefighting foams and even cosmetics. Many everyday products contain PFAS. Author provided, CC BY-SA They’re known as forever chemicals because they don’t break down naturally. Instead, they travel through air and water, eventually reaching their final destination: the ocean. There, PFAS percolate through seawater and sediments and enter the food web, taken up by animals through their diet. Once inside an animal, PFAS can attach to proteins and accumulate in the blood and organs such as the liver, where they can disrupt hormones, immune function and reproduction. Like humans, whales and dolphins sit high in the food web, which makes them especially vulnerable to building up these pollutants over their lifetime. Whales and dolphins are the ocean’s canaries Marine mammals are an early warning system of the ocean. Because they are large predators with long lifespans, their health reflects what’s happening in the wider ecosystem, including risks that can affect people, too. This idea is at the heart of the OneHealth concept, which links environmental, animal and human health. New Zealand is one of the best places in the world to study human impacts in a OneHealth framework. More than half of the world’s toothed whales and dolphins (odontocetes) occur here, making Aotearoa a rare hotspot for marine mammals and an ideal place to assess how deeply PFAS have entered ocean food webs. We analysed liver samples from 127 stranded whales and dolphins, covering 16 species across four families, from coastal bottlenose dolphins to deep-diving beaked whales. For eight of these species, including Hector’s dolphins and three beaked whale species, this was the first time PFAS had ever been measured globally. PFAS contamination is an additional stress factor for Hector’s dolphins, which are endemic to New Zealand and already threatened. Getty Images We expected coastal species living closer to pollution sources to show the highest contamination, with deep-ocean species being much less exposed. However, our results told a different story. Habitat played only a minor role in predicting PFAS levels. Some deep-diving species had PFAS concentrations comparable to (or even higher than) coastal animals. It turns out biology matters more than habitat. Older, larger animals had higher PFAS levels, indicating they accumulate these chemicals over time. Males also tended to have higher burdens than females, consistent with mothers transferring PFAS to their calves during pregnancy and lactation. These patterns were consistent across all major types of PFAS chemicals. Why this matters Our findings show PFAS contamination has now entered every layer of the marine food web, affecting everything from nearshore dolphins to deep-diving predators. While diet is a major exposure pathway, animals could also be absorbing PFAS through other mechanisms, including potentially their skin. PFAS may further interact with other stressors, including climate change, shifting prey availability and disease, adding further pressure to species already under threat. Knowing that PFAS are present across different habitats and species raises urgent questions about their health impacts. Are these chemicals already affecting populations? Could PFAS contamination weaken immunity and increase disease risk in vulnerable species, such as Māui dolphins? Understanding how PFAS exposure affects reproduction, immunity and resilience to environmental pressures is now central to predicting whether species already under threat can withstand accelerating environmental change. Even the most remote whales carry high PFAS loads and we know humans are not isolated from these contaminations either. Answering these questions is not optional but essential if we want to protect both marine wildlife and the oceans we all depend on. The research was a trans-Tasman collaboration which also included Gabriel Machovsky at Massey University, Louis Tremblay at the Bioeconomy Science Institute and Shan Yi at the University of Auckland. Frédérik Saltré receives funding from the Australian Research Council.Emma Betty, Karen A Stockin, and Katharina J. Peters do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Animals

Chemicals

Food

Watch a Wolf Cleverly Raid a Crab Trap for a Snack. It Might Be the First Evidence of a Wild Canid Using a Tool

Footage from British Columbia shows just how intelligent wild wolves can be, but scientists are divided as to whether the behavior constitutes tool use

