

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.
A coalition of conservation groups sued the Trump administration in federal court on Tuesday over its move to rescind the regulatory definition of "harm" in the Endangered Species Act so that extractive industries can degrade crucial habitats.
"Since 1973, the ESA has served as the nation's most effective conservation law, saving numerous imperiled species from extinction and moving them toward recovery," states the complaint, filed in the District of Washington state. It argues that the rescission "defies the text and purpose of the statute, 50 years of administrative policy, and US Supreme Court precedent."'
The coalition is made up of the Center for Biological Diversity, Columbia Riverkeeper, Conservation Law Foundation, Conservation Northwest, Friends of the Wild Swan, Oregon Wild, Sierra Club, Swan View Coalition, and WildEarth Guardians, and is represented by Earthjustice.
"Preventing harm to wildlife by protecting where they live, eat, and sleep is a basic foundation of the Endangered Species Act," said Earthjustice attorney Kristen Boyles in a statement, also stressing that the decision conflicts with not only the ESA but also decades of legal precedent. "Now more than ever, imperiled fish, birds, and wildlife need protection to survive and recover."
Ben Greuel, wildlife campaign manager at Sierra Club, warned that "without the habitat protections offered by the harm rule, countless species would be forced onto a path towards extinction."
For example, "roads built for logging and other human access destroy grizzly bear habitat and the bear's ability to safely use its habitat," said Swan View Coalition chair Keith Hammer. "Weakening the harm rule will allow industry to devastate the habitat grizzly bears and many other wildlife species depend on for their survival."
Noah Greenwald, endangered species co-director at the Center for Biological Diversity, pointed to not only grizzlies but also some of the other specific species that could be impacted by the administration's decision.
"It's beyond tragic that as the world's scientists warn us of an extinction crisis threatening to unravel our shared future, the Trump administration is yanking basic protections from our most endangered wildlife," Greenwald said. "There's just no way to protect endangered animals like spotted owls, Florida panthers, or grizzly bears without protecting the places they live."
In fact, as Oregon Wild staff attorney John Persell, noted, "habitat loss is the leading driver of extinction."
"This gutting of the Endangered Species Act is part of a broader assault on our bedrock environmental values," Persell also emphasized. "From public lands to wildlife to clean air and drinking water, the Trump administration is determined to waste, loot, and pollute America's natural heritage."
Separately, the group Defenders of Wildlife sent a letter to the departments of Commerce and the Interior about its intent to sue over the ESA rescission, which was published in the Federal Register on Tuesday by their respective agencies, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
"The law has been clear for decades," said Jane Davenport, senior attorney at Defenders of Wildlife. "Rescinding this definition is wholly out of bounds and misaligned with the vast majority of Americans who support protecting and recovering endangered species."
"We will use the full force of the law to fight back and prevent industry from unfettered destruction of critical forests, streams, deserts, oceans, and coastlines," Davenport pledged.
The rescission came just a day after President Donald Trump signed proclamations dramatically shrinking the size of two national monuments in Utah, Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante.
As with Trump's repeated attacks on the ESA, his targeting of the two monuments dates back to his first administration.
Taylor McKinnon, Southwest director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said Monday that "gutting Utah’s national monuments to enrich polluting extractive corporations shows Trump's extreme disdain for Americans' shared natural heritage. It's a national embarrassment. These monuments protect some of America's most iconic landscapes and rich biodiversity. We'll fight like hell to safeguard their future."
"The murder of Mona Khalil sends a chilling message: Even those whose only weapon is compassion, whose only mission is preservation, are not spared," said one observer.
For more than 25 years, she protected the endangered sea turtles that laid their eggs near her beachside home in southern Lebanon. But Mona Khalil could not protect herself from Israeli invaders who spared neither her sanctuary nor its steward.
Khalil, 76, was mortally wounded when Israeli forces bombed her brightly painted conservation hub and ecotourism site, called the Orange House, in al-Mansouri, Tyre province, on June 4. She suffered injuries including severe burns during the attack, which also wounded her Ethiopian assistant, and was transported to a hospital in Beirut for treatment.
"They knew exactly who Mona Khalil was," Lebanese journalist and professor Marwa Osman said on social media following Khalil's death. "They knew the bright orange house... They knew it was not a military site, not a command center, not a battlefield position. It was one of the most recognizable symbols of environmental conservation on Lebanon's southern coast; a sanctuary dedicated to protecting endangered sea turtles and preserving life."
The Israel Defense Forces said Saturday that Khalil "was not a target."
"There is no known IDF strike in which she was injured,” the military said. “However, strikes were conducted in the area after the IDF issued evacuation warnings.”
Khalil—who was born in Nigeria in 1949 and held Dutch and Lebanese citizenship—co-founded the Orange House Project in 1999 in what had once been her grandmother's home. Khalil and volunteers gathered there each nesting season to protect sea turtles, their eggs, and hatchlings from both predators and people. She also fought against the privatization of beaches, habitat destruction, dynamite fishing, and other threats.
"For decades, Mona dedicated her life to protecting endangered sea turtles and their nesting habitats," the Lebanese environmental group Green Southerners said on Instagram. "Through the Orange House, she inspired generations of Lebanese to value and protect their natural heritage and coastal ecosystems. Her work made her one of Lebanon’s most respected voices for marine conservation and biodiversity protection."
Green Southerners co-founder Hisham Younes told the BBC on Saturday that Khalil "used to talk about the beach like it was a person."
"Her bond to the sunset, her bond to the water and the turtles... she was really into conservation, and into the soul, the spirit of conservation," Younes added.
According to Lebanon's Ministry of Public Health, Israeli attacks have killed at least 4,106 people—including 383 women, 251 children, and 135 medical workers—and wounded 12,153 others since March 2. Over 1 million Lebanese have also been forcibly displaced.
Over the weekend, Israeli National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir said his country's forces "need to go berserk" and "obliterate" Lebanon, all of which, he said, "must burn."
