Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

For farms and rural businesses, a fresh and funded harvest includes the sun

News Feed
Tuesday, November 12, 2024

In Athens, Wisconsin, the lush green fields surrounding Stoney Acres Farm support a diverse farming operation, including cattle, pigs, wheat, and organic produce. Once a week during the summer, third-generation farmer Tony Schultz hosts a “Pizza on the Farm” night, selling pies made with his tomatoes, basil, vegetables, and pork. Even the pizza crust is made from his homegrown wheat. Sitting on the roof of the barn as visitors enter the property is a 23kW array of solar panels that power the farm’s operations. While solar originally was low on Schultz’s investment priority list, it became financially feasible once he took advantage of grants from the USDA’s Rural Energy for America, or REAP, program. This federal initiative provides grants and loans for projects like his. REAP funded about 40% of the two solar installations that now provide most of Stoney Acres Farms’ power.  The panels cut his monthly power bill from $800 to $200 or less per month, Schultz says. He’s surprised solar companies aren’t getting the word out better, but he wants fellow rural business and farm owners to know about the grants. “Even if you don’t care about your carbon footprint, it’s an easy investment,” Schultz said. “My initial cost has already been repaid and then some because of the REAP grants. It’s something that gives back.” Harvesting energy savings in rural communities REAP is a federally funded program that provides grants and loans to help rural businesses put in a wide variety of clean and energy-efficient technologies. The program partially funds projects that can range from solar panels and battery storage to efficient greenhouse HVAC systems and produce refrigerators. REAP was initially funded through the Farm Bill, which allocated $50 million per year to support renewable energy and efficiency projects for small farms and rural businesses. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 quadrupled that amount, adding $2 billion over 10 years. Farmers and rural small business owners can now apply for grants of up to $500,000 for energy efficiency projects and to $1 million for renewable energy systems. The REAP grants can break down financial barriers to renewable energy, said Emma Searson, a policy & advocacy campaigner with Solar United Neighbors (SUN), a national nonprofit dedicated to helping people access solar. SUN provides guidance and support to farmers and rural small business owners applying for REAP funding. “With that funding, those projects suddenly make more sense for a small farmer or rural business owner,” Searson said. “And it’s a powerful equity tool. Rural areas often have limited access to clean, affordable energy technologies, but the REAP program gives extra weight to applications from underserved rural communities.”  Beyond the obvious financial advantages, solar projects can come with a host of other unplanned benefits, Searson said. Energy security and resilience are crucial for farmers, who risk major losses if the power fails during weather events. Many in rural areas also value independence — producing energy on-site aligns with their values of self-reliance. It also helps demonstrate environmental stewardship to customers. A crowd gathers for a concert at Stoney Acres Farm. Stoney Acres Farm Generating energy can also promote financial stability, which can allow businesses to invest back in their business. In some cases, it can even create extra income by allowing them to sell power back to the grid. When solar-hosting businesses produce more energy than they need, the excess electricity is sent back into the power grid for use by others, and the businesses can credit on their utility bill for the energy they contributed. For Schultz, while the cost savings of solar was his initial motivator, he’s also noted other unexpected perks. “People are impressed when they see our solar panels — they’re part of our identity,” he said. “Our solar installation validates Stoney Acres as a sustainable family farm.” Avoiding outages, selling energy back  Near Sedona, Arizona, vintner and winery owner Eric Glomski creates wines that reflect the Verde Valley at Page Springs Cellars. He’s also proud that the winery is now completely powered by renewable energy, thanks to solar arrays and Tesla commercial battery storage funded by REAP grants. The grants covered roughly 25% of the system’s cost, and Glomski said that after just six years, the winery has already recouped the investment. Energy independence was a huge motivator for the transition to solar. “The weekends are our biggest revenue generators at the winery,” Glomski said. “If we lose power and need to close for a day during the high season, the business loses almost $15,000.” He also appreciates the energy flexibility — the batteries allow him to store energy to use during peak hours when rates are high, and the winery often sells energy back to the grid. Eric Glomski of Page Springs Cellars. Page Springs Cellars The most tangible benefits of the solar implementation were on the winery’s bottom line, Glomski said. But it’s also had intangible benefits for the vineyard’s revenues and reputation. “People want to put their dollars with businesses that take sustainability seriously,” he said. “And we’ve gotten so much visibility from our focus on renewable energy — we’ve had newspaper and magazine features, even won awards.” Other unexpected benefits have included the increased sense of pride that employees take in the business. Glomski highlights the story of an employee who educated herself about the winery’s sustainability practices and now gives eco-tours of the winery to visitors. “The solar panels were a big part of that,” he said. As Page Springs Winery enjoys the benefits of the REAP program, Glomski hopes that other farmers in his region will follow suit. “I know farmers who spend $30,000 [or] $40,000 a year on pumping water,” he said. “If they could use the REAP program to fund solar as their energy source, it would make a big difference in their bottom line.” Even though REAP has become more popular and grants more competitive, Searson still emphasizes that the program is a critical resource. “REAP is a remarkable and impactful opportunity for farmers and rural small businesses,” she said. “It can make solar or other energy efficiency projects financially attainable. These technologies can make a huge difference for your business or farm in the long term.” Solar United Neighbors (SUN) has developed a 10-week program that helps walk farmers and rural small business owners through the REAP application process. Those interested in assistance can join online: Ready, Set, Solar! LEARN MORE This story was originally published by Grist with the headline For farms and rural businesses, a fresh and funded harvest includes the sun on Nov 12, 2024.

