Running out of marijuana, Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket get approval to ship pot to the islands

Nick Perry
Thu, June 13, 2024 




The Associated Press

MEREDITH, N.H. (AP) — Martha's Vineyard was running out of pot, just as thousands of summer vacationers were starting to arrive.

But on Thursday, Massachusetts regulators averted a cannabis drought by issuing an administrative order that will allow pot to be transported to Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket islands for the first time.

On Martha's Vineyard, one dispensary temporarily closed in May after it ran out of marijuana and another said it would close by September.

The Island Time dispensary had filed a lawsuit against the state Cannabis Control Commission. The other dispensary, Fine Fettle, was the sole grower of pot on the island and had provided all the pot for sale. But Fine Fettle had said the small grow operation was no longer economically feasible and was closing it down.

There are more than 230 registered medical users and thousands more recreational ones on Martha’s Vineyard. The year-round population of 20,000 grows to more than 100,000 in the summer, as many wealthy people move into vacation homes.

Although Massachusetts voters opted to legalize marijuana more than seven years ago, the state commission had previously not allowed transportation of pot to the islands. It had taken the position that transporting pot across the ocean — whether by boat or plane — risked running afoul of federal laws.

So as to avoid any federal complications, the commission spells out in its administrative order that the route the pot must be transported to the islands must remain entirely within state territorial waters. That means that the marijuana won't be able to be transported on the ferry but will instead need to be shipped on alternative, approved boats.

Island Time owner Geoff Rose said he was nothing short of ecstatic.

“I can't wait to reopen. My staff is excited,” Rose said. “It's all good.”

He said he was still working through the details on delivery but hoped to have the doors to his dispensary reopened sometime next week.

Adam Fine, a lawyer for Vicente, which is representing the dispensary, said they were ready to drop the lawsuit as soon as Island Time's delivery boat was inspected, which he said was scheduled to happen on Friday.

Three of the five commissioners visited Martha’s Vineyard last week to hear directly from affected residents.

The commission's acting chairperson, Ava Callender Concepcion, said Thursday she had heard from users on Martha's Vineyard about how they might be forced to buy the drug from the black market.

“I'll only speak for myself. It wasn't a matter of if, but how do we do it,” she said. “You never want to be putting consumers and patients in a place where they don't have access to medicine."

She said the commission also didn't want to see dispensaries shut down, especially with the busy summer season approaching.

“That's adverse to our whole mission and the way that we operate,” she said.

She said the commission had reached out to federal authorities and no one voiced opposition to proceeding.

The tension between conflicting state and federal regulations has played out across the country as states have legalized pot. California law, for example, expressly allows cannabis to be transported to stores on Catalina Island, while Hawaii last year dealt with its own difficulties transporting medical marijuana between islands by amending a law to allow it.

Federal authorities have also been shifting their position. The Justice Department last month moved to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, though still not a legal one for recreational use.

Meanwhile, New Hampshire remains New England’s lone holdout against legalizing recreational marijuana.

Legislation to legalize recreational marijuana in New Hampshire died on the House floor Thursday, although the effort got further in the state than it ever has before.

Previously, the state House has passed multiple legalization bills only to have them blocked in the Senate. This year, both chambers passed bills, but the House declined a compromise on the chambers’ separate bills.

Nick Perry, The Associated Press

UK

The Conservatives’ climate change plans show they have tried but failed to reinvent net zero

Sam Fankhauser, Professor of Climate Economics and Policy, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford 

and Anupama Sen, Head of Policy Engagement, Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford

 and Fellow in Environmental Change, Reuben College, University of Oxford, University of Oxford

THE CONVERSATION

Thu, June 13, 2024 

The Conservatives want to keep drilling for new oil and gas in the North Sea. Cal F / shutterstock

The Conservative Party manifesto proposes a “pragmatic and proportionate approach to net zero” with Rishi Sunak, the prime minister, promising to put “security and your family finances ahead of unaffordable eco-zealotry.”

But a closer look at the proposals suggests that they are either poor (and eventually expensive) solutions for people and the climate, or suggest processes that are already in place through existing legislation.

It’s the latest example of politicians focusing on the wrong debate. The question in climate policy is no longer how much adopting net zero technologies will “cost” us. It is how quickly the savings from their adoption can be realised to benefit households, the economy and above all the climate.

For instance, the manifesto proposes continuing to invest in “new fossil fuel extraction through annual licensing rounds” and building “new gas power stations”. But these are unlikely to save money or to make the nation more energy secure, even in the near-term. By 2030, offshore wind power is expected to be 66% cheaper than gas-fired power.

Similar costs savings are possible elsewhere. Our analysis of the investments needed to achieve the UK’s climate targets, shows that in more than 80% of investments, the total lifetime cost of a clean technology is considerably lower than that of a fossil technology, after accounting for cheaper running costs. Electric cars, for example, will by 2030 be 60% cheaper to buy and run than a fossil fuel car.

Electric cars on a London street

The manifesto suggests that it will ensure household bills are lower by reigning in “green levies”. These have actually remained broadly stable over time and relatively low as a proportion of household total energy bills, whereas wholesale energy costs have spiked from 40% to 75% of total bills in recent years, driven by volatility in gas prices. Notably, green levies are not just used to finance renewable energy and reduce emissions, but also to support vulnerable households through the winter months.

Our analysis shows that lower bills can be achieved by increasing investments in clean technologies such as electric vehicles sooner rather than later. That means people can benefit from the lower running costs of these technologies over their lifetimes, which we estimate can be up to £380 per year for a household with a car. Reducing or slowing down investment in green technologies will make these benefits harder to attain.