Ben-Gvir's comments were widely viewed as part of Israel's efforts to sabotage an elusive peace agreement between the United States and Iran, which has endured 114 days of an illegal US-Israeli war of choice.
Israel's Lebanon onslaught, occurring amid a backdrop of its ongoing genocide in Gaza, did not deter Khalil.
"When the war broke out, she said, 'No one should tell me to leave. I don't want to leave,'" Lebanese journalist and environmentalist Fadia Joumaa told Al Jazeera on Monday. "She made the decision to stay. What she said was, 'I'm a civilian. I don't have a weapon. I'll lock myself inside my home. This is my life.' She made that choice and remained in her house."
The Lebanese environmental group Green Southerners decried the Israeli strike, which "targeted a site that had long been known for environmental conservation, biodiversity protection, and public awareness."
"[Khalil's] death stands as a stark reminder of the devastating toll that Israeli attacks continue to exact on civilians, environmental defenders, and the natural heritage they sought to protect," the group said on Instagram. "We condemn the killing of Mona Khalil and reaffirm that those responsible for attacks on civilians and environmental defenders must be held accountable."
Recalling Khalil's successful campaign to ban dynamite fishing and the violent backlash it sparked from opponents, Joumaa told NPR: "Mona was a fighter. She did not like diplomacy. There were times when they shot at her house."
"She always told me: Defend the beach, defend the turtles, defend your country," she added.
Osman called the Israeli strike that killed Khalil "an assault on a woman whose life's work was devoted to safeguarding life itself, a woman known internationally for her environmental activism, whose name had become synonymous with the protection of Lebanon's coastline and its endangered sea turtles."
"The murder of Mona Khalil sends a chilling message: Even those whose only weapon is compassion, whose only mission is preservation, are not spared," Osman added.
From Costa Rica to Colorado, wildlife corridors have been about the connections people make when they care about animal mobility.
Driving on the Interamerican Highway from Monteverde Biological Reserve to Rincón de la Vieja National Park, I couldn’t help but notice a series of rope bridges that crossed the six lanes of traffic. Each crossing structure featured traffic warning signs with silhouette images of monkeys or sloths as nonstop flows of diesel semitrucks and electric cars zoomed by.
Costa Rica is known for its protected areas, which cover one-third of the country and function as core zones for conservation, but the “green republic” should also be recognized for its corridors. What started as an NGO effort in the 2000s when organizations like Kids Saving The Rainforest started installing aerial bridges to improve habitat connectivity later became national policy with a 2024 presidential decree requiring electrical companies to build crossing structures so that animals like howler monkeys and kinkajous avoided electrocution from using power lines. These monkey bridges also keep tropical rainforest more intact for mobile creatures.
Beyond Central America, wildlife corridors are popular in the western United States. According to recent surveys from the Environment America Research and Policy Center and the Pew Charitable Trust, respondents approve creating more wildlife crossings at rates of 85-90%. And that support spans the political spectrum. In March 2026, the Idaho State Legislature passed Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 124, officially supporting the development of wildlife crossing infrastructure, such as highway overpasses and underpasses, to reduce animal-vehicle collisions. In December 2026, California’s Wallis Annenberg Wildlife Crossing is set to be completed across 10 lanes of Los Angeles freeway, making it the largest structure in the world.
Wildlife corridors could receive a financial boost by the bipartisan BUILD America 250 bill, considered by US House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee this week. If passed, it would increase funding for the Federal Highway Administration’s very popular Wildlife Crossings Pilot Program (WCPP) to $80 million annually ($400 million total). The 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act allocated $350 million to 35 projects across 30 states, but demand far exceeded with $500 million in requests.
Today, the benefits of conserving wildlife corridors might be just as much about the social as the biological.
If we’re living in a worldwide golden age for wildlife corridors, where did this idea come from? I trace the origins of this dominant conservation strategy in my new book, Borders of Biodiversity: How Gray Wolves, Monarch Butterflies, and Giant Sequoia Transformed Large Landscape Conservation, published by University of North Carolina Press.
In the 1970s and 1980s, new technologies provided windows into animal mobility. For wolves, radio- and satellite- telemetry allowed US biologist Diane Boyd and Canadian biologist Paul Paquet to track the interchange of dispersing juveniles along the Rockies. For example, Boyd collared wolf #8551, named Kay, west of Glacier National Park; the wolf turned up six months later dead after it was legally shot near Pouce Coupe, British Columbia. The 600-mile movement northward was interesting scientifically because it was two-thirds of the way to the Yukon Territory, but Kay’s movement also had major conservation implications. Wildlife corridors facilitated wolf dispersals; transborder dispersals could facilitate wolf recovery under the Endangered Species Act.
In the 1990s, wildlife corridors were thought of as proactive tools against habitat fragmentation. Responding to Boyd and Paquet’s work, conservationists in Alberta, British Columbia, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming created the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative in 1993 to keep core areas—like Yellowstone National Park or Banff National Park—connected. Projects included lobbying the Canadian government to build wildlife overpasses and underpasses along the Trans-Canada Highway, which Y2Y founder Harvey Locke called the “Berlin Wall of Biodiversity” for its high rate of wolf and elk fatalities. Or investing in predator-deterrence tools like range riding and electrified fladry fencing for ranching communities so wolves and grizzlies could use rural spaces as biological passageways.
By the 2000s, however, wildlife corridors were also understood to help with climate adaptation in a warming world. A scientific meta-analysis documented that of 4,000 animals recently tracked, almost three-quarters of them shifted their ranges to cooler lands or waters. Terrestrial species, on average, were moving 12 miles (or 20 kilometers) every decade toward the poles. Animals relocate to adapt.
Today, the benefits of conserving wildlife corridors might be just as much about the social as the biological. In 2012, Ben Bobowski of Rocky Mountain National Park and Yaxine María Arias Núñez of Santa Elena Biological Reserve created a series of personnel exchanges between the two protected areas called the Naturalmente Juntos-Naturally Together Project. Their connection was based on bird banding studies that revealed 150 bird species, like yellow warblers, migrated along the Continental Divide between Colorado and Costa Rica. In 2015, Rocky and Santa Elena entered a formal sistering agreement.