A federal initiative helps rural business owners and farmers slash expenses by funding solar and other energy innovations.

In Athens, Wisconsin, the lush green fields surrounding Stoney Acres Farm support a diverse farming operation, including cattle, pigs, wheat, and organic produce. Once a week during the summer, third-generation farmer Tony Schultz hosts a “Pizza on the Farm” night, selling pies made with his tomatoes, basil, vegetables, and pork. Even the pizza crust is made from his homegrown wheat.

Sitting on the roof of the barn as visitors enter the property is a 23kW array of solar panels that power the farm’s operations. While solar originally was low on Schultz’s investment priority list, it became financially feasible once he took advantage of grants from the USDA’s Rural Energy for America, or REAP, program. This federal initiative provides grants and loans for projects like his. REAP funded about 40% of the two solar installations that now provide most of Stoney Acres Farms’ power. 

The panels cut his monthly power bill from $800 to $200 or less per month, Schultz says. He’s surprised solar companies aren’t getting the word out better, but he wants fellow rural business and farm owners to know about the grants. “Even if you don’t care about your carbon footprint, it’s an easy investment,” Schultz said. “My initial cost has already been repaid and then some because of the REAP grants. It’s something that gives back.”

Harvesting energy savings in rural communities

REAP is a federally funded program that provides grants and loans to help rural businesses put in a wide variety of clean and energy-efficient technologies. The program partially funds projects that can range from solar panels and battery storage to efficient greenhouse HVAC systems and produce refrigerators.

REAP was initially funded through the Farm Bill, which allocated $50 million per year to support renewable energy and efficiency projects for small farms and rural businesses. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 quadrupled that amount, adding $2 billion over 10 years. Farmers and rural small business owners can now apply for grants of up to $500,000 for energy efficiency projects and to $1 million for renewable energy systems.

The REAP grants can break down financial barriers to renewable energy, said Emma Searson, a policy & advocacy campaigner with Solar United Neighbors (SUN), a national nonprofit dedicated to helping people access solar. SUN provides guidance and support to farmers and rural small business owners applying for REAP funding. “With that funding, those projects suddenly make more sense for a small farmer or rural business owner,” Searson said. “And it’s a powerful equity tool. Rural areas often have limited access to clean, affordable energy technologies, but the REAP program gives extra weight to applications from underserved rural communities.” 