Watch a Wolf Cleverly Raid a Crab Trap for a Snack. It Might Be the First Evidence of a Wild Canid Using a Tool Footage from British Columbia shows just how intelligent wild wolves can be, but scientists are divided as to whether the behavior constitutes tool use Sarah Kuta - Daily Correspondent November 19, 2025 11:53 a.m. Members of the Haíɫzaqv (Heiltsuk) Nation caught the crafty female wolf on camera. Artelle et al. / Ecology and Evolution, 2025 Key takeaways: A dispute over tool use A female wolf figured out how to pull a crab trap from the ocean onto shore to fetch a tasty treat. Scientists debate whether the behavior represents tool use, or if the animal needed to have modified the object for it to count. Something strange began happening on the coast of British Columbia, Canada, in 2023. Traps set by members of the Haíɫzaqv (Heiltsuk) Nation to control invasive European green crabs kept getting damaged. Some had mangled bait cups or torn netting, but others were totally destroyed. But who—or what—was the culprit? Initially, the Indigenous community’s environmental wardens, called Guardians, suspected sea lions, seals or otters were to blame. But only after setting up several remote cameras in the area did they catch a glimpse of the true perpetrators: gray wolves. On May 29, 2024, one of the cameras recorded a female wolf emerging from the water with a buoy attached to a crab trap line in her mouth. Slowly but confidently, she tugged the line onto the beach until she’d managed to haul in the trap. Then, she tore open the bottom netting, removed the bait cup, had a snack and trotted off. Now, scientists say the incident—and another involving a different wolf in 2025—could represent the first evidence of tool use by wild wolves. They describe the behavior and lay out their conclusions in a new paper published November 17 in the journal Ecology and Evolution. This wolf has a unique way of finding food | Science News “You normally picture a human being with two hands pulling a crab trap,” says William Housty, a Haíɫzaqv hereditary chief and the director of the Heiltsuk Integrated Resource Management Department, to Global News’ Amy Judd and Aaron McArthur. “But we couldn’t figure out exactly what had the ability to be able to do that until we put a camera up and saw, well, there’s other intelligent beings out there that are able to do this, which is very remarkable.” Members of the Haíɫzaqv Nation weren’t surprised by the wolves’ cleverness, as they have long considered the animals to be smart. That view has largely been shaped by the community’s oral history, which tells of a woman named C̓úṃqḷaqs who birthed four individuals who could shape-shift between humans and wolves, reports Science News’ Elie Dolgin. Scientists weren’t shocked, either, as they have long understood that wolves are intelligent, social creatures that often cooperate to take down their prey. People aren’t sure how the wolves figured out the crafty crab trap trick. The animals may have learned by watching Haíɫzaqv Guardians pull up the traps, or their keen sense of smell may have helped them sniff out the herring and sea lion bait inside. Or perhaps they started with traps that were more easily accessible, before moving on to more challenging targets submerged in deep water. Wolves are also largely protected in Haíɫzaqv territory, which may have given them the time and energy they needed to learn a new, complex behavior, reports the Washington Post’s Dino Grandoni. Whatever the explanation, experts are divided as to whether the behavior technically constitutes nonhuman tool use, which has been previously documented in crows, elephants, dolphins and several other species. The debate stems mostly from varying definitions of tool use. Under one definition, animals can’t simply use an external object to achieve a specific goal—the creature must also manipulate the object in some way, like a crow transforming a tree branch into a hooked tool for grabbing hidden insects. Against this backdrop, some researchers say the wolves’ behavior represents object use, not tool use. However, some of the disagreement may also be rooted in bias. “For better or for worse, as humans, we tend to afford more care and compassion to other people or other species that we see most like us,” says study co-author Kyle Artelle, an ecologist with the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, to the Washington Post. Marc Bekoff, a biologist at the University of Colorado Boulder who was not involved with the research, echoes that sentiment, telling Science’s Phie Jacobs that “if this had been a chimpanzee or other nonhuman primate, I’m sure no one would have blinked about whether this was tool use.” Regardless, scientists say the footage suggests wild wolves are even smarter than initially thought. In less than three minutes, the female efficiently and purposefully executed a complicated sequence of events to achieve a specific goal. She appeared to know that the trap contained food, even though it was hidden underwater, and she seemed to understand exactly which steps she needed to take to access that food. Tool use or not, the findings point to “another species with complex sociality [that] is capable of innovation and problem solving,” says Susana Carvalho, a primatologist and paleoanthropologist at Gorongosa National Park in Mozambique who was not involved with the research, to the New York Times’ Lesley Evans Ogden. Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Animals

Energy

Food

Suggested Viewing

Sentinels of Silence? Whale Watching, Noise, and the Orca

Does whale watching protect or harm whales? This film explores heated controversies over whale watching, boat noise, and orca conservation in Washington State and British Columbia. Whale watching companies claim that they serve as "sentinels" protecting the orca from unwary recreational boaters, ferries, and ships. A number of local conservationists and scientists have argued that whale watching boats crowd and harass whales, while adding noise to the orcas' immediate environment that makes it difficult for the social species to survive. "Sentinels of Silence?" uses dramatic imagery, peer-reviewed science, and interviews with conservationists, scientists, and industry officials to bring a fascinating chapter in the orca conservation story to light. In December, 2020, three months after Sentinels of Silence? was released, the Washington State Fish and Wildlife Commission made an historic decision to more closely regulate whale watching companies' activities around the Southern Resident Killer Whales, citing noise and harassment as factors.

