New research into the secrets of the forest: Finnish tree population is made up of families and neighborhoods

by University of Oulu

The figure shows the pines sampled in one study area. The most closely related ones are 

connected by a red line. In this study, the closest relatives were second degree relatives,

 for example half-siblings. Pine offspring generally do not travel very far from the mother 

tree, and the forest is a mosaic of families. 

Credit: Peer Community Journal (2024). DOI: 10.24072/pcjournal.413

The trees in the forest are not just a random group. Fascinating facts reveal pine tree family relationships. The pollen that floats in the air can spread for hundreds of kilometers, but the offspring are usually found in the neighborhood.

These new findings, now published in the Peer Community Journal, are also important for forest management.

The trees in the forest are not a randomly organized group, but they make up families and neighborhoods.

Scots pines (Pinus sylvestris) do not grow completely randomly throughout the forest, but remain in the vicinity of their close relatives. This was the conclusion of a new study on the relationships of Finnish forest pines.

The average distance between offspring and parent is 54 meters. This result is probably due to the fact that seeds disperse over a shorter distance than pollen. Indeed, pollen can spread over distances of up to hundreds of kilometers, which can be unnerving for a terrace or car washer, but is an effective promoter of gene flow and, as a result, of a wide gene pool in the Scots pine range.

Despite the long flight distance of pollen, pine reproductive partners are likely to be found among the 2,500 nearest pine trees (the so-called neighborhood size), which corresponds to a good hectare in a Finnish commercial forest.

This year is expected to be particularly rich in pine blossom. Pine is wind-pollinated, meaning that pollen is carried from the male strobili to the female strobili by the wind. Once pollination has taken place, the pine seeds begin to develop inside the pine cone. The seeds are not fully developed until two years later, when they break off from the pine cone and float to the ground.

Pine seeds can also be carried by animals, and this is how a new pine seedling ends up in its growing site. Like humans, pine trees begin to reproduce at around 20 years of age. An individual pine tree has both female and male reproductive organs and self-pollination occurs, but the resulting highly inbred seeds are of low viability.

Although the offspring do not usually travel very far from the mother tree, the forest is still a mosaic of families. The abundance of reproductive pine trees means that individual trees cannot dominate, and there also are many trees from completely different families among close relatives.

"In the past, Scots pine relationships have been studied in small, isolated populations at the edges of their range, where clusters of relatives are more distinct. We now have confirmation that the kinship structure is also present in a very large and continuous pine forest," says Associate Professor Alina Niskanen from the University of Oulu, Finland.

The new data on the dispersal distance and relatedness structure of pine are important for forest management. They can be used, for example, in deciding an appropriate distance between seed trees in terms of avoiding inbreeding caused by relatedness.

The study used forest plots resulting from natural regeneration, where seed trees had been left after felling. The results thus describe a typical situation in Finnish forest management, which arises after seed tree felling, when both seed trees and trees in the surrounding areas seed a new generation of pine trees.

For the study, nearly 500 adult pine trees were selected from the Natural Resources Institute Finland's Punkaharju research forest in Finland and relatedness between them was determined using genome-wide genetic data.

From the distances between individuals with different degrees of relatedness, an estimate of the average distance between offspring and parent and the size of the neighborhood was obtained.

More information: Alina K. Niskanen et al, Does the seed fall far from the tree? Weak fine-scale genetic structure in a continuous Scots pine population, Peer Community Journal (2024). DOI: 10.24072/pcjournal.413

Provided by University of Oulu 

Hurricanes found to boost cone production in longleaf pine

Enbas.netenbas.net/wp-content/plugins/pdfjs-viewer-shortcode/pdfjs/web/viewer.php?file=https://enbas.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/ursula-k-le-guin-the-word-for-world-is-forest-1.pdf&attachment_id=&dButton=true&pButton=true&oButton=false&sButton=true

The Word for World Is Forest - ursula-k-le-guin-the-word-for-world-is ...

... The Word for World Is ForestUrsula K. Le Guin ... No such reassurance rounds off The Wordfor World is Forest ... PDF Producer: -. PDF Version: -. Page Count: -.

Satellites capture smoke pouring from hundreds of wildfires across North America (photos)

"In places, the smoke is so thick that it obscures the blue water beneath."