Procrastination: no solution to net zero challenge

The manifesto says little about how the decarbonisation of the household sector will be achieved in the next parliament. This sector has been neglected since 2013, when David Cameron “cut the green crap”, eventually exposing households to a £2.5 billion increase in energy bills in 2022, requiring expensive policy interventions.

In 2023, annual heat pump deployment was around 80% below where it should have been if following the “balanced net zero” trajectory set out by the government’s official advisory Climate Change Committee. Similarly, EV car sales were 50% below where they should have been. Our analysis shows that the household sector will require around two-thirds of the total investment needed in clean technologies to 2030.

The manifesto states it will ensure that “…families are given time to make changes that affect their lives and never forcing people to rip out their existing boiler and replace it with a heat pump”.

The Climate Change Committee’s Sixth Carbon budget states that by the early 2030s, all new cars and vans and all boiler replacements in homes and other buildings be low-carbon – largely electric. This requires policy support.

Many households that are fuel-poor tend to have less cash in the bank and less access to credit, or may be renters and powerless to make those changes in any case. Households also face non-monetary barriers such as time, access to information, and misperceptions around the “cost” of net zero. This means that some will undervalue the savings that heat pumps or better insulation will provide in future and so will see it as a poor investment.

Therefore, solutions that involve simply waiting, or handing households money through tax cuts, are unlikely to influence their decision to invest in these technologies – not just delaying the transition, but denying people the savings and co-benefits.

Reinventing the Climate Change Act

The manifesto makes a number of suggestions to improve the way climate policy is decided. Pretty much all of them are already contained in the 2008 Climate Change Act.

The Conservatives would like to “reform the Climate Change Committee, giving it an explicit mandate to consider cost to households and UK energy security in its future climate advice.” Section 10 of the Act does exactly that.

Similarly, the manifesto proposes “guaranteeing a vote in the next parliament on the next stage of our pathway.” This is how the UK’s carbon budgets are already set. Section 8 requires that carbon budgets, which define the next stage of emissions reduction, are approved by parliament.

Finally, the manifesto wants to ensure that in future “[the] adoption of any new target [is] accompanied by proper consideration of the plans and policies required to meet the target, to maintain democratic consent for the big decisions that net zero will mean for our country.” Section 14 already requires the secretary of state to report this to parliament.

Missed opportunity for investment and jobs

Initial analyses have estimated the tax cuts and spending pledges in the manifesto at around £18 billion, mostly attributed to tax cuts. The spending associated with climate-related policy appears to be orders of magnitude lower than what is needed for the transition.

For instance, the £1.1 billion “Green Industries Growth Accelerator” amounts to £220 million a year over the next parliament. The manifesto proposes to “invest £6 billion in energy efficiency over the next three years to make around a million homes warmer” and to “fund an energy efficiency voucher scheme open to every household in England, to support the installation of energy efficiency measures and solar panels, helping families lower their bills.”

But our study shows that, to align with net zero, £6 billion to £8 billion of public finance will be needed per year, primarily in the buildings sector.

Climate change does need investment, but it is investment with a substantial return.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation

Anupama Sen has received funding from the Children's Investment Fund Foundation. This article is based on a study co-authored with Harry Lightfoot Brown at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford.

Sam Fankhauser receives funding from UK Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) through the project Productive and Inclusive Net Zero (PRINZ).

REPATRIATIONS

Report finds Colorado was built on $1.7 trillion of land expropriated from tribal nations

Graham Lee Brewer
Fri, June 14, 2024 



A report published this week by a Native American-led nonprofit examines in detail the dispossession of $1.7 trillion worth of Indigenous homelands in Colorado by the state and the U.S. and the more than $546 million the state has reaped in mineral extraction from them.

The report, shared first with The Associated Press, identifies 10 tribal nations that have “aboriginal title, congressional title, and treaty title to lands within Colorado” and details the ways the land was legally and illegally taken. It determined that many of the transactions were in direct violation of treaty rights or in some cases lacked title for a legal transfer.

“Once we were removed, they just simply started divvying up the land, creating parcels and selling it to non-Natives and other interests and businesses,” said Dallin Mayberry, an artist, legal scholar and enrolled member of the Northern Arapaho Tribe who took part in the Truth, Restoration, and Education Commission, which compiled the report.


“When you think about examples of land theft,” Mayberry continued, “that is one of the most blatant instances that we could see.”

The commission was convened by People of the Sacred Land, a Colorado-based nonprofit that works to document the history of Indigenous displacement in the state. The commission and its report are modeled after similar truth and reconciliation commissions that sought to comprehensively account for genocide and the people still affected by those acts and governmental policies.

The report also recommends actions that can be taken by the state, the federal government and Congress, including honoring treaty rights by resolving illegal land transfers; compensating the tribal nations affected; restoring hunting and fishing rights; and levying a 0.1% fee on real estate deals in Colorado to “mitigate the lasting effects of forced displacement, genocide, and other historical injustices'”

“If acknowledgment is the first step, then what is the second step?” Mayberry said. “That’s where some of the treaties come in. They guaranteed us health and welfare and education, and we just simply want them to live up to those promises.”

That could look something like what happened not long ago in Canada, where, following the conclusion of a truth and reconciliation commission in 2015, the government set aside $4.7 billion to support Indigenous communities affected by its Indian residential schools.

The U.S. currently has no similar commission, but a bill co-sponsored by Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.), a Chickasaw Nation citizen, and Rep. Sharice Davids (D-Kan.), a citizen of the Ho-Chunk Nation, would establish a commission to research and document the long-term effects of the Indian boarding school system in the U.S. That measure passed the House Education and Workforce Committee on Thursday with bipartisan support.