Beyond the obvious financial advantages, solar projects can come with a host of other unplanned benefits, Searson said. Energy security and resilience are crucial for farmers, who risk major losses if the power fails during weather events. Many in rural areas also value independence — producing energy on-site aligns with their values of self-reliance. It also helps demonstrate environmental stewardship to customers.

A crowd on a farm in front of a large white barn with solar panels
A crowd gathers for a concert at Stoney Acres Farm. Stoney Acres Farm

Generating energy can also promote financial stability, which can allow businesses to invest back in their business. In some cases, it can even create extra income by allowing them to sell power back to the grid. When solar-hosting businesses produce more energy than they need, the excess electricity is sent back into the power grid for use by others, and the businesses can credit on their utility bill for the energy they contributed.

For Schultz, while the cost savings of solar was his initial motivator, he’s also noted other unexpected perks. “People are impressed when they see our solar panels — they’re part of our identity,” he said. “Our solar installation validates Stoney Acres as a sustainable family farm.”

Avoiding outages, selling energy back 

Near Sedona, Arizona, vintner and winery owner Eric Glomski creates wines that reflect the Verde Valley at Page Springs Cellars. He’s also proud that the winery is now completely powered by renewable energy, thanks to solar arrays and Tesla commercial battery storage funded by REAP grants. The grants covered roughly 25% of the system’s cost, and Glomski said that after just six years, the winery has already recouped the investment.

Energy independence was a huge motivator for the transition to solar. “The weekends are our biggest revenue generators at the winery,” Glomski said. “If we lose power and need to close for a day during the high season, the business loses almost $15,000.” He also appreciates the energy flexibility — the batteries allow him to store energy to use during peak hours when rates are high, and the winery often sells energy back to the grid.

The founder of Page Springs Cellars in Arizona
Eric Glomski of Page Springs Cellars. Page Springs Cellars

The most tangible benefits of the solar implementation were on the winery’s bottom line, Glomski said. But it’s also had intangible benefits for the vineyard’s revenues and reputation. “People want to put their dollars with businesses that take sustainability seriously,” he said. “And we’ve gotten so much visibility from our focus on renewable energy — we’ve had newspaper and magazine features, even won awards.”

Other unexpected benefits have included the increased sense of pride that employees take in the business. Glomski highlights the story of an employee who educated herself about the winery’s sustainability practices and now gives eco-tours of the winery to visitors. “The solar panels were a big part of that,” he said.

As Page Springs Winery enjoys the benefits of the REAP program, Glomski hopes that other farmers in his region will follow suit. “I know farmers who spend $30,000 [or] $40,000 a year on pumping water,” he said. “If they could use the REAP program to fund solar as their energy source, it would make a big difference in their bottom line.”

Even though REAP has become more popular and grants more competitive, Searson still emphasizes that the program is a critical resource. “REAP is a remarkable and impactful opportunity for farmers and rural small businesses,” she said. “It can make solar or other energy efficiency projects financially attainable. These technologies can make a huge difference for your business or farm in the long term.”

Solar United Neighbors (SUN) has developed a 10-week program that helps walk farmers and rural small business owners through the REAP application process. Those interested in assistance can join online: Ready, Set, Solar!

LEARN MORE

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline For farms and rural businesses, a fresh and funded harvest includes the sun on Nov 12, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Under Trump, expect a crypto, corporate-friendly SEC — with costs

People will be on their own to understand risks and ensure they're choosing reputable services