A satellite image shows smoke from Mexico's fires covering roughly two-thirds of the Gulf of Mexico. A cloud bank is seen toward the top right. (Image credit: MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA GSFC)

News
By Sharmila Kuthunur published May 22, 2024


Hundreds of wildfires have been blazing across Canada and Mexico since last week, and new satellite images released by NASA show the smoke pouring out of some.


Firefighters have been battling this army of wildfires, which are scattered across various Canadian provinces, including over 30 blazes in Alberta and British Columbia and 10 in Ontario, according to the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre. Smoke from multiple fires flowed into the United States and blanketed Wisconsin last Sunday (May 12), prompting the state's first air quality advisory of the year.



The full satellite image of smoke from Mexico's fires covering the Gulf of Mexico. The state of Florida in the top right is obscured by clouds. (Image credit: MODIS Land Rapid Response Team, NASA GSFC)

NASA's Terra satellite, which is a small, school-bus-sized satellite circling Earth since 1999, imaged smoke from multiple fires in British Columbia and Alberta. Wisps of smoke can be seen swirling across North America in the new image, which was taken using the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument onboard the satellite. The picture is a mosaic stitched from views taken during three separate passes of the satellite over the regions, NASA said in a statement.

In British Columbia, intense wildfires do not become widespread until late summer, so the ongoing blazes have sparked a fresh wave of concern about whether they are a sign of another deadly wildfire season. Last year's wildfire season was the country's worst on record, when more than 45 million acres burned across the country. However, less intense drought conditions compared to last year are expected to make this year's wildfire season less extreme, according to one New York Times article.

Meanwhile, more than 200 fires raged across Mexico last week, some of which were intentional and controlled in order to clear pasture and renew cropland, among other agricultural purposes, according to a NASA statement. The blazes coincide with the peak of the annual fire season, which usually begins mid-March and lasts for 14 weeks.

NASA's Aqua satellite, which circles our planet from south to north over the equator, imaged the smoke from some of the region's fires, which covered about two-thirds of the Gulf of Mexico. "In places, the smoke is so thick that it obscures the blue water beneath," the space agency wrote in the statement.

Get the Space.com Newsletter

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!Contact me with news and offers from other Future brandsReceive email from us on behalf of our trusted partners or sponsorsBy submitting your information you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy and are aged 16 or over.





In late March, NASA's Landsat 9 imaged the smoke billowing from a fire near the border of Oaxaca and Chiapas in southern Mexico. (Image credit: Wanmei Liang/NASA/Landsat/USGS)

Prevailing winds ferried some of that smoke across the Gulf of Mexico and into southwest Florida, turning the state's normally sunshine-filled skies into a hazy expanse, Florida's local news outlet WINKnews.com reported.

RELATED STORIES:


— Wildfire smoke is warming the planet more than previously thought, scientists say

— How scientists are using artificial intelligence to predict wildfires

— 'Lost' satellite found after orbiting undetected for 25 years

The Aqua satellite, which was launched in May 2002 to study water on Earth, has been in a "free-drift" mode since December 2021, when it completed its final maneuver to make up for atmospheric drag. NASA estimates the satellite "has a strong chance" of operating until September 2026.

CALIFORNIA

Richmond Oil Refining Tax on Chevron, a Major Polluter, Moves Closer to Ballot

Laura Klivans
May 22, 2024
SCIENCE

The Chevron Refinery, a petroleum refinery, can be seen from Point Richmond on 

(Beth LaBerge/KQED)


The Richmond City Council voted unanimously Tuesday night to direct the city attorney to prepare a ballot measure that would tax oil refining, putting the city one step closer to a tax on the Chevron Refinery sought by environmental justice groups.

The tax would help address an anticipated $34 million budget shortfall for the 2024–25 fiscal year, according to Mayor Eduardo Martinez and Vice Mayor Claudia Jimenez, who cited the harm done by oil refining to the environment and public health in introducing the measure.

Chevron, Richmond’s largest employer and taxpayer, netted $21.3 billion in profits last year and paid $45.9 million in taxes to Richmond in the 2022–23 fiscal year, representing more than 15% of the city’s revenues. Annual revenue from a refining tax could approach $100 million, according to Kerry Guerin, an attorney for Communities for a Better Environment Action, which initially proposed the idea along with the Asian Pacific Environmental Network Action.

“We support policies that encourage business investment and seek to create a better quality of life for Richmond residents,” Chevron wrote in a statement sent by company spokesperson Caitlin Powell. “That said, we believe the proposed refining tax is the wrong approach to do that.”

