

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Serena McClain, American Rivers, (202) 347-7550
Monica Allen, NOAA Public Affairs, (301) 713-2370
Rivers and fisheries nationwide are getting a boost, thanks to a partnership between American Rivers, the nation's leading river conservation organization, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Restoration Center. $310,000 in Community-based Habitat Restoration Program Partnership grants were awarded this year to improve fish passage on rivers in five states.
Over the past seven years, the collaboration between American Rivers and NOAA has resulted in more than $2 million being invested in more than 100 projects that provide passage for migratory fish through dam or culvert removal, as well as through traditional and nontraditional fish passage methods.
"All across the country, people are changing the way they look at rivers, from something that cuts a town in half, to something that can bind a community together," said Rebecca Wodder, President of American Rivers. "We're thrilled to be working side by side with NOAA so that communities across the nation can experience the joy of a thriving river, and the economic opportunities it brings with it."
"Strong community-based stewardship is the key ingredient to successful coastal habitat restoration," said retired Navy Vice Admiral Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Ph.D., under secretary of commerce for oceans and atmosphere and NOAA administrator. "Our partnership with American Rivers promotes local action on behalf of the habitat that sustains our nation's fishery resources and communities."
This year's awardees are:
Willamette River, Oregon ($29,000): The project will remove three partial fish-passage barriers and open up two miles of important side-channel habitat for native chinook, coho and steelhead. The overall plan will breach the inlet and outlet dikes on Mission Slough and replace three failing corrugated pipe culverts with a bottomless arch culvert. The funds for the project will be administered by Willamette Riverkeeper.
Black Brook, New Hampshire ($50,000): Black Brook Dam has overtopped during recent major flood events and continues to threaten downstream communities, a local road, and businesses. Its removal will eliminate a significant public safety risk. Removal of the dam will also revitalize Black Brook, improving the overall water quality and ultimately removing the stream from the state's 303(d) list, and restore eight miles of free-flowing river habitat for alewife, blueback herring, Atlantic salmon, and other migratory fish. The City of Manchester, who is administering the grant, is also planning a major park revitalization effort in anticipation of the river restoration project. Along with the City of Manchester, many partners have been involved in making this project a success, including the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, the New Hampshire State Conservation Committee, the New Hampshire Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership, Trout Unlimited, New Hampshire Fish & Game, and the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service.
Brandywine River, Delaware ($50,000): The grant will provide funding to complete an analysis of fish passage alternatives, including dam removal, for Dam #1 on the Brandywine River in Wilmington, Delaware. Dam #1, the first of 11 dams targeted for removal or modification on the river, is the first step in the larger goal of restoring habitat for a variety of fish along the Brandywine River. The State of Delaware, City of Wilmington and US Fish and Wildlife Services have also provided funds for this project. The funds will be administered through The Brandywine Conservancy.
Circle Creek, Oregon ($49,000): The project aims to restore passage for juvenile coho, sea-run cutthroat and lamprey at the culvert crossing on Circle Creek spanning Mulligan Spur road. Currently, the culvert prevents juvenile fish from reaching upstream rearing habitat, and from escaping dangerous storm and high-water events. Replacing the existing culvert with a bottomless arch design will restore upstream and downstream passage for juvenile fish and improve passage for adults. The funds for the project will be administered through Trout Unlimited.
Shingle Mill Gulch, California ($50,000): The project will restore federally designated critical habitat in Shingle Mill Gulch, a tributary of Corralitos Creek, by replacing the existing culvert with a bridge, so the creek can flow freely. Replacing the culvert will remove the final impediment on this stretch of the watershed and restore traditional spawning and rearing habitat for south-central California coast steelhead. The project will also restore streamside trees and vegetation and reduce the amount of sediment in the Corralitos Watershed. The culvert in question provides access to the Koinonia Conference Grounds, which hosts school groups throughout the year. The failing culvert has resulted in narrow, often challenging passage for large school and emergency vehicles. Replacing the culvert with a bridge will allow these vehicles safer access to the site. The funds for the project will be administered through The Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County.