Animals

Conservation

Documentary

The Straight Poop

Our animated short entertains while presenting eye-opening information on one of the fastest, most effective ways to slow the rate of global warming. Our film is an engaging way of addressing the dangers of climate change that educates in a non-threatening comical way. Individuals concerned about climate change can make relatively small personal choices that can have a huge positive effect.

Animals

Climate

Food

Weathering Tides: Saving the Black Rail in South Carolina

The Eastern Black Rail is a federally Endangered and extremely secretive marsh bird, found primarily along the mid-Atlantic and Southeast coast of the United States. Habitat loss from development and sea-level rise inundation has reduced populations by 90% since the 1990s. Without intervention, the remaining east coast population is projected to be extirpated before 2070. Black Rails’ breeding success is incredibly vulnerable to minute changes in water level, and in coastal regions experiencing dramatic changes in storm regimes and steadily rising seas, their future depends on precise water-level management within the critical sites that remain. South Carolina’s ACE Basin is a one such landscape, uniquely comprised of historically dike-impounded wetlands, which today provides a stronghold for some 30 breeding pairs. A grassroots partnership among private landowners, non-profit conservation groups, and state and federal agencies is working urgently to understand the rails’ precise and cryptic needs, and to develop the techniques—and support—required to create those conditions on the ground. The Cornell Lab’s Center for Conservation Media has produced “Weathering Tides” (13 minutes), a short film highlighting the unlikely partnerships and pioneering techniques of this dedicated coalition. The film will be used by agency and non-profit partners in South Carolina and across the Atlantic Coast to build the support and participation necessary to scale effective management efforts beyond the ACE Basin, and to recover Eastern Black Rail populations. To learn more about the work in South Carolina, visit southcarolinablackrails.org. To learn more about efforts to recover Black Rail population across the Atlantic Coast, visit acjv.org/black-rail This film was made possible through generous support from the Robert F. Schumann Foundation.

Animals

Conservation

Documentary

In Praise of Insects [Sandbox]

Insects were here before humanity, but often we eliminate them as a nuisance. They are a fundamental element of this world. Without them, most of the plants would not be pollinated and birds would lose their food and become extinct. Despite their vital role, they are silently disappearing at a rapid rate.... without us noticing. ‘In Praise of Insects’ is a project to help us rethink the tiny subtle lives that are so entwined with our own. The common Bluebottle is one of the few butterflies that can be seen in central Tokyo. Even if you occasionally see the butterfly flying between buildings, you can see the miracle of life by closely observing its appearance and growth.

Experimental

Animals

Nature

When Worlds Collide: A Formosan Black Bear's Deadly Dance with Civilization

This is the true story of one Formosan black bear’s encounter with civilization. A fateful encounter with a wild boar trap in mid-autumn 2019 first brought this bear to national attention. However, after months of recuperation and subsequent release back into the wild, it lingered worryingly near settled areas, damaging orchards and even ransacking a mountain cabin in search of food. Re-released in a remote forested area, the bear set out an incredible journey across arduous terrain in the direction of home. This is the moving story of “711” … also known as “568” – a wild Formosan black bear from Taichung’s Mt. Daxue area. The bear died on the 25th day of its long journey home in May 2022 in the Mt. Wujie region of Nantou County. News of the death was a devastating blow to the hundreds involved in 711/568’s rescue, recovery, and tracking efforts. It also offered a difficult lesson for us all about the work yet ahead for wildlife conservation. This film examines Formosan black bear conservation from multiple perspectives, including those involved in this bear’s rescue and care, living in areas affected by 711/568, and working in the many public and private organizations dedicated to the cause of wildlife conservation. We hope the story told here helps further raise public understanding and concern for wildlife conservation in Taiwan.

Conservation

Inspirational

Animals

Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

GoGreenNation news

The pangolin: An armored, insect-controlling mammal