Chevron called the tax “a hasty proposal, brought forward by one-sided interests” and said it would hinder the company’s ability to improve its facility to better provide clean energy, among other things.

Kevin Slagle, a spokesperson for California’s main oil industry group, the Western States Petroleum Association, said oil refining is already more expensive in California than anywhere else in the U.S.

“Any additional local taxes or regulatory programs could make operations more challenging and expensive, which could lead to higher costs at the pump for all,” Slagle said in an email.

During Tuesday night’s meeting, Jimenez pushed back on the oil industry assertions and said the new tax revenue would not only fund city operations but also help build green businesses to replace fossil fuel production.

“What we are proposing is not going to break things or just to make them leave,” she said. “What we are proposing is to make sure that we continue to advocate for such a big business with billions of dollars to pay their fair share to Richmond.”

Oil refining is the largest single source of pollution in Richmond, with harmful health effects. Emissions of particulate matter from the Chevron Refinery are responsible for 5 to 11 premature deaths in Richmond each year, according to estimations by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. The air district also cites those emissions as contributing to cardiovascular disease, respiratory illnesses and asthma.

Asthma rates for Richmond residents are higher than 90% of other Californians, according to state data.

“I myself suffer from asthma. My son, who’s 9 years old, is a two-time cancer survivor,” said Sandy Saeteurn, a political director with the Asian Pacific Environmental Network Action and a longtime Richmond resident.

She said the Chevron Refinery is “continuing to pollute our air, our environment, our health. And yet, we are not seeing them as good neighbors. We want to make sure that they’re investing in our city, investing in our residents and the future of our community.”


RELATED COVERAGE


Major Richmond Refinery Accidents Settled as Part of Chevron Deal


Chevron Owns Richmond's Main Local News Source — and Many Refinery-Related Stories Go Untold


Bay Air District Hails 'Decisive Victory' in Battle to Cut Refinery Pollution

Dr. Amanda Millstein, a primary care pediatrician who saw patients for years in Richmond after working in other Bay Area cities, said many parents in the city expect that their children will develop asthma – and added that “they are not wrong.”

“I have lost track of the number of families who have asked me at the initial visit with their 2- or 3-day-old baby, ‘Doctor, does my baby have asthma?’ Or ‘How will I know when my baby has asthma?’” Millstein said.

Most of the dozens of people who spoke during public comment in Tuesday’s city council meeting favored the tax.

Longtime Richmond resident Raphael Castro recalled witnessing the 2012 Chevron Refinery fire and sealing his windows with wet towels to protect his younger sister from breathing the air “because, in North Richmond, we have a higher risk of our children getting asthma,” he said.

Timothy Jefferies, a representative of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, many of whom work in refineries, was more wary.

“We are not against clean air,” Jefferies said. But he cautioned the council to take stock of the good-paying jobs provided by the refinery and “all the indirect jobs, all the indirect economics that this city enjoys because of those jobs.”

Richmond voters passed a tax on refineries in 2008, but the measure was challenged in court and struck down in 2009.

Community groups backing this renewed effort said the city can resolve those legal issues this time around. The ballot measure sought by the City Council would go before voters in November.

UK

Academic calls for upgrade to sewage systems to protect health

by University of Leeds

Credit: Pixabay/CC0 Public Domain

The risk to public health from human feces in our rivers and seas will increase without action to create a wastewater system fit for the future, according to a Leeds academic.

Professor Barbara Evans, Leeds' Professor of Public Health Engineering, has collaborated on a new report which assesses the best ways to reduce dangers associated with recreational use of water contaminated by sewage.

She said, "Investments in sanitation require national vision and leadership; 150 years ago, the U.K. committed to eliminating cholera and made the necessary huge investments in our wastewater system; we have reaped the benefit of that vision for our whole lives, and we probably haven't been sufficiently aware of it.

"That investment is reaching the end of its life, and we owe it to our children and our grandchildren to make a new commitment and create a vision of a new wastewater system fit for the future."

The report, led by the Royal Academy of Engineering, calls for improvements to the country's sewage system, better maintenance, and more widespread testing of the country's waterways to reduce the risks to swimmers and other water users.

Professor Evans, from Leeds' School of Civil Engineering, was a member of the working group that led the project.

She said, "It's important that people use our natural resources for leisure. It's good for public health and we don't want to stop that.

"What we want to do is to find interventions that bring down the risk of the chance of disease outbreaks when people use those resources."