Shawsheen River, Massachusetts ($50,000): The Shawsheen River Restoration project will examine the feasibility and design for three dam removals on the Shawsheen River that will provide 25 mainstem river miles and 60 tributary miles of high quality habitat for American shad, river herring, American eel and other migratory and resident fish. By restoring these fish as well as natural river and floodplain habitat, the Shawsheen restoration will provide substantial ecosystem benefits to the Merrimack River watershed, central New England and the Gulf of Maine. The project will also provide significant social, cultural and economic benefits, through education, stewardship and downtown improvement opportunities. The Shawsheen River restoration is being accomplished by a partnership of state, federal, local and non-governmental organizations, including the Town of Andover, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and Center for Ecosystem Restoration, working closely with dam owners and other local stakeholders.
Waterman Creek, California ($32,000): The funding will remove Waterman Dam, a 100-year-old log dam constructed in association with a turn of the century redwood logging mill. The removal of this 12-foot high dam, which has prevented steelhead from accessing valuable sections of Waterman Creek, will open approximately one mile of spawning habitat. Waterman Creek feeds into Pescadero Creek near Pescadero, a local farming and ranching community whose beaches and outdoor environment make it a popular weekend tourist destination. The funds for the project will be administered through The San Mateo County Farm Bureau.
American Rivers is the only national organization standing up for healthy rivers so our communities can thrive. Through national advocacy, innovative solutions and our growing network of strategic partners, we protect and promote our rivers as valuable assets that are vital to our health, safety and quality of life. Founded in 1973, American Rivers has more than 65,000 members and supporters nationwide, with offices in Washington, DC and the Mid-Atlantic, Northeast, Midwest, Southeast, California and Northwest regions.
"Now in its third consecutive year of famine, Sudan received nothing."
Elon Musk's vault to trillionaire status following the public debut of his rocket company SpaceX came on the heels of an analysis showing the devastating impact of his destruction of the US Agency for International Development on millions of people in countries facing or on the brink of famine.
The analysis, authored by Council on Foreign Relations expert and longtime aid worker Sam Vigersky, noted that Musk's targeting of USAID during his tenure as head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) resulted in the transfer of the Food for Peace program to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), an agency "without international humanitarian or disaster-response expertise."
Vigersky found that the USDA this year chose just seven countries to receive American grain under the Food for Peace program: the Democratic Republic of Congo, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, Kenya, El Salvador, and Rwanda. The latter two countries, Vigersky noted, "do not meet an emergency threshold" for assistance.
"Meanwhile, the country facing the largest hunger crisis in the world—Sudan—did not make the list. Now in its third consecutive year of famine, Sudan received nothing. In fact, more than 40% of Sudan’s community kitchens, a lifeline for the displaced, have closed in the past six months as funding dried up, according to Islamic Relief," Vigersky reported. "Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Yemen were also passed over. Millions of people in those countries live one step from famine, according to the Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC), the UN-backed monitoring system that uses a standardized five-point scale (five being famine) to measure the severity of food insecurity."
Experts assessing the global impact of USAID's decimation at the hands of billionaire US President Donald Trump and the world's first trillionaire, who bragged publicly about "feeding USAID into the wood chipper," estimate that hundreds of thousands of people have already died as a result of the large-scale loss of humanitarian assistance—and millions more will die in the coming years if swift action is not taken to restore aid.
"The impacts of the cuts were immediate and tragic," Nicholas Enrich, a former USAID employee who became a whistleblower, wrote in The Boston Globe on Friday. "Health clinics and emergency ambulance services shuttered overnight. Clinical trials were deserted. Thousands of healthcare workers lost their jobs. Lifesaving food and medicine was left to expire in warehouses. According to conservative estimates, in the year since USAID was dismantled, 750,000 people have died as a result of the cuts. For the first time in a generation, more children died in one year — 2025—than in the previous year."
Oxfam has estimated that a 10% tax on Musk's $1 trillion fortune would generate enough revenue to end extreme poverty worldwide for a year.
Trump claimed on social media that a diplomatic agreement would be signed on Sunday, but Iran's Foreign Ministry pushed back on that timeline.
President Donald Trump claimed Saturday that the US and Iran are on track to sign a diplomatic agreement this weekend, but added that "we have the ultimate alternative" if the process doesn't "work out."
"The 'ultimate alternative' sounds a lot like a nuclear threat," Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, wrote in response to the president's Truth Social post. "Not the first time Trump has hinted at it."
The agreement Trump referenced is believed to be "memorandum of understanding" that's expected be fleshed out in "technical talks" that could begin next week, according to Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who is mediating the negotiations.
"We are closer to a peace deal than ever before," Sharif wrote on social media, echoing Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who said on Friday that "the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding has never been closer."