From Costa Rica to Colorado, wildlife corridors have been about the connections people make when they care about animal mobility. In an era of border-hardening nationalism, corridors can help people of different nationalities facilitate solidarities among shared species.
"Barbed wire cannot silence people," said one conservationist. "A protected landscape of global importance is under attack, and people are demanding an end to the devastation."
As President Donald Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner moves forward with plans to build a luxury resort on one of the last untouched parts of the Mediterranean coast, thousands of Albanians have taken to the streets in protest.
On Tuesday evening, a throng gathered outside the office of Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama in the capital Tirana, holding inflatable flamingos and signs reading "Nation is not for sale" and "I don't want Albania like Dubai," Reuters reported.
Kushner's investment firm, Affinity Partners, is seeking to build a €1.4 billion ($1.6 billion) resort on the uninhabited island of Sazan and around 10,000 hotel rooms and villas along a stretch of coastline near the protected wetland of Vjosa-Narta.
According to BirdLife International:
The area shelters over 70 endangered species and more than 200 bird species, including flamingos and Dalmatian pelicans. It sits on the Adriatic Flyway, a critical migration corridor for millions of birds traveling between Africa and Europe each year. The surrounding waters are among the last Mediterranean refuges for the Mediterranean monk seal, one of the world’s most endangered marine mammals, and a key nesting ground for the loggerhead sea turtle.
In February 2024, Albania's parliament amended its protected areas law to allow the development of luxury resorts. Just weeks later, Kushner announced plans to build in Albania, which spurred an investigation by anti-corruption prosecutors.
Kushner himself has not been accused of any wrongdoing, but protesters view the construction of the sprawling complex as a symbol of the country being sold out to powerful oligarchs without their consent.
"We have a protected area, but above all, our state has allowed construction work to continue without consultation and without transparency," said Klajdi Belo, an activist who attended a demonstration on Monday, told Euronews.
Activists have said bulldozers have begun tearing through the coastline and gravel has already been dumped on age-old sand dunes—damage that could take hundreds of years to repair. Meanwhile, a large barbed-wire fence has been erected, blocking public access to the beach.
Over the weekend, protesters assembled outside the barricades surrounding the development near the coastal village of Zvërnec.
"Don't defend the oligarchs!" one man was seen shouting into a megaphone. "Those are the citizens' properties!"
During these protests, a video captured an activist being dragged along the ground by a group of black-shirted security contractors.
"There is great public outrage over what is happening in Albania, but the spark was what happened in Zvërnec," said Arilda Lleshi, who said the man and others were there because they were "protesting against a fence that had been installed there illegally."
As activists have called for heavy machines to be removed from the protected area, Rama has said no amount of public backlash will lead him to abandon the project.
"Under no circumstances do we receive the stigma of being a country where investors are met with hostility," he said in a statement to Reuters. "There is absolutely no chance that the investment will stop as long as I am here."
Anouk Puymartin, head of policy for BirdLife Europe and Central Asia, said that it's not just the habitat of endangered species at stake, but the question of whether longstanding environmental protections can be shredded at the whim of the wealthy.
"Barbed wire cannot silence people. Thousands have taken to the streets of Tirana to defend Vjosa-Narta from destruction driven by private profit," Puymartin said. "A protected landscape of global importance is under attack, and people are demanding an end to the devastation."
Ivanka Trump, the US president's daughter and Kushner's wife, has come under scrutiny for her comments about the development project recently, which were blasted as "out of touch."
In a recent interview, the Trump heiress described being inspired to purchase the island of Sazan while vacationing there years ago: “We were on a friend’s boat, and we stopped for a swim. Effectively, that’s how we found it. We swam to the islands. We went on a hike, barefoot all the way, up to the top. And we were just captivated.”
She described the project of developing the island as part of an effort to "help realize its potential" and described it as "the culmination of all of my experience in real estate, all of my travel, a lot of reflection on how I want to live."
But Puymartin describes the project as an encroachment by private wealth onto land that was previously held for the benefit of everyone.
"Nature belongs to everyone, not a handful of investors," she said. "The horrendous situation in Vjosa-Narta shows why laws are crucial to protect both people and nature. But those protections mean little if governments fail to uphold them."
His latest spending proposals build on his history of overseeing significant reductions in taxes and dramatic increases in defense spending, in line with core conservative goals.
Since Donald Trump first broke onto the national political scene, there has been a serious debate among Republicans regarding his commitment to conservative principles. His style was, in a word, flamboyant. His morality was questionable. And his behavior and language were outrageous. None of these behaviors could be identified with the staid “buttoned down” behaviors on display in conservative circles.
In recent decades, Republicans have latched onto a range of social issues like gay marriage, transgender rights, and abortion, or cultural matters like xenophobia and opposition to affirmative action. None of these issues, however, were central to textbook conservatism, which historically has been encapsulated in the mantra “lower taxes, smaller government” and the insistence that the principal role of government ought to be “securing the national defense.” Despite not being cut from the same mold as Barry Goldwater or Ronald Reagan, President Trump has proven his bona fides on advancing these core conservative goals. Mimicking the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations, President Trump in his first and second terms has coupled significant reductions in taxes with dramatic increases in defense spending either to expand the Pentagon’s already bloated budget or to underwrite foreign wars fought by us or allies.
This week’s rollout of Trump’s proposed budget for fiscal year 2027 looks like a conservative’s dream come true. He is asking for a $500 billion increase in the defense department’s budget, amounting to the largest increase (44%) and the largest overall military budget since World War II. This 2027 increase is on top of the $350 billion supplement requested for 2026, presumably to offset the increased costs resulting from the US-Israel war on Iran.