Reducing people's risk of encountering human fecal pathogens in untreated and treated sewage discharged into rivers and coastal waters must be a priority, the document said.

Consumption of water contaminated with human feces exposes people to bacteria such as salmonella and E. coli, viruses and protozoa, all of which can cause stomach upsets, diarrhea and vomiting. Small children are particularly vulnerable.

The report says collective action by industry, government, public bodies and the general public is required. It makes 15 recommendations, including: review current bathing water regulations; prioritize maintenance of the existing sewage network; return to collecting widespread data on fecal bacteria; develop a long-term strategy for better designing cities to reduce flooding, and the appointment of a dedicated wastewater champion.

Professor Chris Whitty, England's chief medical officer, said it was a "public health priority as well as an environmental one."

First of its kind

This is the first time a comprehensive report has been undertaken to assess actions to reduce public health risks associated with use of public waters contaminated by fecal matter from human waste.

Its findings are based on risk-based assessments and consultations with more than 100 engineers, plus wastewater experts, the water industry, campaign organizations and policymakers.

Despite wastewater treatment works reducing the concentration of human fecal organisms, the continuous discharge of treated effluent into rivers, seas and lakes remains a source of these potentially health-damaging organisms.

The report's authors emphasize that the aim is not to completely remove all those organisms but to find cost-effective, long-term methods of reducing them to a level that does not put public health in jeopardy.

Greater exposure to pollutants

The report, published on 21 May by the National Engineering Policy Center, notes the rise in recreational activities in coastal and inland open waters across the U.K., leading to greater public exposure to pollutants. Increased public awareness and data availability on water quality have spurred renewed scrutiny over U.K. water standards and necessitated a revaluation of the public acceptability of the risk.

The report notes that there is a lack of evidence to demonstrate a direct, causal link between specific wastewater discharges and specific health incidents but emphasizes the known public health risk from exposure to high concentrations of fecal organisms.

It focuses on the role of wastewater infrastructure in introducing primarily human fecal organisms into open water through storm overflows and treated effluent discharge. It does not look at agricultural runoff from livestock, wild animals, or septic tanks.

The working group examined a range of actions across storm water management, wastewater treatment, monitoring and communication with the public, and maintenance and operations. The proposed actions aim to either engineer a reduction in the hazard itself or minimize public exposure to it and the report emphasizes that the choice of action will depend on local conditions, including scale, geography, policy priorities and affordability.

The authors said that the government should not just focus on improving infrastructure—which would reduce the short-term health risk—but a longer-term vision for how the U.K.'s cities are designed.

Public health priority

Professor Whitty said, "Public waterways are a great resource enjoyed by many children and adults and can have a significant positive impact on our health.

"Minimizing human fecal organisms in fresh water is a public health priority as well as an environmental one.

"While there will always be challenges with the efficient management of sewers and sewage treatment works, this report provides clear technical options for how this can realistically be achieved."

The experts also recommended decreasing urban runoff, with incentives for removing impermeable surfaces, like patios or paved-over gardens; increasing rainwater collection and expanding natural environments like wetlands, which would all help to reduce the amount of water and sewage going into the network; as well as educating the public about public health risks and improving effectiveness of signage at designated bathing sites; plus a potential ban on non-flushable items.

United effort

Professor David Butler FREng, Chair of the National Engineering Policy Center working group on wastewater, said, "Our vision for the U.K.'s future wastewater system is one that ensures the right balance of human health, environmental protection, and economic sustainability.

"But first we need a strong evidence base to understand and measure public health risks accurately. Such a foundation is essential to inform regulations, standards, and policies, enabling a united effort by governments, regulators, and water companies to mitigate health risks and ensure the safety of open waters for everyone.

"Growing urbanization and forecasts for more frequent and intense rainfall events due to climate change will mean increasing pressure is put on our aging wastewater system. Policymakers and industry should carefully consider the actions we have outlined here and their implications in future wastewater infrastructure projects."

