A new study finds that human hikers create a “landscape of fear” chasing other animals to hide.
Even when hikers are unarmed and peacefully using the landscape, they can cause disturbance on par with that of apex predators, according to study Published this month in Scientific Reports.
The study authors note that when human hikers were present in Montana’s Glacier National Park, 16 of the 22 species of mammals—including both predators and prey—changed when and where they arrived in certain areas.
Some completely deserted places they used previously, others used them less frequently and some turned to more nocturnal activities to avoid humans.
These findings add evidence to the theory that the mere presence of humans can change how species use the garden.
Since fishing is not allowed on Glacier, these responses are really driven by human presence and human noiseSenior author Daniel Thornton, a wildlife ecologist at Washington State University, said in a statement.
The researchers also expected to find that the presence of humans would attract smaller predators and prey by driving away the larger predators they feared—a dynamic known as “anthropoprotection.”
But only red foxes were likely found on the paths when the park was open—perhaps because coyotes, their canine rivals, were among the species left by humans.
studying It builds on results From a similar study conducted in October 2022 in Glacier Bay National Park, in a remote coastal region of Alaska.
Authors that study It was found that when human visitors were present, there were fewer animal finds per week across all species studied.
The study found that just 40 visitors from remote countries was enough to reduce the number of wildlife sightings to zero.
Today we’ll look at why business groups are suing the Environmental Protection Agency, explore a royal wind farm, and see the growing nutritional impact of dollar stores. Plus: Lab-grown meat gets a kosher label.
Let’s dig deeper.
The groups are suing the administration over streaming protection
A coalition of other trade and agricultural groups is suing the Biden administration over a new environmental rule intended to protect temporary flows from pollution.
The National Beef Association (NCBA) led the lawsuit, including groups such as the American Farm Bureau Association and the National Pork Producers Council.
In the case: the suits It challenges the legality of a rule that expands EPA jurisdiction to regulate dangers to small, intermittent streams, wetlands, and other bodies of water.
- These so-called “ephemeral currents” carry water only during certain times of the year or after heavy rains.
- But they make up a large percentage of the total miles of streams in the United States and are critical to water quality—particularly in western states like Arizona, where they make up the bulk of the state’s waterways.
This category will now include temporary streams in some cases.
stuck in the middle: The new rule establishes a rough middle ground between the positions of previous administrations.
- The Obama administration protected these currents, but the Trump administration rescinded those protections.
- The Biden-era rule splits the difference by sometimes giving these streams protection.
Industry opposition: An NCBA spokesperson called the new approach lacking “common sense.”
Agricultural groups have long argued that these flows should not be subject to federal regulation under the Clean Water Act, according to NCBA vice president for policy Jane Copenhaver.
- “My cattle operation in southwest Virginia has a schedule It does not carry water until after big stormsCopenhaver, a Virginia cattle producer, said in a statement.
- Under the new law, Copenhaver added, ranchers “may be subject to complex federal regulations.”
Not far enough? Environmentalists run afoul of the law that needs more protection for the country’s wetlands and waterways.
Austin Frick, a fellow in the Thurman Arnold Project who studies agricultural integration, told Equilibrium that the lawsuit, filed by the NCBA and a wide variety of other business groups, was “a soundboard response on their part.”
Charles: The profits from the wind farm should benefit the public
King Charles III announced that future profits would come from newly signed wind farm deals You must spend on the public rather than members of the royal family, the Washington Post reported.
For the “common good”: Buckingham Palace has written to the British government to “share the King’s desire” to redirect these profits “for the broader public good,” a spokesman said Thursday, according to the newspaper.
The spokesman said the palace had asked the government to propose “an appropriate reduction in the surplus of the Crown Estate which finances the Sovereign Grant”.
Run millions and win billions: The palace statement was issued the same day it was issued Crown real estateThe Washington Post, which manages the property’s property portfolio, has announced six new wind farm deals.
- Wind farms are expected to generate power for about 7 million homes by 2030.
- leasing arrangements It can generate 1 billion pounds ($1.2 billion) annually for at least three years, according to the BBC.