The 2027 budget request also includes increases for Veterans Affairs and the Justice Department (to cover the costs of immigration prosecutions). But the 2027 budget also makes cuts in 10 other government agencies, with sharp reductions for the State Department and international programs; renewable energy projects; research grants in healthcare; and a number of social, educational, and medical programs. When asked by reporters about the impact of these reductions specifically on Medicare, Medicaid, and daycare programs, the president replied: “We’re fighting wars. It’s not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these things.”
Because mainstream Democrats have shied away from criticizing past and present wars and excessive defense spending, they’ve allowed Republicans to use the issue of budget deficits to play innocent and instead attack Democrats as “big spenders” who are recklessly spending the US into a hole.
What makes this problematic is that these dramatic increases in defense spending have been coupled with a sharp reduction in revenues resulting from Trump’s signature legislation—the “One Big Beautiful Bill”—that passed last year. That bill included reductions in taxes totaling $4.5 trillion over the next 10 years. In other words, “lower taxes, smaller government” and a singular focus on defense spending—the conservatives’ dream budget.
Two additional benefits to Republicans result from this pairing of decreases in revenues and increases in defense spending. On the one hand, it sharply increases budget deficits, which Republicans have effectively used to call for more spending cuts to social welfare spending. Because mainstream Democrats have shied away from criticizing past and present wars and excessive defense spending, they’ve allowed Republicans to use the issue of budget deficits to play innocent and instead attack Democrats as “big spenders” who are recklessly spending the US into a hole. In reality, however, it was Ronald Reagan’s irresponsible massive tax cuts and huge increases in military spending that caused the budget deficits of the 1980s. And while during the 2012 election Republicans made an issue of the growing national debt, no one pointed out that it was George W. Bush’s tax cuts and the war in Iraq that rang up a bill of trillions of dollars with no new revenues raised to offset the outlays for the war and its aftermath. To date, that war has cost over $7 trillion. Now Trump is following in the footsteps of Reagan and George W. Bush.
There is still another way, that Trump, like Reagan, will try to exploit the crisis created by a skewed budget to his advantage. This week, when reporters asked the president about his budget proposal’s impact on daycare programs, Medicaid, and Medicaid (which will experience cuts or strains), he replied:
(We can’t) send any money for daycare because theUnited States can’t take care of daycare. We’re a big country. We have 50 states. We have all these other people. We’re fighting wars. It’s not possible for us to take care of daycare, Medicaid, Medicare, all these individual things. They can do that on a state basis.
By recklessly reducing the federal government’s revenues and then forcing cuts in needed social programs to make way for increased defense spending, Trump, like Reagan, is forcing the financial cost of daycare, Medicaid, education, etc., down to the state level. Then when Democratic governors are forced to raise taxes to cover these increased costs, Republicans will pounce, criticizing them for raising taxes.
If this president’s policies over the last decade haven’t convinced the conservative elite that he's really one of them or voters that he’s not the radical populist his rhetoric made him out to be, then his 2027 budget should be all the convincing they need.
"The Bandero delivered a gentle but deliberate nudge to the stern of the Antarctic Sea, accompanied by a message: Stop despoiling the ecological integrity of the Southern Ocean," said activists aboard the ship.
An ocean conservation ship operated by anti-whaling campaigner Paul Watson collided Tuesday with a commercial krill trawler off Antarctica in what the fishing vessel's owner described as a "deliberate attack," but activists called "a David-and-Goliath battle against an industrial giant."
The Captain Paul Watson Foundation (CPWF) said on Facebook that, as part of its Operation Krill Wars campaign, the Bandero is currently targeting "two of the largest Norwegian trawlers operating in Antarctic waters, the Antarctic Endurance and the Antarctic Sea,"—both of which are owned by Aker QRILL Company of Lysaker, Norway.
"Earlier today, both trawlers released lines into the water to move the Bandero, a dangerous maneuver that could have disabled our ship," the foundation alleged. "In response, the Bandero delivered a gentle but deliberate nudge to the stern of the Antarctic Sea, accompanied by a message: Stop despoiling the ecological integrity of the Southern Ocean."
Aker QRILL is owned by New York City-based American Industrial Partners and Norwegian billionaire Kjell Inge Røkke, and calls itself "the world's leading krill company."
Company CEO Webjørn Barstad responded to the incident by claiming in an interview with Reuters that "our crew were put at risk in some of the most remote waters on Earth, and only luck avoided potential environmental damage."
"If the steel plates... had ruptured, it could have caused a spill," Barstad added. "It was probably just luck that it didn't cause more damage."
CPWF scoffed at the company's claims of danger, saying on Facebook that "I understand your need to play the victim while you scoop life from the sea."
As the Operation Krill Wars campaign explains:
Krill is the keystone species of the ecosystem in Antarctica. The majority of Antarctic species are reliant on krill as their primary food source or krilI is the the food source of their prey. From the great whales down to the penguins, seals, and seabirds, all rely on an abundance of krill to survive.
Currently the quota set by the Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources is 620,000 tons which is said to represent 1% of the total biomass of krill. However the fishing of krill is in concentrated areas, meaning that the likelihood of ecological collapse in those areas is far more likely.
After the near extinction of several large whale species in the 19th and 20th centuries, conservation efforts in the later half of the 20th century and 21st century have seen whale populations recovering. Though not back to their pre-commercial whaling numbers, this increase in whale populations obviously requires a greater amount of krill for food. Yet what we are seeing is a greater extraction of krill by human commercial enterprises.
“If the ocean dies, we die,” Paul Watson said in a statement. “Krill are the blood of the sea. Without them, the whales, penguins, fish, and birds will starve, and the ocean will fall silent.”
Watson is best known as the co-founder of Greenpeace and, later, the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. He has dedicated his life to defending marine wildlife—especially mammals like whales—from harm. A controversial figure, Watson was arrested and jailed in Greenland in 2024 on an international warrant issued by Japan over his anti-whaling activism. However, he was freed after Denmark—which controls Greenland's foreign affairs—refused Japan's extradition request.
