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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Use of pesticides on UK farms to be cut by 10% by 2030 to protect bees

News Feed
Friday, March 21, 2025

The use of pesticides on UK farms will be reduced by 10% by 2030 under government plans to protect bees and other pollinators.Campaigners welcomed the news, but said they were disappointed that the target applied only to arable farms and not to urban areas and parks. The plan has been a long time coming – it has been delayed since 2018.The EU’s target for pesticide reduction is more ambitious; its member states aim to reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides, as well as the use of more hazardous pesticides, by 50% by 2030.The UK government will be unveiling a new pesticide load indicator to monitor progress towards this target, and encouraging integrated pest management, which is a way to reduce pests on farmland without using pesticides.This can include sowing plants that are more attractive to certain pests next to crops, to divert their attention away, or using carnivorous beetles or other predators to keep down pest numbers. The plan also includes penalties for those who fail to use pesticides responsibly, and the target makes note of how toxic a pesticide is as well as how much of it is used, which campaigners also welcomed.A spokesperson from the Pesticide Collaboration, a grouping of health and environmental organisations, academics, unions and consumer groups, said: “We are thrilled that the UK government has today announced the UK’s first ever pesticide reduction target of 10%. While we had hoped for a higher percentage, the adoption of a target which takes into account both how much of a pesticide is used and how toxic it is a clear signal that reducing pesticide-related harms to the environment is now being taken seriously.“We are also pleased that there are commitments to increasing the uptake of non-chemical alternatives by farmers and urge the government to provide them with the support they need. While there are no commitments to phasing out urban pesticide use, we have been assured by the government that this area of work will be progressed separately.”Paul de Zylva, a nature campaigner at Friends of Earth, said: “The new plan’s failure to address the use of pesticides in urban areas is a major flaw. The government must commit to the phasing out of pesticide and herbicide use in urban parks and streets, which is unnecessary and risks the health of people, pets, wildlife, rivers and soils.”Farmers have welcomed the plan, and asked for government support in creating habitats for the predatory insects that feed on pests.Martin Lines, the CEO of the Nature-Friendly Farming Network said: “I welcome the publication of this long-overdue action plan, especially the inclusion of specific targets for pesticide reduction. However, it remains to be seen whether it can truly can deliver the radical changes we urgently need.“Dramatically reducing the use of chemicals and transitioning to nature-based solutions – such as creating habitats for predatory insects – is absolutely key to building a food and farming system that is resilient for the future while also reversing the decline of nature and biodiversity.”This is the latest step towards reducing pesticide use in the UK, after the government committed recently to ending the use of neonicotinoid pesticide, which is toxic to bees.The environment minister, Emma Hardy, said: “The government is restoring our natural world as part of our commitment to protect the environment while supporting productivity and economic growth.“That is why we have banned bee-killing pesticides in England and today we’re going further to support farmers and growers to adopt sustainable practices.”

Campaigners welcome long-delayed proposals to reduce pesticide-related harms to pollinatorsThe use of pesticides on UK farms will be reduced by 10% by 2030 under government plans to protect bees and other pollinators.Campaigners welcomed the news, but said they were disappointed that the target applied only to arable farms and not to urban areas and parks. The plan has been a long time coming – it has been delayed since 2018. Continue reading...

The use of pesticides on UK farms will be reduced by 10% by 2030 under government plans to protect bees and other pollinators.

Campaigners welcomed the news, but said they were disappointed that the target applied only to arable farms and not to urban areas and parks. The plan has been a long time coming – it has been delayed since 2018.

The EU’s target for pesticide reduction is more ambitious; its member states aim to reduce the use and risk of chemical pesticides, as well as the use of more hazardous pesticides, by 50% by 2030.

The UK government will be unveiling a new pesticide load indicator to monitor progress towards this target, and encouraging integrated pest management, which is a way to reduce pests on farmland without using pesticides.

This can include sowing plants that are more attractive to certain pests next to crops, to divert their attention away, or using carnivorous beetles or other predators to keep down pest numbers. The plan also includes penalties for those who fail to use pesticides responsibly, and the target makes note of how toxic a pesticide is as well as how much of it is used, which campaigners also welcomed.