"Pending its finalization, the media should refrain from entering speculation about its content," Araghchi added. "In line with our responsible and transparent approach, all details will be shared with the public in due course."
On Saturday, a spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry cast doubt on the timeline put forth by Trump and Sharif.
"We will have to wait and see about the exact date of the signing of the memorandum of understanding, although it will not be tomorrow,” said Esmaeil Baqaei, as reported by Iranian state media. “The possibility of this happening in the coming days cannot be ruled out. However, due to the hesitation of the other side, we must be cautious in making any comments about this process.”
In his Truth Social post on Saturday, Trump declared that the Strait of Hormuz will be "OPEN TO ALL" immediately after the deal is signed—a condition that Iran has not confirmed.
"We look forward to working with Iran, and the entire Middle East, long into the future," Trump added. "Hopefully, this process will all work out quickly, easily, and smoothly. If it doesn’t, we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again!"
Trump has repeatedly issued genocidal threats against Iran since launching the illegal war in late February, openly declaring his intention to target Iran's civilian infrastructure and wipe out its "whole civilization." Experts say such threats, even if they aren't acted on, constitute war crimes under international law.
"The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more."
A Trump White House plan to give political appointees more power over federal grant money has sparked alarm among scientists, public health organizations, environmental groups, and others who fear that the proposal amounts to an attempt to subordinate critical funds to the whims of the president and his far-right allies.
More than 300 organizations signed a joint letter on Friday calling on White House budget director Russell Vought, the proposed rule's architect, to extend the public comment period that's set to end on July 13, warning that the "scope and impact of [the Office of Management and Budget's] rule is vast."
"The rule will impact the entirety of government grant-making across the United States," the groups warned. "OMB itself says the revisions suggested would relate to over $179 billion of funds to small entities."
Politico, which exclusively obtained the letter, noted that the "proposed rule has already garnered over 15,000 public comments, with many expressing alarm that the changes could undermine research across fields."
Under Vought's rule, federal agencies would be required to perform "pre-issuance reviews" of federal grants—funds appropriated by Congress—to ensure their distribution is consistent with "applicable law, federal agency priorities, and the national interest."
The rule lays out a number of standards that political appointees at federal agencies must screen for when deciding whether an organization can receive federal grant dollars. For instance, the rule would prohibit the distribution of federal grants to organizations that "promote anti-American values" or support "ideologies that deny the biological reality of sex or the sex binary in humans."
The New York Times reported that the consequences of Vought's rule "could fall hardest on health and science, a field in which [President Donald Trump] has pursued some of the steepest cuts in his second term."
"In exchange for federal assistance, researchers would face limits on the subjects that they can explore, the foreign labs with which they may collaborate and even the conferences at which they can appear," the Times noted. "Dr. Georges C. Benjamin, the chief executive of the American Public Health Association, a professional organization and advocacy group, said the policy could 'devastate innovation, science, and research' in the United States."
"This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans."
Earlier this month, Lawyers for Good Government and the Environmental Protection Network said that "if finalized, the rule would put senior political appointees in charge of approving and canceling individual grants, while stripping recipients of due process rights" while attaching "ideological conditions to nearly every federal dollar, raising First Amendment and equal-protection concerns."
The two organizations published a fact sheet warning that the proposed rule has the potential to halt billions of dollars in funding that communities across the US depend on for "health, public education, scientific research, public safety, and economic development projects."
“This is an executive power grab that would hand presidential political appointees unchecked control over more than a trillion dollars that Congress appropriated in the interests of all Americans,” said Jillian Blanchard, senior vice president for climate change and environmental justice at Lawyers for Good Government. “Conditioning funding for critical programs on ideology and viewpoint discrimination, while erasing basic due-process protections, violates freedoms of speech, equal protection, and eviscerates Congress’ power of the purse.”
Democratic lawmakers have also sounded the alarm about Vought's proposal. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said Thursday that she has given her Republican colleagues two opportunities to denounce Vought's rule—and they declined both times.
"Vought continues to attempt to steal from communities across the country. Now, he is trying to set a new political test on grants for a wide swath of the federal government," said DeLauro. "The test will be a simple one: Are you sufficiently loyal to the president? If the answer is no, it will result in the denial of lifesaving disaster relief, funding for research into cures, the closure of Head Start offices, and more. If you are not loyal enough, if you speak out against this administration, the president and his cronies will take away resources Congress provided."