More information: Testing the Waters: Priorities for Mitigating Health Risks from Wastewater Pollution: raeng.org.uk/news/new-report-u … rotect-public-health

Provided by University of Leeds Reviving England's polluted rivers through incentivizing farmers and comprehensive monitoring

 

Congressional Leaders Call on US DOJ to Investigate Fossil Fuel Industry Climate Deception

Statement by Kathy Mulvey, Union of Concerned Scientists

Published May 22, 2024

WASHINGTON—Today, U.S. Senate Budget Committee Chair Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and House Oversight and Accountability Ranking Member Jamie Raskin (D-MD) asked U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland to investigate fossil fuel industry climate deception and efforts to divert and delay action to address the worsening climate change crisis. The lawmakers forwarded evidence uncovered through public hearings and internal documents produced in response to congressional subpoenas issued as part of a multi-year bicameral investigation into ways fossil fuel companies and their associates knew about the harm their products would cause to people and the planet but lied to the public to continue boosting corporate profits.

Below is a statement by Kathy Mulvey, the accountability campaign director in the Climate and Energy Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).

“This multi-year bicameral congressional investigation has brought to light shocking and undeniable wrongdoing by ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Shell and others in the fossil fuel industry. There’s now a mountain of evidence confirming the fossil fuel industry’s ongoing efforts to defraud the public, manipulate our political system, delay the necessary transition to clean energy, and risk shareholder investments in the name of power and profits. Investigation and civil litigation against tobacco and big pharma firms by the U.S. Department of Justice was a critical step toward accountability for corporate misconduct, and similar action is warranted in the face of the fossil fuel industry-driven climate crisis. Requiring major oil and gas producers to stop lying and correct past lies could lead to a watershed moment in furthering climate action.”

This announcement comes after the United States experienced the highest-ever annual number of billion-dollar plus disasters in the previous year. Also in 2023, ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell and BP brought in combined annual profits totaling over $100 billion. Climate attribution research, including multiple studies led by UCS, directly connect emissions from the extraction and use of fossil fuel products to increased average temperature of the Earth’s surface, global sea level rise, ocean acidification, and wildfires. Another peer-reviewed analysis by UCS found that if policymakers do not take action on climate change, extreme heat could cause tens of millions of outdoor workers in the United States to jeopardize their health and risk losing a collective $55.4 billion in earnings each year by midcentury.

Additional UCS Resources and Analyses:

• A UCS blogpost by Mulvey on revelations from the first batch of internal oil and gas documents released by the U.S. House Oversight Committee.

• In a video, UCS scientists react to misleading statements made by the CEOs of BP, Chevron, ExxonMobil and Shell at a previous House Oversight Committee hearing.

• A UCS blogpost documenting disinformation claims by oil and gas company executives.

• A UCS report, “The Climate Deception Dossiers: Internal Fossil Fuel Industry Memos Reveal Decades of Corporate Disinformation.”

• A UCS blogpost by Mulvey discussing the departure of ExxonMobil’s climate scientist board member.

• A UCS blogpost by Laura Peterson, a corporate analyst at UCS, outlining ExxonMobil’s lawsuit against its shareholders and the company’s recent departure from the Independent Petroleum Association of America.

• A UCS blogpost by Peterson breaking down the climate disclosure rule proposed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission earlier this year.

• MEDIA CONTACT

  

  Ashley Siefert Nunes

  Climate and Energy Media Manager

  Climate, International Climate Negotiations, Corporate Accountability

  asiefert@ucsusa.org

  
  

Doctors engage the public by bringing a human side to social media

Presenting their ‘human self’ as well as their ‘professional self’ allows doctors to role model healthy behaviours for peers and trainees, and be more relatable to their patients and the public.

THE CONVERSATION 

Published: May 22, 2024 

A few years ago, doctors flooded social media with photos of themselves in swimsuits, along with the hashtag #medbikini. The reason? A recently published study suggested it was “unprofessional” for women physicians to post photos of themselves in bikinis.

Although the study caused a major outcry and was eventually retracted, its key message was nothing new. For decades, doctors have been trained to keep their personal lives separate from their work lives. To maintain their identities as trusted experts wherever they go — even on the beach.

Studies have shown that this pressure to appear professional can lead to burnout and even suicide. It may also damage physicians’ relationship with the public, because people tend to trust experts who are not only knowledgeable, but also warm and personable.



But our new study shows that — despite these pressures — physicians feel it’s important to show their personal side on social media. To be effective health communicators, they see that presenting their “human self” as well as their “professional self” allows them to role model healthy behaviours for peers and trainees, and to be more relatable to their patients and the public.
Doctors on X

As researchers who study health communication and physician education, we wanted to understand how doctors present themselves on social media — an environment where the lines between personal and professional are often blurred.