When you hear "SEC", your first thought might be about a powerhouse college football conference. But there's a different SEC — the Securities and Exchange Commission — that plays a critical role in the financial system and overall economy. And the agency could be in for some changes under the incoming Trump administration.  To the average person, the SEC's policies may seem obscure or irrelevant. But even if you don't work in finance, the agency can have a significant impact on your life.  Anyone who invests in securities such as stocks or bonds — the majority of Americans, especially when accounting for retirement investments — arguably benefits from the SEC's rules and enforcement. Born out of the Great Depression, the SEC's mission includes ensuring fair and orderly financial markets. If companies try to manipulate investors with false information, for example, the SEC can put an end to this practice and punish bad actors. The SEC's mission also extends to areas such as facilitating capital formation by startups and other businesses — such as through initial public offerings (IPOs) — which ultimately can help create jobs and economic growth. While opinions differ on how the SEC should regulate financial markets, in general most agree that having some level of regulation promotes investor and business confidence in the system. However, under the Trump administration, the scales could tilt toward lighter oversight. "What you'd likely get with almost any kind of more conservative or Republican-leaning administration is less of a grip of regulation enforcement," said Jonathan E. Groth, partner at DGIM Law. Initially, that could bring down costs and enable more widespread investment — especially for crypto and other digital assets. But in the long run, deregulation arguably increases risk throughout the financial system — such as what was seen leading up to the Great Recession — and leaves individuals more on their own to figure out what's a legitimate investment. A crypto-friendly SEC In early December, Trump tapped Paul Atkins for SEC Chair to replace outgoing Biden nominee Gary Gensler. Atkins, an SEC commissioner under President George W. Bush's administration whose current roles include being co-chair of the Token Alliance, is expected to embrace more crypto-friendly practices as opposed to Gensler's emphasis on cracking down on crypto fraud.  Crypto falls into sort of a gray area in terms of how the SEC can regulate it, as it's not a traditional security like stocks. It remains to be seen how friendly the SEC will be if Congress passes legislation that gives the agency clearer authority over these assets. "Right now, with a lack of a stronger regulatory framework with respect to digital assets, really what you're relying on is a mishmash of rulings from U.S. district courts throughout the country," Groth said. "That opens a book for potentially conflicting rulings from different courts. And it's hard to kind of grasp what direction you can take." The SEC could provide "a framework so that for businesses and groups that are trying to bring more tokens and more coins to the market, or are trying to allow for wider adoption and use of digital assets, it makes it easier for them to understand what's expected of them," Groth said. This could bring confidence to these companies that if they're offering digital assets in compliance with a clear regulatory framework. "They're not going to be subject to enforcement actions or subject to lawsuits for potential fraud, which we see a lot of right now," he added. That's not to say the SEC will stop prosecuting crypto scams like pump-and-dump schemes, but the number of enforcements might lower, in part because of regulatory clarity and rules that give more leeway to issuers.  Any new regulatory framework will be likely to include some form of investor and consumer protection, but "as digital assets and cryptocurrencies proliferate under this administration, it's important to be smart. It's important to not just hitch your wagon to this train that's coming into the station without being as educated as you possibly can," Groth said. Lighter disclosure In addition to taking a more crypto-friendly stance, the SEC will also likely take a lighter approach to disclosure requirements for public companies, financial advisers and others that fall under the agency's purview. "At minimum, I do think we're going to see a rollback on active rulemaking, in particular with respect to ESG-related issues" "At minimum, I do think we're going to see a rollback on active rulemaking, in particular with respect to ESG (environmental, social and governance)-related issues," said Jennifer Lee, partner at Jenner & Block and a former assistant director in the SEC's Division of Enforcement. In March 2024, for example, the SEC adopted rules that would require public companies to make climate-related disclosures, but these might not come to fruition. Well before Trump's reelection, the SEC issued a stay, meaning these rules were put on pause until further judicial review. "I expect those to either be not enforced or rolled back entirely," Lee said. Other areas like cybersecurity and artificial intelligence could also face less active rulemaking and enforcement than during the Biden administration.  In some ways, lighter disclosure requirements could be free up time and money for corporate activities beyond compliance. For example, the SEC's climate disclosure rules are estimated to cost registrants $628 million per year. For investors, however, not having standardized disclosures — such as how companies are addressing cybersecurity risks — makes it "harder to do an apples-to-apples comparison," Lee said. Overall, public companies and others regulated by the SEC will likely have more leeway under Trump. A relaxed regulatory environment "can be very good for the market," Groth said. "People can see their portfolios grow more quickly and more substantially." However, that can mean people are on their own to understand risks and ensure they're choosing reputable financial products and service providers.  "That's not to say that they're stripping away all consumer protection efforts by any means, but naturally, a higher focus on free markets and relaxing regulation certainly means it's got to come at the cost of somewhere. And that generally will likely mean consumer protection measures," Groth said. Read more about personal finance

Business
Climate

Can flood of cheap new EVs coming to Europe save its carmakers?