A spokesperson from the Pesticide Collaboration, a grouping of health and environmental organisations, academics, unions and consumer groups, said: “We are thrilled that the UK government has today announced the UK’s first ever pesticide reduction target of 10%. While we had hoped for a higher percentage, the adoption of a target which takes into account both how much of a pesticide is used and how toxic it is a clear signal that reducing pesticide-related harms to the environment is now being taken seriously.

“We are also pleased that there are commitments to increasing the uptake of non-chemical alternatives by farmers and urge the government to provide them with the support they need. While there are no commitments to phasing out urban pesticide use, we have been assured by the government that this area of work will be progressed separately.”

Paul de Zylva, a nature campaigner at Friends of Earth, said: “The new plan’s failure to address the use of pesticides in urban areas is a major flaw. The government must commit to the phasing out of pesticide and herbicide use in urban parks and streets, which is unnecessary and risks the health of people, pets, wildlife, rivers and soils.”

Farmers have welcomed the plan, and asked for government support in creating habitats for the predatory insects that feed on pests.

Martin Lines, the CEO of the Nature-Friendly Farming Network said: “I welcome the publication of this long-overdue action plan, especially the inclusion of specific targets for pesticide reduction. However, it remains to be seen whether it can truly can deliver the radical changes we urgently need.

“Dramatically reducing the use of chemicals and transitioning to nature-based solutions – such as creating habitats for predatory insects – is absolutely key to building a food and farming system that is resilient for the future while also reversing the decline of nature and biodiversity.”

This is the latest step towards reducing pesticide use in the UK, after the government committed recently to ending the use of neonicotinoid pesticide, which is toxic to bees.

The environment minister, Emma Hardy, said: “The government is restoring our natural world as part of our commitment to protect the environment while supporting productivity and economic growth.

“That is why we have banned bee-killing pesticides in England and today we’re going further to support farmers and growers to adopt sustainable practices.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Trump DEI crackdown expands to national park gift shops

The Trump administration’s efforts to purge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from the federal government is hitting gift shops at national parks. In a memo last month, acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron called for a review of the items available for purchase in park gift shops. The memo says that items should be...

The Trump administration’s efforts to purge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from the federal government is hitting gift shops at national parks. In a memo last month, acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron called for a review of the items available for purchase in park gift shops. The memo says that items should be reviewed for compliance with an order from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to cease activities related to DEI, accessibility or “environmental justice.” Like the order before it, the memo does not appear to define DEI.  Asked whether this means that any product related to people who are minorities would be impacted, a spokesperson for the Interior Department replied, “As you saw the memo, then you know that is not what it says.” Instead, said the spokesperson, Burgum’s order “directs federal agencies to ensure that government-affiliated retail spaces remain neutral and do not promote specific viewpoints.” “To comply with this order, the National Park Service is conducting a review of retail items to ensure our gift shops remain neutral spaces that serve all visitors,” added the spokesperson, who did not sign their name in the response. “The goal is to keep National Parks focused on their core mission: preserving natural and cultural resources for the benefit of all Americans.” The review’s deadline is next Friday. The memo does not appear to lay out specific criteria for the review. The memo was made public this week by the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy organization. “Banning history books from park stores and cracking down on park T-shirts and keychains is not what national park visitors want from their Park Service,” said Alan Spears, the group’s senior director for cultural resources, in a written statement.  “The National Parks Conservation Association opposes this latest move from the administration because we, like the majority of Americans, support telling the full American story at our parks. That means acknowledging hard truths about slavery, climate change, and other topics that challenge us as a nation,” he added. The memo comes as part of a broader Trump administration push to reshape the portrayal of history at national parks and beyond. Earlier this year, the administration directed National Park Service units to review all public-facing content for messaging that disparages Americans or that “emphasizes matters unrelated to the beauty, abundance, or grandeur” of natural features. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Government
Climate
Conservation

Government reveals taxpayer-funded deal to keep Australia’s largest aluminium smelter open. How long we will pay?