We interviewed 28 doctors in the United States about how they decide when and what to post and who they hope to reach on X (formerly Twitter). We also looked at each doctor’s bio and profile photo, noting the images, hashtags and descriptions they used to present themselves.

We found that the doctors used X for many reasons, ranging from the strictly professional to the highly personal. They used the platform to connect with colleagues, advocate for social change, raise awareness about social justice issues and educate the public about health topics, which aligns with previous research.

This public outreach wasn’t just a hobby or passion for physicians, but a core part of their professional role. As one doctor put it: “I feel like it’s part of my job. It’s part of what I signed up for as being a physician to educate my communities.”

Most importantly, doctors also used X to show a more human side, posting about their families, pets, vacations (yes, including pictures of themselves in swimsuits), hobbies and more. Many were also upfront about their failures and struggles with their mental health, explaining that they wanted to show the general public (but also remind some of their medical colleagues) that doctors “are human beings…like everyone else.”

Doctors felt it was important that their posts and profile represented their authentic self and not just their professional credentials, although they showcased those as well. As one doctor put it: “This is me. I’m a physician. I’m a woman. I’m a mother.”

Showing their authentic selves

Doctors felt it was important that their posts and profile represented their authentic self and not just their professional credentials. (Shutterstock)

Doctors explained that showing their human side wasn’t just something they did for themselves but was also a way to build trusting relationships with their patients. They were keenly aware that trust is essential for effective medical care, increasing the chances that patients will return for follow-up visits and stick to health recommendations.

As one doctor put it, “I think I get credibility for demonstrating humanity, honestly…Once they sort of know who I am as a human, I like to think that it, I hope, makes them more likely to listen when I say something medically.”

Doctors also shared their authentic selves to create social change, both in their profession and in society at large. Recognizing the high levels of stress students face in medical school, they hoped to role model for future physicians that “doctors can’t be doctors all of the time” and encourage them to work towards better work-life balance. Doctors also used their profiles to speak out about important social justice issues, such as diversity in medicine, gun control and the climate crisis.

At times, doctors’ openness about their personal identities and beliefs caused tensions in their professional lives. For example, some received comments from employers who felt their social media use was “too personal.” Others experienced harassment, including offensive comments about their race or gender.

Still, the doctors in our study overwhelmingly felt that showing this human side was worth it — that it made them better social media communicators, doctors and citizens. By showing their authentic selves online, they felt they could show colleagues, aspiring doctors and the public that it is possible — and even beneficial — to be both a doctor and a human being.

Authors

Alice Fleerackers
Postdoctoral Fellow, School of Journalism, Writing, and Media, University of British Columbia

Disclosure statement
Alice Fleerackers receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

Lauren A Maggio
Professor of Medical Education, University of Illinois Chicago

How Audubon is Working to Protect Wetlands a Year After US Supreme Court Gutted Protections

Wetlands and small water bodies are critical for birds and need renewed support.


Green Heron. Photo: Liz Eudy/Audubon Photography Awards
Words by Caitlin Wall
Policy Director, Water Conservation
Published May 21, 2024


On May 25, 2023, the Supreme Court drastically weakened federal Clean Water Act protections for waterways across the country. The Sackett v. EPA ruling found that smaller bodies of water—like seasonal streams or wetlands—that do not directly connect to another federally protected water body (like a larger lake or river) do not fall under the jurisdiction of the Clean Water Act. A year later, the ramifications of the ruling are still being understood in many parts of the country, but overall, the decision resulted in drastically fewer federal protections for waterways that are critical for birds and people.

Audubon recognizes the value of wetlands not only for bird habitat, but also the important benefits they provide to communities across America. Wetlands and similar waterbodies filter pollutants out of the water system, recharge aquifers, act as storm buffers, and absorb carbon—providing resilience to climate change threats like drought, flooding, and extreme storm events. Removing federal protections for these waterways opens them up to development and destruction as they are no longer subject to federal permitting or mitigation processes.

At Audubon, we continue to work with partners and federal agencies to find solutions for this regulatory gap—this includes working at state and local levels and advocating for increased federal funding for existing programs that protect and restore wetlands. We are working across the country to shore up protections in states that now have the ability to protect—or ignore—these critical waterbodies. Here are some of the ways Audubon is leading the fight to protect wetlands:

Colorado

Audubon Rockies, along with coalition partners, was instrumental in working with state leaders to pass a bill that protects wetlands and ephemeral streams that lost federal jurisdiction after Sackett. Colorado’s legislative calendar and process allowed it to move quicker than other states, with impressive partner collaboration. In all, Audubon network members took 2,523 online actions to support this policy and protect the waterways in their state.