“The United States carried out a federal policy of genocide and extermination against Native peoples, and their weapon against our youngest and most vulnerable was the policy of Indian Boarding Schools,” said Ben Barnes, chief of the Shawnee Tribe, who testified before Congress in support of a commission to investigate the ongoing effects of the boarding schools.

“The next step is reconciliation and healing for the generations who’ve dealt with the trauma that followed, which begins with establishing the Truth and Healing Commission to investigate further,” Barnes said.

The 771-page report also calls on Colorado State University to return 19,000 acres of land that was taken from several tribal nations through the Morrill Act, signed by Abraham Lincoln in 1862, which used expropriated land to create land grant universities across the country.

In 2023 the university pledged to commit $500,000 of the earnings from its land grant holdings. But while the commission commended that decision, it said “there are questions about its adequacy, given the resources that have been generated by the endowment created by selling and/or leasing stolen land.”

A university spokesperson told AP that the school has not had a chance to review the report but noted that “that revenue from the endowment land income fund is used for the benefit of Native American faculty, staff and students.”

The commission also found that Native American students in Colorado have lower high school graduation rates and higher dropout rates than any other racial demographic. It determined that state schools teach about Native American issues only once in elementary school and then again in high school U.S. history classes, and it called on the Colorado Department of Education to increase the amount of its curriculum that focuses on the histories, languages and modern cultures of tribal nations that are indigenous to the state.

The education department said in a statement that it is “committed to elevating and honoring our Indigenous communities.

“We have worked alongside tribal representatives to create a culturally affirming fourth-grade curriculum focused on Ute history fourth-grade curriculum and have made this available to our school districts and educators,” the statement added.

However that educational program is not mandatory across Colorado, where curriculum decisions are made at the local level.

A 2019 study found that 87% of public schools in the U.S. fail to teach about Indigenous peoples in a post-1900 context and that most states make no mention of them in their K-12 curriculum.

“They should be an integral part of the curriculum, especially in areas where there’s a high percentage of Native Americans,” said Richard Little Bear, former president of Chief Dull Knife College in Montana and a member of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe. “There’s gotta be a full scale effort.”

___

Brewer is an Oklahoma City-based member of AP's Race and Ethnicity team. Follow him on X at @grahambrewer

Graham Lee Brewer, The Associated Press

California voted to ban new diesel trucks at ports. Why did L.A. and Long Beach just add 1,000 more?

Tony Briscoe
Thu, June 13, 2024 at 4:00 AM MDT·7 min read

California is waiting for the EPA approve a rule that would hasten the electrification of cargo trucks at seaports. Meanwhile, diesel-powered big rigs continue to be granted access to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, seen here. 

(Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)


More than 1,000 diesel-powered cargo trucks — which should've been banned from serving California ports — were granted access to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach due to inaction from the Biden administration, according to harbor records.

In April 2023, the California Air Resources Board voted to ban fossil fuel-powered big rigs from obtaining new registrations to serve the state's 12 major seaports, a landmark rule that was slated to go into effect on Jan. 1.

But one year later, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not granted a waiver for California's so-called Advanced Clean Fleets rule. As a result, state air regulators have been unable to enforce the regulation, which has allowed trucking companies and independent operators to continue adding diesel-snorting big rigs that can pollute port communities for up to a decade.

Since the start of the year, more than 1,200 trucks have obtained new registrations to move cargo at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, according to data obtained by the Los Angeles Times. About 92% of the newly registered trucks had diesel-powered engines, which are known to emit cancer-causing particles and planet-warming carbon emissions.

The Advanced Clean Fleets rule is one of eight clean-air policies that California regulators are still waiting for the Biden administration to sign off on. Collectively, these rules were expected to prevent 11,000 premature deaths and provide $116 billion in health benefits over the next three decades, according to the American Lung Assn.

But that assumed the rules would be implemented on time.

Seven of the eight pending policies should've already gone into effect. The federal inaction has resulted in delays in adopting zero-emission technologies or reducing emissions for trucks, boats, trains, construction machinery and lawn equipment. And the deferred policy implementation could have national implications, as several other states have expressed interest in adopting California's more stringent rules rather than the EPA's.

Heading into an unpredictable election year when the presidency and both chambers of Congress are up for grabs, environmental advocates want to see these rules prioritized.

"Any further delay in the waiver process really does risk that we're going to see more diesel trucks on the roads or working at the ports," said Will Barrett, national senior director of clean air policy with the American Lung Assn. "We're also going to see more gasoline-powered equipment like leaf blowers and lawnmowers when those sales should have been stopped. The transition to zero-emission technology in these sectors is delayed, and because of that, we're concerned that we're just going to see this equipment live on, putting out more pollution for longer than it should have."

The EPA declined to comment on the addition of more diesel trucks at Southern California ports and the pending Advanced Clean Fleets waiver.

Environmental experts say the Biden administration has been tied up with its own jam-packed federal environmental agenda, which may have slowed the review process for California's rules. In the past year, the EPA has approved new rules for cars, heavy-duty trucks, new coal- and gas-fired power plants and methane-leaking oil wells.

Those federal rules are expected to have little bearing in California, where state regulations are already more strict.

Due to its notoriously poor air quality, California holds the distinction as the only state that can regulate vehicle emissions, so long as it obtains permission from the EPA. The state has used these powers to adopt groundbreaking rules, such as requiring cars to be outfitted with catalytic converters and check engine lights.

"That's the dance that's been going on since the mid-1960s," said Ann Carlson, a UCLA environmental law professor and former transportation czar with the Biden administration. "California leads, in part, because EPA grants its waiver. Then California pushes the rest of the country."