The federal government has done a deal - underwritten by the taxpayer - to keep Australia’s largest aluminum smelter open. What’s the exit strategy if it doesn’t go to plan?

It seemed inevitable – politically at least – that the federal government would step in to save Tomago Aluminium in New South Wales, Australia’s largest aluminium smelter. Rio Tinto, the owners of Tomago, has enjoyed attractively priced electricity for a long time, most recently with AGL. But this contract ends in 2028. Unable to find a replacement at a price it could accept, Rio Tinto warned that Tomago was facing closure. Tomago produces more than one-third of Australia’s aluminium and accounts for 12% of NSW’s energy consumption. On Friday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a Commonwealth-led deal for electricity supply beyond 2028. This deal will provide the smelter with billions of dollars in subsidised power from the Commonwealth-owned Snowy Hydro through a portfolio of renewables, backed by storage and gas. This follows months of negotiation to avoid the smelter closing and sacking its roughly 1,000 workers. The government has provided funding to support other struggling manufacturers such as the Whyalla steelworks and the Mount Isa copper smelter, and wants to see aluminium production continue in Australia. About 30–40% of the cost of making aluminium is the energy, so it’s a huge input. Electricity from the market would have been considerably more expensive, so the government is subsidising the commercial price. The deal may have been a necessary and immediate solution to a political problem with local economic and social impacts. However, it raises several important questions about the risks involved and the longevity of the plant. Risks and benefits First, to what risk is the federal government exposed? Commodity markets such as aluminium are prone to difficult cycles, and there’s a chance Tomago might not survive at all, in which case the government is off the hook. Not only are we looking to subsidise Tomago’s electricity, but we are looking for Snowy Hydro to invest in renewable energy projects and build more renewable energy in NSW. The history of building renewable energy and its support transmission infrastructure suggests that both cost and time constraints become problematic. The NSW government may have a role in supporting this side of the deal. The Commonwealth’s case for making this deal is presumably underpinned by its Future made in Australia policy. This says we should be supporting industries where there’s a national interest in a low-emissions world. So if, for example, we can see a future where subsidising Tomago’s electricity for five or ten years would mean it can produce low-emission aluminium the world wants to buy, that would be a success. But what happens if, after five or ten years, the world hasn’t sufficiently changed to provide enough renewable energy to make our electricity cost less? What if the rest of the world wants green, low-emissions aluminium, but that’s not what Australia produces? If the risks the government is underwriting crystallise in a bad way, does the government have an exit strategy? We’ve been here before In 1984, under the leadership of John Cain, the Labor government signed a joint venture agreement with Alcoa to build an aluminium smelter at Portland, including a deal to subsidise electricity until 2016. Forty years later, we’re still pay for it. With Tomago, we don’t want Australian taxpayers exposed to something over which we have no control – the global price of aluminium. If the price of aluminium collapses, or Snowy Hydro is permanently uncompetitive or China dominates the world market, the hypothesis that Tomago can be competitive in the long term collapses. Interestingly, this deal is very different to the one the Commonwealth and Queensland governments have done to support Rio Tinto’ Boyne smelter in Gladstone. In October, Rio Tinto announced plans to possibly bring forward the closure of Gladstone Power Station to 2029, six years ahead of the current schedule, and supply the smelter with predominantly renewable electricity. The move was welcomed by environmental groups, as Gladstone is Queensland’s oldest and largest coal-fired station. But some commentators have said closing the plant in four years’ time is unrealistic, and a staged phase-out would be better. The announcement this week, welcomed by the business and its workers, is probably unsurprising. But we haven’t seen the detail. The government may very well have a case for this deal, but the future of the plant and its power supply remain unknowable. The risks with taxpayer funds may have been worth taking, but they should be clearly explained and justified. Tony Wood 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.

Government
Business
Energy

Israel Publishes Draft Law Seeking to Boost State Revenues From Dead Sea Minerals

By Steven ScheerJERUSALEM, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Israel on Wednesday published a draft law that aims to boost state revenues from a concession for...