Indiana

Unfortunately, not all states took the opportunity to protect wetlands. Some chose to double down on the Sackett decision and further erode the legal protections for these smaller waterways. Audubon Great Lakes fought hard, speaking out on behalf of the 94 percent of Indiana voters who believe that state leaders should either strengthen or maintain Indiana's current wetlands protections. Looking ahead, Audubon Great Lakes will continue working with partners throughout the state to restore protections and conserve wetland habitat wherever possible.

Illinois

Other Great Lakes states are heeding the call to protect wetlands, including Illinois. This state is close to following Colorado’s lead in enacting its own state-level protections for wetlands and waterways left vulnerable by the Supreme Court. The work is still ongoing to pass this legislation this session and Audubon Great Lakes will continue advocating for swift passage.

Wisconsin

The work to protect wetlands in Wisconsin was ongoing even before the Sackett decision. In fact, the past year has led to two amazing victories for the Badger State. Last year, Audubon Great Lakes helped secure funding in the Wisconsin state budget for a wetlands restoration project. This collaborative effort —which included the Oneida Nation, Northeastern Wisconsin Audubon, and the University of Wisconsin-Green Bay Cofrin Center for Biodiversity—will also help scientists understand how birds respond to wetland conservation efforts. This year, the governor signed bipartisan legislation into law creating the Pre-Disaster Flood Resilience Grant Program. This will provide funding to encourage local governments to restore and conserve wetlands and undertake other proactive strategies before flooding events occur.

New Mexico

In the Land of Enchantment, Audubon Southwest is working with partners to help improve the health and flow of rivers. This includes advocating for the development of a state-base surface water-quality permitting program that would help buffer the protection of our streams from pollution and dewatering that will result from relaxed federal standards. This critical work is all the more important as our non-profit partner, American Rivers, recently named all of New Mexico’s as the most endangered in America.

California

A bill currently in the California legislature session would codify a state policy that would result in no net loss of wetlands and would require long-term gains in the quality and quantity of wetlands. Audubon California is also supporting additional staffing and authority for the State Water Resources Control Board to regulate "waters of the state," including isolated wetlands. And, Audubon California is co-sponsoring a bill to protect water supplies for managed wetlands. While California already has strong state protections for wetlands, this critical work will proactively ensure wetlands are providing the habitat and ecosystem needs for birds and people throughout the state.

Maryland

Audubon Mid-Atlantic had several water wins in the Maryland legislative session this year and the Clean Water Justice Act was a crucial win for wetlands. This bill restores protections for some Maryland waters that were lost in Sackett and restores the right of communities harmed by water pollution to bring a lawsuit against polluters in those waters. Audubon Mid-Atlantic was proud to support environmental justice and watershed conservation advocates working to advance this critical response to Sackett for Maryland’s waterways.

Utah

Audubon has long worked to support saline lakes and their surrounding wetlands throughout the West and our tenure at Great Salt Lake is no exception. The goal of the Great Salt Lake Watershed Enhancement Program, co-led by Audubon and The Nature Conservancy, is to enhance water quantity and water quality, with at least 25% of the funding used to protect and restore wetlands habitat to benefit the hydrology of Great Salt Lake. Late last year, the Trust awarded more than $8.5 million to protect or restore wetlands for the benefit of the lake.

Florida

In Florida, Audubon has worked for over a century to protect the Everglades and its surrounding ecosystems. The work continues in Tallahassee and in Washington, DC. A recent decision to delegate federal wetland permitting authority to the state would further weaken federal protection of these wetlands. Fortunately, a federal judge has intervened to stop that delegation. Audubon Florida has also moved successfully during multiple recent legislative sessions to block proposals to roll back wetland protections enacted by local government that are stronger than state law. In Congress, Audubon is supporting provisions in the Water Resources Development Act of 2024 that would provide for wetland restoration in the Western Everglades and Lake Okeechobee.

Audubon will continue to look for and promote opportunities that protect America’s wetlands and seasonal streams for birds and people.

Big Tech thinks it can plant trees better than everyone else

Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Salesforce launched a new coalition to try to cancel out their greenhouse gas emissions.