CPWF said that the issue of ocean exploitation must be "confronted legally and brought to global attention."
"We are here in the Southern Ocean to oppose a crime against nature and humanity—aggressively, but nonviolently," the group said Wednesday. "We welcome the opportunity to defend our actions in court and expose the true cost of krill fishing to the world."
The Bob Brown Foundation, an Australian green group, defended CPWF in a statement Wednesday calling "for the complete end to krill fishing in Antarctica."
"The krill fishing industry is fully aware of the damage they cause, such as killing whales in their nets, yet they do all they can to greenwash krill products," said Bob Brown Foundation Antarctic and marine campaigner Alistair Allan. "We applaud the brave actions of the Captain Paul Watson Foundation, who are ensuring that the plunder of krill does not go unchallenged.”
“Krill is violently sucked out of Antarctica’s fragile wilderness all for products we don’t need, such as fish farm feed, pet food, and supposed health products," Allan added. "It’s time for the world to boycott all products with krill in them."
Local and state governments should invest in protecting natural landscapes as the foundation of rural prosperity—not funnel more public dollars into yet another dirty and destructive industry.
Nature is our lifeline. Technology cannot replace it.
That truth is the heart of a growing conflict in rural America. As data centers and AI infrastructure are sold to communities as “innovation,” “jobs,” and “the future,” we’re being asked to trade away the natural systems that have always sustained us: forests, clean water, a stable climate, and the human need for connection with each other and the natural world.
It’s not a fair trade. It’s not a winning economic strategy. And no matter what Big Tech claims, it’s not good for us.
Like many Americans, my most treasured memories come from time spent outdoors. I grew up exploring the forests of coastal South Carolina—climbing trees, watching birds fly across the sunset, picking wildflowers. Those experiences led me to co‑found Dogwood Alliance, an organization dedicated to protecting Southeastern forests, in 1996.
We still have a choice: Allow hollow promises to lead us into a dead planet, or look to nature for survival and joy.
Our Southern forests are among the most biodiverse in the nation—and are the least protected. Industrial logging has presented the greatest threat to forests I’ve seen in my lifetime. The South is logged at a rate estimated to be four times higher than South American rainforests. I’ve seen how decades of expansion in wood production—from paper to biomass wood pellets—have fouled air and water while degrading millions of acres. I’ve seen how clear-cutting and the conversion of wild forests into single‑species plantations have devastated biodiversity, water quality, natural flood control, and carbon storage. I’ve seen entire communities become sacrifice zones, with low‑income, Black, and Indigenous residents bearing the brunt of pollution and forest destruction.
What I have never seen is a corporation’s promises of clean operations and economic prosperity actually materialize. That’s why I am more convinced than ever that our future depends on protecting standing forests
Today, we stand at a crossroads. After years of community organizing, public pressure, and scientific pushback, paper and wood‑pellet mills are shuttering. For those of us in rural and forest communities, this presents a rare opportunity to rethink what we want our economy to be. Do we continue down a path of destruction, or do we accelerate the protection of nature?
Into this moment steps a new pitch: data centers and AI as the next economic “miracle.” But their enormous appetite for electricity and water accelerates resource extraction, pollution, and climate impacts. The declining forestry industry is now trying to hitch itself to this swindle, promoting the burning of trees to power data centers as a way to prop up its obsolete business model—and calling it “progress.”
Progress toward what? Much of what these AI data centers produce is inflammatory content that fuels political outrage and deepens social division. No wonder people across the country are pushing back—and winning.
In so many ways, forests are the most advanced technology the world has ever known. They regulate temperature, store carbon, support food systems, and offer psychological grounding no device can replicate. When left intact, forests are self‑maintaining, self‑renewing, and infinitely more productive than any data center.
Study after study shows that time in nature improves cognitive function and a wide range of mental and physical health markers. Research also links depression, anxiety, and attention disorders to tech overload and reduced time outdoors. Science shows what we instinctively know to be true—nature brings people together. Protecting it is one of the few remaining ways to restore health and rebuild unity in a divided time.
Equally important, forest protection is a proven economic strategy for rural communities. The outdoor recreation economy generates far more revenue and jobs than the timber industry. Conservation and recreation jobs, ecological restoration, and community‑led development create long‑term prosperity without sacrificing land, water, or health. These sectors keep wealth local, strengthen small businesses, and attract people who want to live in places defined by beauty and belonging—not destruction and noise.
At Dogwood Alliance, we’ve seen what happens when communities reject extractive industry and shift to people power. Last year, we partnered with New Alpha Community Development Corporation to purchase Freedom Land, a 305‑acre property that will become a community‑led hub for forest conservation, ecotourism, and outdoor recreation. We also helped the Pee Dee Indian Tribe purchase 77 acres of wetlands to create an environmental education center celebrating Native American culture and heritage.
These projects offer a blueprint for a community‑led movement to save our forests and our towns. And they come at a critical moment, as rural communities face new threats from Big Tech’s land‑hungry, resource‑intensive infrastructure
We still have a choice: Allow hollow promises to lead us into a dead planet, or look to nature for survival and joy. Local and state governments should invest in protecting natural landscapes as the foundation of rural prosperity—not funnel more public dollars into yet another dirty and destructive industry.
We can and must build a future rooted in nature, not in the false god of AI technology. Nature is not just the original technology—it’s still the best.
“Rivers don't recognize borders—and neither do the fish that depend on them," said one researcher. "The crisis unfolding beneath our waterways is far more severe than most people realize, and we are running out of time."
More than 300 species of migratory freshwater fish are in dire need of "urgent coordinated cross-border collaboration" amid a crisis of rapid collapse, according to a report released Tuesday at a key United Nations conservation conference in Brazil.
"Some of the longest, most important migrations of species on Earth are happening beneath the surface of the world’s rivers and many are rapidly collapsing," the United Nations Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals' (CMS) annual "Global Assessment of Migratory Freshwater Fishes" report states.