Last week, Gov. Gavin Newsom and state rulemakers touted news that the sale of new zero-emission trucks had doubled in 2023 compared with the prior year, putting the state two years ahead of its goals. This mostly resulted from the sales of thousands of medium-duty pickup trucks, such as Ford's F-150 Lightning and Rivian's R1 lineup.

Zero-emission big rigs remain a small fraction of sales and existing fleets serving state ports.

All those cargo containers that come into the Port of L.A., seen here in March, have to go somewhere. For now, most will be aboard diesel-powered big rigs. (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Asked about the outstanding Advanced Clean Fleets rule, state officials were optimistic the Biden administration would take action.

"We're of course eagerly awaiting the U.S. EPA to grant our waiver, and we expect them to take action very soon," said Steven Cliff, executive director of the California Air Resources Board.

"We're seeing 1 in 6 new trucks sold is zero emissions," Cliff added, "and going forward, that's going to benefit Californians, especially those who live near ports who have been most impacted by pollution."

Nearly 23,000 cargo trucks are registered with the Port of Los Angeles, the busiest container port in the Western Hemisphere. About 94% of those are diesel trucks, and another 5% burn natural gas. One percent are zero-emission: 271 cargo trucks are battery-electric, and nine are hydrogen fuel-cell.

The Port of Los Angeles announced last year that it had reduced diesel particulate matter by 88% since 2005, due, in part, to better controls for ships and cleaner truck engines.

Read more: Los Angeles makes progress but earns 25th-straight F in air quality

The Advanced Clean Fleets rule was expected to rapidly accelerate zero-emission adoption, starting with the 2024 ban on fossil-fuel truck registrations. In the year leading up to that deadline, trucking companies went on a buying spree, according to public records.

More than 9,000 trucks obtained new registrations at both ports in 2023 — almost triple the amount registered in 2018. The vast majority of these trucks had diesel-powered engines.

The registration of diesel trucks continued into the first half of 2024. More than 1,100 diesel trucks were registered at the ports so far this year. Seventy-six electric trucks and 19 hydrogen trucks received approval to move cargo in the same time.

Many truck drivers serving the ports are independent owner-operators, running their own small businesses with their big rigs instead of working for a large company with a fleet. They have expressed concerns about the high upfront costs of purchasing electric trucks, which are significantly more expensive than diesel-powered models.

Mercer Transportation Co., an owner-operator transportation company, registered the most trucks so far in 2024, enrolling 131 diesel trucks at both ports, including several with engines over a decade old. Performance Team Freight Systems Inc., a Santa Fe Springs-based company, introduced the most zero-emission vehicles, with 23 electric trucks.

Read more: Amazon and Volvo team up on big rig electric trucks, rolling out of Southern California ports

Under the fleets rule, the existing fleet of diesel and gas trucks would be allowed to visit the ports until they reached 18 years old or a maximum of 800,000 miles traveled. Trucks that exceed 800,000 miles driven can operate for only 13 years.

Agmark Transportation registered a diesel truck with an engine from the year 2000, which would not have been allowed if the EPA had granted California's waiver.

The delayed rule would also prevent any fossil-fuel truck from moving cargo at the ports in 2035. But environmental advocates would still like to know how the state plans to offset any unintended pollution and carbon emissions resulting from late implementation.

"What we fully expect and strongly endorse is, when these waivers are signed and official, anything that has been done to increase pollution beyond what was designed in these programs really needs to be addressed quickly," said Barrett, of the American Lung Assn. "If that's the addition of hundreds of diesel trucks into the port drayage fleet, we would call on our state agencies to look at those and see what they can do to get those out of the fleet as quickly as possible."

SCOTLAND

Council staff to vote on strikes after pay offer rejected

Craig Paton, PA Scotland Deputy Political Editor
Fri, June 14, 2024 

Council staff across Scotland have rejected a new pay offer, with a vote now set to open on potential strike action, a union has said.

Unison Scotland balloted members on the offer from local authority body Cosla, but it said 91% of respondents rejected the 2.2% uplift, which would have increased by a further 2% after six months.

The union said over the coming weeks, its members – including cleansing workers and school staff – will now be consulted on walkouts.

Colette Hunter, chairwoman of the local government committee at the union, said: “This result must be a wake-up call for Cosla that council workers need to be rewarded fairly for the essential services they provide.

“Staff have experienced years of cuts to their pay levels and a reversal has to begin.

“The last thing anyone wants to do is go on strike, but local government workers deserve a fair increase to stop their pay lagging further behind inflation, and the wage increases being given in other sectors of the economy.

“Workers have seen the value of their pay fall over the past 10 years, often while being asked to do even more.

“They provide vital services to their communities by caring for the most vulnerable, educating children, waste and recycling and keeping people safe.

“Council workers deserve better.”

Cosla has been contacted for comment.

AUSTRALIA

Orphaned Baby Wombat Snuggling in Manmade 'Pouch' Will Melt Anyone's Heart

Diana Logan
Thu, June 13, 2024 




When orphaned baby animals arrive at a rescue, the race is on to try to recreate the comfort they should have been receiving from their animal mother. Sometimes that is making a baby formula specially designed to meet their peculiar dietary needs. Sometimes that means building a den or a nest that the baby will find familiar. And sometimes—in the case of a marsupial like this adorable baby wombat, it means creating a manmade pouch.

View the original article to see embedded media.

April is a baby wombat being cared for by a Wombat Rescue and Rehab Facility operating in New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory. She is an extremely young creature and lives full time in the softly woven manmade pouch her human rescuers have provided. Intros clip, her keeper even explains that the baby wombat doesn’t even get out of her pouch to eliminate waste, just sticks her tiny bottom over the side to do her business.