Current structure: Under a taxpayer-funded Sovereign Grant – now £86.3m ($107m) a year – the monarch receives 25 per cent of the Crown Estate’s annual surplus, Watchman mentioned.
- According to The Guardian, the “big windfall” resulting from the six new energy leases “would normally result in a jump in official funding for the monarchy”.
- While ownership of the Crown belongs to the reigning monarch, it is not the private property of the monarch.
Ignite the climate war: King Charles’ decision is in line with his broadcast on Christmas Day, in which he confessed How people struggle to cover their expenses.
Charles has also long been what the newspaper describes as a “climate crusader” – but he has “moderated his activism since becoming king”.
Dollar stores are rising along with rural food retailers
A new study finds that dollar stores are now the fastest growing grocery retailer in the contiguous United States — a trend that could have serious implications for public nutrition.
Uptrend: The households that make the most purchases at these stores tend to be low-income and headed by people of color, according to studyingPublished in the American Journal of Public Health.
- Dollar stores have doubled their presence in rural America over the past decade.
- The foods and drinks stocked by these stores are usually lower in nutrients and higher in calories.
Road Trip Views: Lead author Wenhui Feng said her inspiration for this study came from the road trips she took after completing her Ph.D.
Feng, professor of healthcare policy at Tufts University, said Permit.
How did it last? Feng and her colleagues analyzed food purchase data from 2008 to 2020 through the IRI Consumer Network, a nationally representative database of about 50,000 households.
Researchers found that as people’s incomes decreased, the dollar share of their food purchases in stores increased.
Footprint in rural America: Nationally, dollar stores were responsible for about 2.1 percent of household food purchases as of 2020, according to the study.
- But in rural and low-income areas, people tend to spend more than 5 percent of their food budget on these retailers.
- This share was greatest for rural non-Hispanic households, which spend about 11.6 percent of their food budgets at dollar stores.
To learn more about the results of the study, click here.
Lab-grown steak is kosher, the chief rabbi of Israel is the rule
Israel’s chief rabbi, Baruch Lau, decided that the Thousand Farms lab would grow steaks — grown from a cow still living in California — permitted under Jewish lawThe company announced on Thursday.
open doors: The decision clears the way for Thousand Farms to certify the Israel-based production facility and its products as kosher – creating a new entry point into the lucrative kosher market.
- It’s also a promising sign for the company’s attempts to market its products to other religious groups with strict rules about meat consumption or ritual slaughter.
- The company, whose products are set to launch later this year, is in talks with Muslim and Hindu clerics.
Growing Markets: Alef’s announcement comes along with greater growth in the cultured meat industry – and the kosher market.
Market advantage: Lab-grown meat has a cost-saving advantage over traditional halal and halal foods.
- It does not require labor intensive slaughter and meat preparation from a live animal, which is the main reason why these forms of meat are so expensive.
- as many as possible 80 percent of the cattle Those sold to Jewish slaughterhouses are reported by the Jewish Telegraphic Agency not to meet the strict standards that would make them kosher – driving up costs throughout the supply chain.
To read the full story, please click here.
Greta talks about the oil companies, the United Nations weighs in on lead pollution and the Brazilian government cracks down on illegal logging.
Greta Thunberg: Energy companies are throwing people under the bus
- Climate activist Greta Thunberg on Thursday accused energy companies of throwing people “under the bus” With Fossil Fuel Finance, our colleague Julia Shapiro reports. “These people are going to go as far as possible,” Thunberg said at a symposium in Davos, Switzerland, on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum.
The United Nations intervenes in the issue of lead pollution in Zambia
- United Nations experts are Interfering in a class action lawsuit A South African mining company has been sued for lead contamination in Zambia. The applicants allege that the company, through its involvement in a local lead mine in the town of Kabwe, assumed a responsibility to protect its residents from exposure, according to the UN.
Raids on illegal loggers begin in Brazil
- New Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva on Thursday Launched The country’s first raids against illegal deforestation of the Amazon rainforest — a problem that escalated under his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, Reuters reports. A senior federal agent told Reuters the goal of the previous government was to “show that we didn’t do anything.”