Released at CMS' 15th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP15) in Campo Grande, Brazil the report details how freshwater fish—which are vital for the health of riparian ecosystems and provide food for hundreds of millions of people around the world—"are among the most imperiled wildlife on the planet."
"Many migratory species now face declines driven by loss of connectivity, flow alteration, habitat degradation, exploitation, pollution, and interacting pressures across borders," the report notes. "Recognizing these trends and their transboundary nature, [CMS] has sought stronger coordinated action for inland fishes that move across national jurisdictions."
📣 MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT 🚨 Out now at #CMSCOP15: the Global Assessment of Migratory Freshwater Fishes, the most comprehensive overview yet on the conservation needs of migratory freshwater fish. 🌍🐟Download the #CMSFreshwaterFishes in English, Spanish and French: www.cms.int/news/un-vita...
[image or embed]
— Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) (@cms.int) March 24, 2026 at 5:28 AM
The report's authors—Zeb Hogan, Zach Bess, Michele Thieme, and Twan Stoffers—identified 325 species of freshwater fish as candidates for international conservation efforts. River basins the report says should be prioritized include the Amazon and La Plata–Paraná in South America, the Danube in Europe, the Mekong and Ganges-Brahmaputra in Asia, and the Nile in Africa.
According to the report:
Many migratory fish rely on long, uninterrupted river corridors connecting spawning grounds, feeding areas, and floodplain nurseries, often across multiple countries. When dams, altered flows, or habitat degradation interrupt those pathways, populations can decline rapidly...
Migratory freshwater fish populations worldwide have declined by roughly 81% since 1970 and nearly all (97%) of the 58 CMS-listed migratory fish species (including fresh and salt-water species) are threatened with extinction.
CMS recommends governments take steps to safeguard migratory fish and their habitats, including protecting migration corridors, devising basin-scale action plans and transboundary monitoring, and international coordination of seasonal fisheries.
“Many of the world’s great wildlife migrations take place underwater," Hogan, the report's lead author, said in a statement. "This assessment shows that migratory freshwater fish are in serious trouble, and that protecting them will require countries to work together to keep rivers connected, productive, and full of life.”
Thieme, who is vice president of World Wildlife Fund-US, said that “rivers don't recognize borders—and neither do the fish that depend on them."
"The crisis unfolding beneath our waterways is far more severe than most people realize, and we are running out of time," she added. "Rivers need to be managed as connected systems, with coordination across borders, and investments in basin-wide solutions now before these migrations are lost forever."
The CMS report follows last month's publication of a study by researchers in Spain who examined how ocean warming driven by human burning of fossil fuels is causing a "staggering and deeply concerning loss of marine life.”
Noting that species are at risk from not only warming waters but also overfishing, one expert argued that "any management reform must simultaneously address both drivers of change."
Humanity's continued reliance on fossil fuels led to last year being among the hottest on record, and oceans store over 90% of the excess heat from greenhouse gases. A study out Wednesday details how the related long-term heating, warm years, and marine heatwaves "pose serious but poorly quantified threats" to fish species.
"To put it simply, the faster the ocean floor warms, the faster we lose fish," lead author Shahar Chaikin of Spain's National Museum of Natural Sciences (MNCN) told the Guardian. "A 7.2% decline for every tenth of a degree per decade might sound small... But compounded over time, across entire ocean basins, it represents a staggering and deeply concerning loss of marine life."
For the study, published in the journal Nature Ecology & Evolution, Chaikin, his MNCN colleague Miguel B. Araújo and the National University of Colombia's Juan David González-Trujillo analyzed 702,037 estimates of biomass change for 33,990 populations of 1,566 fish species across the Mediterranean, north Atlantic, and northeast Pacific between 1993 and 2021.
"On shorter timescales, warmer years and marine heatwaves were linked to sharp biomass losses of up to 43.4% in populations at the warm edge of the species' range and biomass increases of up to 176% at the cold edge," the study states. Chaikin warned in a statement that the temporary jumps in cooler areas could send misleading signals to managers of fisheries.
"Although this sudden increase in biomass in cold waters may seem like good news for fisheries, these are transient increases," he explained. "If managers raise catch quotas based on biomass increases caused by a heatwave, they risk causing the collapse of populations when temperatures return to normal or when the effect of long-term warming prevails, because these are short-lived increases."
González-Trujillo stressed that "unlike extreme short-term weather fluctuations, which can vary dramatically, this chronic warming exerts a constant negative pressure on fish populations in the Mediterranean Sea, the north Atlantic Ocean, and the northeastern Pacific Ocean."
Specifically, Chaikin said that "when we remove the noise of extreme short-term weather events, the data show that this warming is associated with a sustained annual decline in biomass of up to 19.8%."
Are warmer oceans good or bad for #fish? 🐟 The answer is a dangerous paradox. Our new paper in @natecoevo.nature.com shows how marine heatwaves may create “fake” fish gains that mask a large-scale crash. Read our findings here: www.nature.com/articles/s41...@mncn-csic.bsky.social #ClimateChange
[image or embed]
— Shahar Chaikin (@shaharchaikin.bsky.social) February 25, 2026 at 5:05 AM
Given the findings, Araújo emphasized that fisheries' managers "must balance localized increases with long-term declines extremely carefully to avoid overexploitation."
"As ocean warming continues, the only viable strategy is to prioritize long-term resilience," the study co-author said. "Management measures must plan for the biomass decline expected in an increasingly warm ocean."
Carlos García-Soto is a scientist at the Spanish National Research Council, which manages MNCN. Although not a study co-author, he also highlighted the need for policymakers to understand the "clear risk of misinterpretation" detailed in the new paper.
"In a context of accelerated climate change, policies cannot react solely to extreme events or be based on short-term signals," García-Soto said in a statement. "They need consistency between science, planning, and governance, especially in shared ecosystems or on the high seas."
Also responding to the research on Wednesday, Guillermo Ortuño Crespo of the International Union for Conservation of Nature said that "I believe this is a methodologically sound and valuable study that provides valuable evidence on how different components of ocean warming affect fish biomass."