Related: Baby Wombat at Australia Reptile Park Gets the Cutest Case of the Zoomies

The Marsupial Pouch

Like all marsupials, wombats have a pouch in which their underdeveloped offspring crawl to finish growing. Wombats give birth to tiny, hairless creatures after only twenty to thirty days of gestation, who then crawl into the mother’s pouch to finish growing for another six months. Even when wombat babies first leave the pouch, it’s another eight or nine months before they are weaned, and ready to live on their own.

In the wombat, the marsupial pouch actually opens toward the creatures’ rear (unlike with kangaroos). Scientists believe that this adaptation aids the wombat when digging and prevents dirt from being shoveled into the pouch on top of the baby. And while a backward-facing pouch might be a problem for the upright kangaroos, for the quadrupedal wombat, it works just fine.

The Life of the Wombat

Wombats are a short-legged burrowing marsupial species found across the continent of Australia. Though the fossil record shows some species of enormous sizes, living wombats are generally about three feet long, with round bodies and short legs. Their name comes from an aboriginal language, though many English settlers called them “badgers” due to their resemblance to the animal from their home country.

In the wild, they live to about fifteen years if they can steer clear of accidents or disease, but in captivity, they may live twice that amount. The goal of the Wombat Rescue is to return all wombats to the wild, even ones that are being hand-reared by humans. Wombats are herbivores and foragers, dig burrows in which to make dens, and have remarkably low metabolisms. Like many Australian mammals, they have fur that glows under a blacklight, and their most distinctive feature is their incredibly unique ability to create cube-shaped feces.

Wombats are threatened by habitat loss, disease, car accidents, and predation by wild dogs. They are a protected species, even though they are considered pests by some Australians due to their burrowing habits.

It’s likely that April the baby wombat was nearly another statistic of these unfortunate wombat circumstances, and it seems as if whatever happened, she was deprived of the mother who would naturally be caring for her during these vitally tender months. With good fortune, she will remain healthy enough to be reintroduced to the wild.

A crocodile was terrorizing this Australian town. So residents cooked and ate it

A FEAST

Angus Watson, CNN
Thu, June 13, 2024 

A remote Australian community has taken revenge on a massive saltwater crocodile by eating the 3.6-meter (11.8-foot) beast blamed for devouring pets and chasing children.

On Wednesday, police in the town of Bulla in Australia’s Northern Territory shot the crocodile after deeming it a “significant risk to the community.”

The animal was barbecued after it was shot by police. - Northern Territory Police

In a statement, Northern Territory Police said the predator “had been stalking and lunging out of the water at children and adults” and had “also reportedly taken multiple community dogs.”


In a waste-conscious move, the crocodile was “prepared for a feast in the traditional manner,” police said, but not before authorities took the opportunity to give local children an impromptu “crocodile safety session,” including an “up-close look at the dangers within our waterways.”

Speaking to public broadcaster ABC, Northern Territory Police Sergeant Andrew McBride said the animal was “cooked up into crocodile tail soup, he was on the barbecue, a few of the pieces were wrapped up in banana leaves and cooked underground.”

“It was a rather large traditional feast and there were a few full bellies,” Sergeant McBride said.

Both the saltwater and freshwater crocodile species are protected in Australia, where hunting the animals has been banned by federal law since 1971 – a time when poaching had driven them close to extinction.

Numbers have boomed in the decades since, with the Northern Territory now home to some 100,000 crocodiles, according to the local government.

Thousands more crocodiles are distributed across the north of neighbouring states Queensland and Western Australia.

“Any body of water in The Top End may contain large and potentially dangerous crocodiles,” said government wildlife specialist Kristen Hay, using a colloquial name for the Northern Territory.

The territory’s website notes that saltwater crocodiles can grow to six meters (20 feet), weigh up to a ton and “will eat just about anything.”

That means interactions between crocodiles and humans can be fatal, and park rangers across northern Australia remove hundreds of saltwater crocodiles from populated areas each year.

In April, a 16-year-old boy was killed by a crocodile in northern Queensland while attempting to swim to shore after his boat broke down. Last year, the remains of a 64-year-old fisherman were recovered from inside a crocodile, also in Queensland.

A nine-year-old boy was lucky to survive a crocodile attack in the Northern Territory’s Kakadu National Park in January, after being hospitalized with “puncture wounds.”

GOLDEN SHOWERS IN DESANTISLAND

What’s the secret surprising power of lobster pee? It can protect Florida’s coral reefs

Claire Grunewald
Wed, June 12, 2024 

South Florida loves its spiny lobsters, meaning loves to catch and eat them. But there’s another lesser-known lobster species whose value extends beyond the dinner plate.

The spotted lobster doesn’t just live on coral reefs, it also protects them – including in one peculiar way. Spotted lobster pee appears to act like a repellent to coral predators, creating what a new study by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission describes as “a landscape of fear.”

That surprising finding (who even knew that lobster pee?) is just one of several fascinating facts from FWC studies about the role that lobster play in the marine food chain and in South Florida’s struggling reef system. Researchers also documented lobster foraging on coral-damaging fireworms and — for the first time — observed spiny lobster eating a fish. In this case, it happened to be an invasive lionfish that the state is trying to stop from overrunning reefs.

The findings could help shape efforts to save and restore the South Florida reef tract, which has lost an estimated 90 percent of its hard corals over the last 40 years – devastating damage caused by ocean temperatures driven higher by climate change, a string of coral-killing diseases, pollution, boat anchors and a number of other factors.

“There’s so much effort going into coral reefs right now trying to safeguard them and restore them as well as you can,” said Casey Butler, the FWC’s spiny lobster research program lead. “But is there a way to let you know the biology of the system works in your favor, so you don’t have to do as much work?”
Mini-season targets

Lobsters are an important part of the Florida commercial seafood industry and the annual frenzy of mini-season for recreational divers packs boat ramps in Miami-Dade and Broward counties and fills hotel rooms in the Florida Keys.