JERUSALEM, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Israel on Wednesday published a draft law that aims to boost state revenues from a concession for extracting minerals from the Dead Sea as well as tackling its environmental consequences.The Finance Ministry said the proposed law intends to redefine the concession to ensure the public and the state get their rightful share, while ensuring the preservation of nature and environmental values."The law serves as the basis for allocating the concession and the terms of the future tender for resource extraction from the Dead Sea, with an emphasis on promoting optimal competition, lowering entry barriers, and attracting leading international players," it said.Fertiliser maker ICL Group has held the concession, giving it exclusive rights to minerals from the Dead Sea site, for five decades, but its permit is set to expire in 2030.Last month, ICL gave up right of first refusal for its Dead Sea concession under a government plan to open it up for tender, although it would receive some $3 billion if it loses the permit when it expires.ICL, one of the world's largest potash producers, has previously said its Dead Sea assets were worth $6 billion. ICL extracts mainly potash and magnesium from the concession.Under the draft law, which still needs preliminary approval from lawmakers, the state's share of concession profits would ultimately rise to an average of 50% from 35% currently, partly through royalties, the ministry said.The law also aims to tackle negative impacts of resource extraction activities in the Dead Sea, which continues to shrink.ICL plans to participate in the future tender and has said it believes it is the most suitable candidate to operate the future concession.Accountant General Yali Rothenberg said the law places emphasis on fair, efficient, and responsible use of one of Israel’s most important natural resources. It "will ensure that the state maximizes economic value for the public, promotes optimal competition, and protects the unique environment of the Dead Sea region for future generations," he said.(Reporting by Steven Scheer. Editing by Jane Merriman)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Government
Nature
Resources

Trump administration puts Fema workers back on administrative leave

Fourteen workers who signed a petition that warned cuts put the US at risk were initially suspended in AugustThe Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Continue reading...

The Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.Last Wednesday, those 14 workers received notices that they were being reinstated at the beginning of this week. But within hours, Trump officials moved to re-suspend the staffers, after CNN broke the news of their return to work.“When they went in at 8.30 in the morning, the employees’ email accounts were restored and they were given new entry cards,” said David Seide, a lawyer at the non-profit group Government Accountability Project, which helped the Fema employees file complaints challenging their suspensions. “But around midday … they stopped working and then after that, they began to receive notices saying: ‘You’re back on administrative leave again.’”Jeremy Edwards, former deputy of public affairs at Fema who signed the August petition, said the reversal “represents the type of dysfunction and inefficiency that has plagued Fema under this administration”.“Not only have these staffers not been provided any legal justification for being placed on administrative leave, they are being paid their full-time, taxpayer-funded salaries to sit at home and do nothing, when all they want to do is their jobs,” Edwards said.The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Fema, confirmed the reversal. “CNN reporting revealed that 14 Fema employees previously placed on leave for misconduct were wrongly and without authorization reinstated by bureaucrats acting outside of their authority,” a department spokesperson said.“Once alerted, the unauthorized reinstatement was swiftly corrected by senior leadership. The 14 employees who signed the Katrina declaration have been returned to administrative leave,” the spokesperson continued. “This Administration will not tolerate rogue conduct, unauthorized actions or entrenched bureaucrats resisting change. Federal employees are expected to follow lawful direction, uphold agency standards and serve the American people.”Seide called the reversal “unbelievable” and “appalling”.“I’ve never seen this happen in government operations like this, ever, and I’ve been around 40 years,” Seide said.He said the employees’ suspension was illegal, violating protections for government employees and particularly for whistleblowers.“You can’t retaliate people just because they signed a petition,” he said.Fema’s decision to reinstate the employees seemed to reinforce that argument. “Although the [Report of Investigation] substantiated the employee’s involvement with the so-called Katrina Declaration, FEMA’s legal counsel has advised that the employee’s actions are protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act (5 USC 2302(b)(8)) and the First Amendment of the US Constitution,” said a Fema email to the 14 staffers.“Political appointees reversed that,” said Seide.Called the Katrina declaration, the August petition from workers criticized the Trump administration’s sweeping overhaul of Fema and stated a desire to shift the responsibility for disaster response and preparedness to states. Sent days before the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, it was signed by more than 180 current and former Fema employees, some of whom remained anonymous.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOne day after the missive was sent, the 14 employees who used their names were informed that they were being placed on indefinite leave, Seide said. One of those 14 workers was then fired in mid-November, but she successfully challenged her termination, he said.Fema staffers coordinated the petition with Stand Up for Science, a non-profit protesting the Trump administration’s attacks on federally funded science research. The group also helped organize a separate June letter from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) workers, which accused the Trump administration of violating the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment. After receiving that petition, the EPA placed 139 employees on leave, then terminated seven of them.Before it was walked back, Seide’s group celebrated Fema’s decision to reinstate the 14 employees placed on leave, saying it could help build the case for EPA workers to similarly be reinstated.“It would have seemed that reasonable judgments were made and should be followed,” said Seide. “But now I think the message is just the opposite.”The Trump administration has terminated, suspended and pushed out thousands of federal employees since re-entering the White House in January. Fema has been the subject of particularly scrutiny, with the president even floating plans to scrap the agency altogether.A review council set up by Trump is soon expected to issue recommended changes to the agency.