While recognizing the well-documented and devastating impacts of fossil fuel-driven heating on marine species, Ortuño Crespo also warned that "there is a risk, in my opinion, that climate change will become the main explanation for changes in marine species biomass, leaving aside overfishing."
"Historically, overfishing has been the main determinant of biomass declines in many fisheries around the world," he noted, citing the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. "The proportion of overexploited stocks globally continues to increase, indicating that fishing pressure remains a dominant risk factor. The current challenge is that this overfishing crisis is being further exacerbated by ocean warming and deoxygenation."
"In terms of public policy, the study is highly relevant because it emphasizes that fisheries management systems must become more climate-adaptive," Ortuño Crespo said. "Any management reform must simultaneously address both drivers of change: climate and fisheries. Adjusting quotas solely on the basis of climate without reducing overcapacity and the impact of high-impact gear, such as bottom trawling, is likely to be insufficient to recover stocks."
Members of a five-person crew who spend their summers tending to puffins, terns, and other sea birds on Seal Island, Maine, share what it's like to do this essential work despite a changing climate and a hostile administration.
After contorting under boulders for puffin chicks, chasing skittish tern chicks in the weeds, and sitting as stone-silent sentinels in bird blinds to observe feeding and behavior, the five-person research crew on Seal Island relaxed in their work cabin in the orange and purple sunset glow. Their conversation on a mid-July evening wafted into waves of joy, angst, anger, and gratitude.
The emotional highs and lows of that conversation were something Coco Faber, Camilla Dopulos, Liv Ridley, Mark Price, and Jack Eibel wanted the world to hear and feel, from 21 miles out to sea from the coast of Maine.

A puffin catches a fish. (Photo by Derrick Jackson)
The joys were obvious. One was that, despite the Gulf of Maine overall being one of the fastest-warming bodies of ocean on Earth, it was a near-spectacular summer for puffins on Seal Island, a place legendary in the world of conservation. A part of the National Wildlife Refuge System and managed by the Audubon Seabird Institute, the island is part of the world’s first successful restoration of seabirds where humans killed them off.
Atlantic puffins were wiped out here and across several islands in Maine by the 1880s as coastal fishing and farming communities hunted them for their meat and eggs. Seal Island, a mile long, had hosted the then-largest-known puffin colony in the Gulf of Maine.
In my visit in mid-July, I often had between 100 and 200 puffins stretching across my view from my bird blind.
In the 1970s, Steve Kress, then an Audubon bird instructor in his late 20s, launched what became known as Project Puffin (and now known as the Seabird Institute). He brought hundreds of puffin chicks down from Newfoundland to hand raise on Eastern Egg Rock, a tiny 7-acre island, 6 miles off Pemaquid Point. Puffins began breeding anew on that island in 1981 and set a record 188 breeding pairs in 2019.
Kress repeated the experiment with hundreds more chicks on Seal Island, much farther out to the northeast. Puffins began breeding once more here in 1992. Last year, Faber and her team counted a record 672 active burrows.
“I’m very confident that there are more burrows,” said Faber, 31, who is the island supervisor and in her tenth summer with the Seabird Institute. “There are so many more that we have found since and burrows we might have missed because the chick fledged before we could get to them.”
You could not doubt her. In my visit in mid-July, I often had between 100 and 200 puffins stretching across my view from my bird blind. Puffin parents brought in a steady stream of juicy haddock, nice long sand lance, and even occasional herring to feed their chicks. Faber reported to fellow researchers on other islands that many Seal puffin chicks were “big and healthy.” Alcid cousins of puffins, black guillemots and razorbills, had their highest chick productivity ever.
If only all the birds the crew managed were so lucky.

A tern delivers a fine meal of sand lance to a chick. (Photo by Derrick Jackson)
The same ocean that was a sea of plenty for puffins was more of paucity for Arctic, common, and roseate terns. They are species also restored across the Gulf of Maine by the Seabird Institute and the US Fish and Wildlife Service after decades of absence. They screech and dive to protect their chicks on the ground from gulls. By coincidence, that vigilance also offers protective cover for puffins down below.
Many species of terns were among the estimated 300 million birds slaughtered in the late 19th and early 20th century for feathers to adorn women’s hats. Public outcry led to the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918. The protections helped the tern population in Maine briefly rebound until the 1930s.
But the overall ecosystem was so upset by the prior massacres that terns were crowded off many islands by herring gulls and great black-backed gulls. Both species of gulls were also decimated in the feather trade. But being omnivores that feast both on bird chicks and garbage from landfills and fishing waste, their populations recovered much faster than terns and puffins, which feed solely on fish. Terns left Seal Island by mid-century, and the island became even more inhospitable as it became a Navy bombing range from the 1940s to the 1960s.
With the help of decoys, recorded tern calls, and gull control, 16 pairs of Arctic and 1 pair of common terns nested once more on Seal Island in 1989. By 2011, the colony grew to 3,038 pairs.
“Our observations of the terns show us how the impacts of climate change can cascade in interesting and often horrifying ways,” Faber said.
But the colony has shrunk steadily and dramatically since then. This summer, the island crew counted only 1,203 Arctic and common tern nests. That was the lowest combined census count since 1995.
The reasons are likely many. The last decade and a half has seen the warmest water temperatures ever recorded in the Gulf of Maine. When temperatures are particularly high, species of fish that terns snatch on the surface to feed chicks often flee too deep to be caught. Unlike puffins, razorbills, and guillemots, which can dive to hunt a variety of fish, terns feed only at the surface.
Then add the fact that terns are only in the Gulf of Maine from May to August. Common terns migrate as far south as Chile and Argentina. Arctic terns are the world’s longest-traveling migratory bird, breeding at the top of the Northern Hemisphere and wintering off Antarctica. Some Arctic terns hatched in Maine veer around South Africa into the Indian Ocean before joining other terns in the Weddell Sea.