The primary target is the Caribbean spiny lobster, a species that migrates as it grows, moving from shallow nearshore seagrass beds out to shallow reefs, then deeper waters that provide shelter and food. But the FWC studies focused more on the spotted lobster, which appear do the heaviest lifting when it comes to protecting reefs.

They actually start life on coral reefs and stay there, playing that coral-protecting role as part of a healthy reef ecosystem. There are no season limits or regulations protecting spotted lobsters, aside from releasing egg-bearing females, but they face little fishing pressure and are only occasionally caught in traps or by divers.

“The spotted spiny lobsters are sort of the knights in spiny armor, if you will. They’re cryptic, but nobody fishes for them,” Butler said. “So we don’t have to worry about people really going for them and saying, ‘Oh, you can’t fish for lobsters anymore because of the coral reef.’ No, that’s not what we’re saying.”
Natural repellent

There are a couple of ways they do their work. One recent study suggests a previously unknown power of lobster pee as a predator repellent. Lobsters urinate frequently and lab tests, Butler said, show coral-eating snails don’t like seawater with lobster pee in and tend to avoid areas where the lobsters inhabit. While both spiny and spotted lobster produce prodigious volumes of pee, it’s the spotted lobster that seem to have the most powerful natural deterrents, particularly when including its dining habits. They tend to target more coral predators.


The spotted lobster, on the left, isn’t a regular commercial or recreational target in Florida. But new studies by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission suggest it’s important to protecting declining corals on Florida’s reef tract.

Based on these studies, Butler believes that simply protecting spotted lobsters on a reef might be a more beneficial preservation step than trying to remove snails or fireworms that eat coral.

Last summer, Florida coral reefs experienced the deadliest bleaching event in history, mainly from record hot water temperatures. And the numbers aren’t better this summer.

That historic heat also unintentionally provided a new variable for the state’s lobster studies. Butler and scientists found that lobsters at healthier reefs ate damaging predators like fireworms. But as reefs decline, along with food options, spotted lobster can turn to eating herbivores that protect corals instead, leaving the damaged reef even more vulnerable.

“Think about it like if you wanted to go out and you said, ‘Tonight, I really want to go eat scallops and crab legs or something,’ and that’s what you wanted, but instead, you ended up at the Golden Corral and had had to just sort of achieve what was available,” Butler said. “I think that’s sort of what’s happening as we go from less degraded to a more degraded system as a result of our changing quality.”

Butler said the FWC hopes to eventually publish its findings in scientific journals.

The study on the spotted lobster’s appetite was funded by the Fish and Wildlife Foundation with a $37,000 grant to FWC.

Michelle Ashton, FWF director of communications and events, said funding backing the work was a “no brainer.” She said it was important to understand what happens when a reef is stressed and the cascading ripple effects on the food web.

“To pinpoint one part of that ripple is fascinating,” Ashton said.

DESANTISLAND

Recreational marijuana amendment sparking discussion of potential economic benefits

Kylie Jones
Thu, June 13, 2024 

TAMPA - In less than five months, Floridians will vote on whether to legalize marijuana for recreational use.

If it passes, Amendment 3 would allow anyone 21 years or older to possess, buy or use marijuana products for personal, non-medical use.

The amendment would also allow Medical Marijuana Treatment Centers and other licensed entities to sell products for this use.

PREVIOUS: Florida Supreme Court approves abortion, marijuana amendments for November ballot

The amendment has garnered a lot of support and opposition from leaders around Florida.

On Thursday, leaders from Tampa Bay held a roundtable to discuss how the legalization of marijuana for recreational use could have a major impact on the economy.

"This opens it up to a lot more people and the state will benefit from that, taxwise. So I think it’s kind of a win-win," Attorney Jim Shimberg said.

Some leaders believe the legalization of marijuana for recreational use is inevitable, so they want to be proactive in discussing how it should be regulated.


However, leaders like Governor Ron DeSantis, have voiced strong opposition to the amendment.

"If that marijuana passes, this will smell like marijuana," DeSantis said.

On Thursday, leaders discussed where the revenue from sales would go, if Amendment 3 passes.

"I don’t want us to establish a monopoly," Hillsborough County attorney Sean Shaw said. "But you’ve got to get it here first, and then you’ve got to allow the legislature, hopefully, to regulate it in a manner that opens it up. That allows it to do what you want to do. Then more people get access to it. But you’ve got to have it first."

Leaders say, if Amendment 3 passes, they want Floridians to be able to benefit.

"It’s about the fact that we have black markets right now, and then we have monopolies, essentially, being made in Tallahassee when you give only a few licenses to a few specific companies," Tampa Bay Young Republicans Executive Director Jake Hoffman said.

READ: Judge halts law requiring city officials share financial information as cities still feel effects

Many leaders agreed that they would want to see the revenue go to local governments and fund things like public safety, education, mass transit, housing and mental health.

"Hopefully some of this money will be allocated for specific needs of Florida, which they’re great," Shimberg said.

It’s also unclear how recreational marijuana would be regulated by law enforcement.

"How do we make the distinction between medical and recreational, and who bought it on the black market? Who didn’t buy it on the black market?" Hoffman said.

Some leaders argue legalization would take a burden off the criminal justice system.

"The time that police officers are spending going after petty possession charges," Morgan Hill, with Smart & Safe Florida, said.

However, some law enforcement officers around Florida have been outspoken against legalization of recreational marijuana, arguing that it would only lead to more crime.

"The amendment language says that there can be no penalties for use or possession, civil, criminal, anything," DeSantis said. "I think it's going to be very difficult for businesses to operate without that infringing on them."