Government
Health
Science

Wood-burning stoves to face partial ban in Labour’s updated environment plan

Exclusive: Pollution targets set out alongside nature recovery projects to allay concerns over housebuildingWood-burning stoves are likely to face tighter restrictions in England under new pollution targets set as part of an updated environmental plan released by ministers on Monday.Speaking to the Guardian before the publication of the updated environmental improvement plan (EIP), the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, said it would boost nature recovery in a number of areas, replacing an EIP under the last government she said was “not credible”. Continue reading...

Wood-burning stoves are likely to face tighter restrictions in England under new pollution targets set as part of an updated environmental plan released by ministers on Monday.Speaking to the Guardian before the publication of the updated environmental improvement plan (EIP), the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, said it would boost nature recovery in a number of areas, replacing an EIP under the last government she said was “not credible”.Reynolds said efforts to restore nature would now take place on “a strategic level” rather than a previously piecemeal approach, arguing this meant the government’s push to build housing and infrastructure could still come with a net gain in habitats.One element of the new EIP will see the targets for concentrations of PM2.5 particulate pollutants tightened to match current EU targets, something that was not part of the previous plan, published in 2023 under the Conservatives.According to sources in Reynolds’ department, this will involve a consultation on possible measures to reduce PM2.5 pollution, including those from wood-burning stoves and fireplaces.This could involve pollution limits being tightened in smoke control areas, which already limit what fuels can be burned: for example, setting out that wood can be burned only in approved types of stoves or burners, not in fireplaces.It could mean an effective ban on older appliances and that, in some places, it will not be possible to use a wood-burning stove at all.The current annual PM2.5 limit is 25ug/m3 (micrograms per cubic metre), with an aim to meet 10ug/m3 by 2040. The EU’s standards are stricter, with a new directive passed last year asking member states to meet 10ug/m3 by 2030.The World Health Organization recommends an annual limit of 5ug/m3. It is understood the EIP will bring the UK’s standards in line with the EU, with an aim to eventually meet WHO targets.Exposure to PM2.5s, which bury deep into the lungs, is linked to numerous health conditions including asthma, lung disease, heart disease, cancer and strokes. Domestic combustion accounted for 20% of PM2.5 emissions in 2023 and has been found to produce more pollution than traffic.Elsewhere in the EIP, Reynolds will set out that £500m of existing departmental money is to be allocated to landscape recovery projects, larger-scale attempts to restore landscapes and ecosystems, often working with farmers and other landowners.This will include a specific target to restore or create 250,000 hectares (618,000 acres) of wildlife-rich habitats by 2030.The EIP is required under the Environment Act, with the intention that it should put into action a more general commitment to improve the environment within a generation.For the first time, as part of the new EIP, the government will publish detailed Environment Act target delivery plans, which set out how actions will contribute to its aims and help to measure progress.Such moves, Reynolds argued, should mitigate fears about nature depletion owing to housebuilding and other projects, after fears were raised the government’s planning and infrastructure bill could reduce protections and see green spaces lost.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“What we’re talking about is restoring nature, not house by house, but at a more strategic level. We can be both pro-development and pro-home-ownership and pro-nature,” she said.“The last EIP, under the previous Tory administration, wasn’t credible. I’m confident that our EIP is credible, because it’s got these delivery plans built in. You can’t just set the targets. You’ve got to explain how you’re going to achieve those targets. And that’s exactly what we’ve done.”The new EIP is also expected to include a commitment from the previous plan for every household to be within a 15-minute walk of green space or a waterway.Other measures to be announced on Monday include a new plan for “forever chemicals”, to reduce the amount of PFAS in the environment, and a crackdown on illegal waste dumping.Ruth Chambers, from the Green Alliance thinktank, said the new EIP was “an important milestone and an opportunity to harness the government’s collective clout to deliver better for nature”.She said: “It must now be converted swiftly into the sustained action needed to restore nature, clean up our rivers and air, create a circular economy and help people reconnect with the natural world.”