Between their fall and spring migrations and the incessant flying for food, they can cover 55,000 miles in one year. In a lifetime, an Arctic tern, which can live past 30, could have made three round trips to the moon.
In its journey, a single tern can face a myriad of uncertainties from sea ice loss, overfishing, pollution, and coastal development. In recent years, many Arctic terns have returned to Seal Island in poor body condition. An international team of researchers found in a 2023 study that what might seem “minor changes” in conditions along the migration routes of Arctic terns may sum up to an effect that proves to be “greater than the parts.”
The Seal Island crew said they are already witnessing the compound effects. This year, as in several recent years, many Arctic terns arrived from spring migration in poor body condition. After an early tease of herring and hake, most of the food being brought to chicks by summer’s end was tiny crustaceans. In my blind stints, parent terns landed before me with a single krill, a dragonfly, a moth, or a tiny pufferfish.
And it could be even worse. This summer was relatively dry, but in years of both poor food supply and incessant rains, crews have told me there is no more helpless feeling than being holed up in their cabin and tents while weakened chicks are being soaked into fatal hypothermia.
It feels harder to get people to care when the nation is currently under a White House that is trying to weaken or gut the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and firing thousands of federal staff involved with conservation.
“Our observations of the terns show us how the impacts of climate change can cascade in interesting and often horrifying ways,” Faber said. She said low weight adults may lay smaller clutches of eggs, abandon nests early in the season or flush more easily from nests when gulls swoop down to try to eat eggs or chicks. Parents that get lucky and return to the island with a juicy fish for a chick are mugged in midair by other terns and gulls, often dropping a fish that no chick gets to eat.
Poor fish availability of course leads to poor growth of the chicks that survive and less chance of surviving during their first migration. “If the fish don’t last for the entire season, tern chicks that started out fat and grew quickly can still starve to death,” Faber said. “Adults are also more aggressive to neighboring chicks, sometimes to the point of killing them and chicks will pile onto each other if an adult does land with a fish.”
It makes it all the more celebratory when luckier chicks do survive and start flying around the island. The first sight of a chick fledging is often a cause for cheering and clapping. “I call it Tern TV,” said Dopulos, 24. “Sometimes it’s comedy, sometimes it’s tragedy.”
Price, 19, noting how hard parent terns work to find food for chicks, even to the point of bringing insects back, said, “They’re such fierce fighters. The funny thing is, with puffins, we don’t ever see most of the chicks under the rocks. We see the tern chicks every single day. It feels more personal.”
Ridley, 27, added, “To think that they go from little fluff balls to trying to fly in three weeks and then fly to Antarctica never stops being amazing.”
The crew said if people, who pack boat tours by the thousands each summer to admire puffins with their clownish orange, yellow and black bills and tuxedo-like plumage, really cared about that bird, they would also care about the challenges for terns.
Fortunately, terns did much better elsewhere in the Gulf of Maine as several islands racked up record numbers of common terns in 2022. But with seabirds in severe global decline, nothing can be taken for granted. Neither Arctic terns nor common terns are federally endangered, but Arctic terns are a threatened species in Maine as they “still far below historic levels.” Common terns are in decline in the Great Lakes.
Faber said it was “morally repugnant” to her that in a world where humans consider themselves the center of existence, that a “cute” species like puffins merits attention, while so many other creatures, like terns, are afterthoughts or ignored altogether. “I love the puffins,” she said. “They are the umbrella species for conservation. But terns are the umbrella species for puffins.”

Puffins, once gone for nearly a century from several islands in Maine, are now a prime tourist draw. (Photo by Derrick Jackson)
And this is where the crew’s angst simmers into anger.
It feels harder to get people to care when the nation is currently under a White House that is trying to weaken or gut the Endangered Species Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and firing thousands of federal staff involved with conservation.
“We get to escape from the darkest parts of the world,” she said. “I feel extra lucky to be here at this moment.”
The effects of the actions in DC earlier this year were acutely felt within the crew this summer. Dopulos had a job lined up this summer with the National Park Service. But it was cut by the Trump administration. She has several friends who lost their jobs in a service that has lost nearly a quarter of its permanent employees and left thousands of seasonal jobs unfilled.
“Some of them are still doing what they were doing to protect wildlife and resources, but as volunteers,” Dopulos said. “And they’re joining protests at the same time. They’re so passionate about what they do that they’re not going to let government get in the way. It’s a way of saying ‘We still persist.’”

Holding a puffin is the Seal Island crew of (from left to right): Supervisor Coco Faber, Camilla Dopulos, Jack Eibel, Mark Price, and Liv Ridley. (Photo by Derrick Jackson)
For Dopulos and the crew, talking about persistence led back to a more joyful place. Even with the oft-dour drama of terns, they all said they were grateful for the privilege of living for three months of the year out of tents, tending to such an historic sanctuary.
“It’s my favorite place in the world,” said Ridley, who winters as a line cook in Idaho. “You get to live in a place that is not human dominated. Everywhere else, we manipulate the world. People think that the human way is the only way, but living in a society of seabirds proves to me daily that it isn’t. I feel lucky to have that perspective.”
Faber said Seal Island has become her own sanctuary. “We get to escape from the darkest parts of the world,” she said. “I feel extra lucky to be here at this moment.”
Feeling just as lucky was Steve Kress, who came out to Seal Island for a day while I was there. He and I have coauthored two books on his seabird restorations. Being much more remote than Eastern Egg Rock, Seal Island has never come close to receiving the press the pioneering island still receives. But while Egg Rock proved puffins could be brought back, Kress said Seal’s restoration, with three times more puffins, “makes me see the grand possibilities for restoration where there is such abundant, quality nesting habitat."
“When puffins first nested at Seal Island, we weren’t as overwhelmed and relieved as when the first pairs reclaimed Egg Rock. But the fact that similar methods led to the same outcome proved that we were on to something very important. It’s encouraging to find that given enough time, persistence, and patience, successful restoration projects can become the norm.”