Amendment 3 is a single-subject amendment, so if it passes, the regulations and rules around the recreational use of marijuana would still have to be decided upon by the state legislature.

If the amendment passes, some leaders say they want to ensure that the future regulations imposed are ones that will benefit the majority of Floridians and the economy.

"We have the situation in front of us, and it’s good to go back to the legislature and say, ‘Hey, now, work on it. Make this better, and create a framework that makes this work for everybody in the state of Florida,'" Hoffman said.

The amendment is expected to bring a lot of voters to the polls in November.

Marijuana could be legalized on NC tribal land by August

Sydney Heiberger
Wed, June 12, 2024 

Marijuana could be legalized on NC tribal land by August


CHEROKEE, N.C. (QUEEN CITY NEWS) — The sale and use of recreational marijuana could become legal as early as this summer for anyone over the age of 21, as long as it’s bought and consumed on the Qualla Boundary of the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians.

Tribal council members voted to approve the new ordinance on June 6, just a few weeks after opening North Carolina’s first medical marijuana dispensary.

Officials estimated The Great Smoky Cannabis Company could generate $385 million in gross revenue in its first year if it sold to anyone over the age of 21, compared to $200 million if it catered to only medical patients.

In September, EBCI members voted in a referendum about whether they would support recreational marijuana sales. 70 percent said they would.

Medical marijuana dispensary opens on 4/20 with NC bill still pending

Now that the ordinance has passed, leaders said recreational sales will likely begin to tribe members in July and will expand to anyone over the age of 21 by mid-August.

“We exercised our sovereignty, and we use the best practices possible,” said Carolyn West with Qualla Enterprises, the Cherokee-owned company that manages the tribe’s cannabis operation.

The Great Smoky Cannabis Company started selling medical marijuana to adults with medical marijuana cards on April 20.

Meanwhile, marijuana use in North Carolina remains illegal. Any cannabis purchased on the Qualla Boundary cannot be taken off of it.

A bill to legalize medical marijuana in the state is still sitting in the general assembly, but Speaker Tim Moore said he doesn’t believe it has enough support to get off the ground.


KENTUCKY

Will medical marijuana be allowed in JCPS schools? What a proposed policy says

Krista Johnson, Louisville Courier Journal
Updated Thu, June 13, 2024 

Marijuana is grown at the University of Mississippi's Coy Waller Laboratory for research in Oxford, Miss., seen on Friday, Oct. 27, 2023. UM expects to have classes open for a two-year masters program in medical cannabis and dietary supplements in Fall 2024.


With Kentuckians set to gain access to medical marijuana next year, school districts across the state are now tasked with deciding whether or not their students can use the drug on campuses.

The Board Policy Committee for Jefferson County Public Schools met Monday to draft a policy regarding medical marijuana, with members agreeing students who have a prescription from a medical professional should be able to take it at school.

State law dictates that if a district allows the drug on school property, families can either choose to let a school nurse or staff member administer it to their child, or a guardian can come to the school to do it.

Medical marijuana, also called cannabis, is often prescribed to individuals who have seizures.

JCPS' proposed policy would require administration to be done out of the view of other students.

Board members ultimately have the power to adopt the policy or not. They are set to discuss the committee's proposal during their Tuesday, June 25 meeting, said JCPS spokesman Mark Hebert.

"If approved by the board, this would be no different than school nurses, nurse practitioners or other trained school staff administering other tightly controlled substances like Ritalin or Adderall to a student," Hebert said.

"We anticipate most medicinal cannabis will be given to students at home, but there may be times when the doctor or prescription calls for the medicine to be given during school hours," he added.

Medical cannabis will not be available in the state until at least Jan. 1, 2025. Licenses for cannabis businesses are expected to be awarded this October, and production cannot start until then.

Easing federal marijuana rules: There’s still a long way to go

Jacob Fischler
Wed, June 12, 2024





LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA - MAY 24: In this photo illustration, marijuana joints and buds, also known as 'flower', are viewed on May 24, 2024 in Los Angeles, California. A new study by Carnegie Mellon University has found that marijuana consumption has overtaken alcohol as more Americans now use marijuana on a daily or near-daily basis than those who drink alcohol at a similar frequency. (Photo Illustration by Mario Tama/Getty Images)

Nearly three weeks after the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration proposed loosening a federal prohibition on marijuana, the next phases of policy fights over the drug’s status are starting to take shape.

Public comments, which the DEA is accepting on the proposal until mid-July, will likely include an analysis of the economic impact of more lenient federal rules.

Administrative law hearings, a venue for opponents to challenge executive branch decisions, will likely follow, with marijuana’s potential for abuse a possible issue.

Congress, meanwhile, could act on multiple related issues, including banking access for state-legal marijuana businesses and proposals to help communities harmed by the decades of federal prohibition.

U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, a Democrat from Oregon and longtime advocate for legalizing marijuana who’s retiring at the end of the year, is encouraging his colleagues to build on the administration’s action by taking up bills on those related issues.

The politics of the issue should favor action, even in the face of an upcoming campaign season that typically slows legislative action, Blumenauer said in a May 17 interview, noting the popularity of a more permissive approach to the drug.

“Congress may not do a lot between now and November, but they should,” the 14-term House member said. “Because it’s an election year, there’s no downside to being more aggressive.”
Economic impact

In a proposed rule published in the Federal Register last month, the DEA specifically asked commenters to weigh in on the economic impacts of moving the drug from Schedule I to the less-restrictive Schedule III list under the federal Controlled Substances Act.