By Justine Calma, a senior science reporter covering energy and the environment with more than a decade of experience. She is also the host of Hell or High Water: When

 Disaster Hits Home, a podcast from Vox Media and Audible Originals.

VERGE
May 22, 2024

An area of dense primary forest in the Loango National Park, Gabon, on Wednesday, Oct. 12, 2022. Photo: Getty Images


Some of the biggest names in tech are joining forces to try something that many before them have failed to do: use trees to cancel out their greenhouse gas emissions. Google, Meta, Microsoft, and Salesforce are creating the Symbiosis Coalition as an effort to support “nature-based” projects aimed at taking carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere.

It’s a tactic companies have used for decades to try to offset their greenhouse gas emissions by planting trees, which take in and store carbon dioxide through photosynthesis. The hope is that paying to restore forests will amplify that process, ostensibly counteracting companies’ carbon footprint. It sounds simple enough on paper. However, a growing body of evidence has shown that this strategy fails time after time.

A growing body of evidence has shown that this strategy fails time after time

The Symbiosis Coalition seems to think it can turn things around. Together, the companies have committed to purchasing credits from “high-impact, science-based restoration projects” representing up to 20 million tons of captured carbon dioxide by 2030. They say they’ll vet projects for quality control, aiming to drum up demand for carbon credits that have earned a bad rap because so many carbon offset initiatives have fallen flat in the past.

In one recent example, a study of 26 carbon offset projects across six countries published in the journal Science last year found that few of them succeeded in stopping deforestation. Whatever climate benefits the projects were purported to have were overblown by as much as 300 percent. A separate investigation into one of the world’s leading carbon registries found that 90 percent of its rainforest offsets turned out to be “phantom credits” that likely didn’t represent real-world reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. And a 2022 report by nonprofit watchdog Carbon Market Watch determined that carbon offset credits offered by major European airlines were similarly linked to faulty forestry projects.

A big part of the problem is that it’s difficult to measure just how much carbon dioxide a tree or forest has absorbed, which has led to projects exaggerating how much good they do for the climate. Planting trees is also a tricky endeavor — if they don’t live for hundreds of years, they just wind up releasing all the carbon they’ve stored. Planting the wrong trees in the wrong place, creating tree farms instead of forests, can also harm the local environment. In 2020, Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff backed a World Economic Forum plan to plant a trillion trees — although the research undergirding the effort was quickly criticized by dozens of scientists for grossly overestimating the potential environmental benefits.

Salesforce, Google, Meta, and Microsoft are confident they can keep history from repeating itself

Nevertheless, Salesforce, Google, Meta, and Microsoft are confident they can keep history from repeating itself. To try to accomplish that, they worked alongside independent experts to establish strict criteria for forestry projects. Symbiosis also says in a press release that it’ll “involve and compensate Indigenous Peoples and local communities” to work toward “equitable outcomes.” And while it’s starting with forestry projects, Symbiosis says that, over time, it’ll incorporate other strategies, like sequestering carbon dioxide in soil.

“Nature-based projects are complex and challenging to get right and haven’t always lived up to their intended impact,” Symbiosis executive director Julia Strong said in an email to The Verge. “Symbiosis aims to address challenges around nature-based project integrity to date by setting a high-quality bar that builds on best in class market standards and the latest science, data, and best practice.”

The coalition is modeled after a similar initiative called Frontier launched by Stripe, Alphabet, Meta, Shopify, and McKinsey in 2022. Frontier is focused on supporting new technologies to take carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere. Frontier has contracted more than 510,000 tons of carbon removal — but delivered just around 1,700 tons of captured carbon so far.

Both Symbiosis and Frontier are aimed at facilitating deals between carbon removal projects and companies that want to pay for their services. Eventually, Symbiosis hopes more companies beyond its founders will hop on board.


For perspective, all of these efforts still add up to a small fraction of the emissions these companies produce. The 20 million metric tons of nature-based carbon dioxide removal that Symbiosis committed to is just slightly more than the 15.4 million metric tons of carbon dioxide Microsoft alone produced in its last fiscal year.


To be sure, safeguarding the world’s forests does a lot of good for the planet. But exploiting them in the name of fighting climate change hasn’t been a safe bet. Raising the stakes, Big Tech’s greenhouse gas emissions are growing with the rise of energy-hungry AI tools. If companies are serious about taking on climate change, they’ll still have to rein in the amount of pollution they produce in the first place. Even successful forest projects can’t do all the dirty work for them.