Government
Nature
Pollution

Suggested Viewing

Let's talk about it! (International Politics is NOT a child's play)

The effects of the Human impact in the World can't be resolved through conflicts and wars. We need to talk about it!

Government
Business
Student

Lake Victoria: An Ecosystem in Turmoil

Decades of mismanagement, environmental changes and a burgeoning population have created tensions for the 40 million people living on the shores of the world's second largest freshwater lake, Lake Victoria. Desperate fishermen use illegal nets and overfish the East African lake's dwindling stocks, while many fishermen have had to turn to other forms of work - much of which has a detrimental impact on the health of the lake and its residents. Lake Victoria: An Ecosystem in Turmoil follows some of those trying to eek out a living on the lake: a Kenyan fisherman who illegally crosses the border into Uganda in the search for fish; a Ugandan who gave up fishing to become a palm oil farmer; and a Tanzanian gold miner using mercury with his bare hands to extract the precious mineral from unregulated mines on the lake's shores. But how well do they comprehend the pressure that they’re putting on the lake, and can the regional governments and communities take action before irreversible damage happens?

Land Use
Water
Government

The Fellowship of the Springs

Florida’s artesian springs are a natural wonder of the world. As unique as the geysers of Yellowstone and as mesmerizing as Vernal Falls in Yosemite, these blue jewels surrounding the north Florida landscape are considered a treasure by many who see them. The state contains the largest and highest concentration of fresh water springs on earth. But today, the future of Florida’s springs is uncertain. With flow levels declining and nitrate pollution on the rise, the springs today bear the scars of a profound struggle. Florida's own government continues to approve permits for large companies that want to pump water from the springs and their springsheds, for nominal permit fees that often cost less than a day pass to Disney World. The Fellowship of the Springs takes viewers behind the scenes of the fight to save Florida's springs, from the halls of the state capitol in Tallahassee to deep caves of Ichetucknee spring.

Water
Government
Business

Jetty Cats

Jetty Cats explores contemporary animal rights issues through a focus on a feral cat colony that has survived on a rocky, seaside jetty in Southern California for decades. There is an ongoing debate over feral cat colonies involving advocates who support the trap, neuter, and return -- or "TNR" -- model of management, and those who argue that trapping and euthanizing the cats is more humane. This documentary’s point-of-view supports the TNR model and the related “no-kill” animal shelter policy, and features an exclusive interview with Richard Avanzino, the "Father" of the no-kill movement.

Animals
Government
Activism

The Green Amendment: New Mexico, Part One

Join Maya van Rossum, Founder of Green Amendments For The Generations, in her exploration of New Mexico’s biggest environmental issues and the role a NM Green Amendment could play in the fight for environmental justice with: Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, legislative sponsor of the New Mexico Green Amendment; Emma Rose Cohen, CEO/Founder of the sustainable business Final; Beata Tsosie-Peña, Environmental Health and Justice Program Coordinator for Tewa Women United; Artemisio Romero y Carver, founding member of Youth United for Climate Crisis Action (YUCCA); and Dee George and Penny Aucoin, fracking waste accident victims impacted residents of Otis, NM.

Government
Activism
Documentary

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.