That will likely mean the agency will consider the impact of allowing state-legal marijuana businesses to deduct business expenses from their federal taxes, Mason Tvert, a partner at Denver-based cannabis policy and public affairs firm Strategies 64, said in an interview. Under current law, no deductions are allowed.

That issue is seen by advocates, including Blumenauer and fellow Oregon Democrat Ron Wyden, who chairs the tax-writing U.S. Senate Finance Committee, as paramount for the industry.

Thousands of state-legal businesses struggle to earn a profit or operate at a loss under the current system, Blumenauer said.
Potential for abuse

The DEA typically looks at three factors when assessing how strictly to regulate a drug: its medicinal value, potential for abuse relative to other drugs and ability to cause physical addiction.

A 2023 analysis by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that looked at data from states where medicinal marijuana is legal showed that “there exists some credible scientific support for the medical use of marijuana.”

That finding could lead DEA to look at other factors, Tvert said.

“The battleground that we’ll see will be around how we define potential for abuse,” he said.
Agencies split?

But the DEA proposed rule revealed a divided view among government agencies about the drug’s potential harms, Paul Armentano, the deputy director for the longtime leading advocacy group National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, told States Newsroom.

The text of the proposed rule shows “a lack of consensus” among HHS, the Attorney General’s Office and the Drug Enforcement Administration, he said.

“There are several points in the DEA’s proposed rule where they express a desire to see additional evidence specific to concerns that the agency has about the potential effects of cannabis, particularly as they pertain to abuse potential and potential harms,” Armentano said.

“The HHS addresses those issues, but the DEA essentially says, ‘We’d like to see more information on it.’”

Kevin Sabat, the president and CEO of the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, agreed that the DEA did not appear to agree with the HHS conclusion that medical uses exist.

The proposed rule “just brings up all these issues with the HHS’s determination and it basically invites comment on all those issues,” he said.
Administrative law hearing

Sabat’s group will also be petitioning for a DEA administrative hearing, he said. An administrative law judge could rule that the proposal should not go through or that it should be amended to remain stricter than the initial proposal described.

“We’re going to highlight the fact that, first of all, this does not have approved or accepted medical use,” he said.

Tvert said the accepted medical value question is likely not to be a major factor in an administrative law hearing. Several medical organizations and states that allow medicinal use have already endorsed its medicinal value, he said.

Instead, the focus will turn to the drug’s potential for abuse, he said.

“What will be critical is looking at cannabis relative to other substances that are currently II or III or not on the schedule, and determining whether cannabis should be on Schedule I when alcohol is not even on the schedules and ketamine is Schedule III.”

As of June 6, nearly 12,000 people had commented on the proposal in the 18 days since its publication.

While opinion polls show that most Americans favor liberalizing cannabis laws — a Pew Research Center survey in March found 57% of U.S. adults favor full legalization while only 11% say it should be entirely illegal — the public comments so far represent a full spectrum of views on the topic.

“This rule is a horrible idea, this should remain in Schedule I,” one comment read. “Marijuana is a gateway drug and ruins lives.”

“There are no negative side effects to its use,” another commenter, who favored “fully” legalizing the substance, wrote. “Its not harmful. The only harm is what the government has done to me and America. Shame on the people that continue to oppose this. Seriously shame on anyone that would stand in the way of this change.”
Congressional action?

Blumenauer authored a memo last month on “the path forward” for reform as the rescheduling process plays out.

He listed four bills for Congress to consider this year.

One, sponsored by House Democrats, would remove cannabis from the Controlled Substance Act schedule entirely and expunge prior offenses.

A bipartisan bill would make changes to the banking laws to allow state-legal businesses greater access to loans and other financial services.

Another, cosponsored with Florida Republican Brian Mast, would allow Veterans Administration health providers to discuss state-legal medicinal marijuana with veteran patients.

Blumenauer has also co-written language for appropriations bills that would prevent the Department of Justice from prosecuting marijuana businesses that are legal under state or tribal law.

“All of these things are overwhelmingly popular, they’re important, we have legislative vehicles and supporters,” he said.

Still, there may be disagreements about what to pursue next.

Recent years have seen disagreements among Democratic supporters of legalization over whether to prioritize banking or criminal justice reforms.

A banking overhaul has much greater bipartisan support, and advocates on all sides of the issue agree it’s the most likely to see congressional action.

But some who support changes to banking laws in principle object to focusing on improving the business environment without first addressing the harms they say prohibition has caused to largely non-white and disadvantaged communities.

As recently as 2021, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer described banking reform legislation as too narrow. Sen. Cory Booker, a New Jersey Democrat, called it a “common-sense policy” but said that he favored a more comprehensive approach.

“I’ve gone around with Cory on that,” Blumenauer said. “More than anybody in Congress, I’m in favor of the major reforms, and we’ve been fighting for racial justice and equity … but (racial justice and banking reforms) are not mutually exclusive.”

In September, Booker agreed to co-sponsor the banking reform bill after winning a promise from Schumer that a separate bill to help expunge criminal records would also receive a vote. Neither measure has actually received a floor vote.

In a statement following the administration’s announcement on rescheduling, Booker praised the move, but called for further action from Congress.

That includes passing a bill he’s sponsored that would decriminalize the drug at the federal level, expunge the records of people convicted of federal marijuana crimes and direct federal funding to communities “most harmed by the failed War on Drugs,” according to a summary from Booker’s office.

“We still have a long way to go,” Booker said in the statement on rescheduling. “Thousands of people remain in prisons around the country for marijuana-related crimes. They continue to bear the devastating consequences that come with a criminal history.”

Blumenauer said Congress should act on the proposals that have widespread support from voters.

“This not low-hanging fruit, this is having them pick it up off the ground,” he said. “There is no other controversial issue that has as much bipartisan support that’s awaiting action.”