Analysts argue 2024 is minor blip and that lobbying for relaxation of rules could harm industry in long termAffordable new electric family cars – particularly those that are EU-made – have been tough to come by in Europe for the past few years. There were no launches of homegrown electric models for less than €25,000 (£20,740) across the EU during 2022 and 2023, according to the campaign group Transport & Environment.Yet in the past few months that has changed, with a rush of new cars ranging from the Fiat Grande Panda to the Citroën ë-C3, the Hyundai Inster to the latest Dacia Spring and the Renault 5. Suddenly, buyers have options. Continue reading...

Affordable new electric family cars – particularly those that are EU-made – have been tough to come by in Europe for the past few years. There were no launches of homegrown electric models for less than €25,000 (£20,740) across the EU during 2022 and 2023, according to the campaign group Transport & Environment.Yet in the past few months that has changed, with a rush of new cars ranging from the Fiat Grande Panda to the Citroën ë-C3, the Hyundai Inster to the latest Dacia Spring and the Renault 5. Suddenly, buyers have options.That is no coincidence. Stricter EU carbon emissions targets kick in on 1 January, meaning carmakers will have to sell more electric cars or face fines. New battle lines are being drawn: the industry wants the rules relaxed, while environmental campaigners are urging the EU to hold firm.Carmakers around the world are struggling with faltering demand for their models, whether powered by batteries or internal combustion engines. Falling profits have come at a difficult time for the industry, just as it tries to find the money for the expensive transition to electric vehicles (EVs).Globally, 2024 has been a record year for electric car sales, driven by the extraordinary growth of China’s industry. But the market in Europe has gone through a painful slowdown. Matthias Schmidt, a Berlin-based electric car analyst, forecasts a 1.4% fall in sales across the 18 largest western and northern European markets in the past year (including those in the UK and Norway).A key factor in the decline has been the withdrawal of generous subsidies for new electric cars in Germany, the continent’s biggest market for EVs. Will Roberts, the head of automotive research at the consultancy Rho Motion, said the end of incentives of €5,000 for each car was “quite a difficult thing to get over” for consumers in the EU’s largest car market, and that turmoil in German politics meant there had “not been any political motivation or societal motivation to turn that around”. France also had a slowdown in EV sales, possibly not helped by the country’s own political uncertainty.Schmidt said some carmakers were performing better than others. Ford is struggling to sell electric models made in Cologne, but BMW and Stellantis have previously said the emissions targets are not a problem. The electric-only brands Tesla and Polestar, plus fast-transitioning Volvo, are already far ahead of the targets – meaning they can sell “credits” to rivals.But the timing of the overall decline in sales has alarmed politicians, as car companies have blamed regulation for their plans to close factories. Volkswagen has sent shock waves through Germany with a plan to close as many as three factories in its home country – the first time it has considered a closure. Ford is cutting 4,000 jobs in Europe, while Stellantis has repeatedly halted assembly operations at its main plant in Mirafiori, Italy, as well as announcing the closure of a van plant in Luton, in the UK.In Britain, manufacturers have successfully argued they need leeway from fines. The industry wants the same across the Channel. The European Automobile Manufacturers Association (Acea), an influential lobby group, has called for a “clear political statement by the European Commission by the end of 2024” that pledges to relax the emissions rules in order to save jobs.A Fiat Grande Panda. Stellantis has repeatedly halted assembly operations at its main plant in Mirafiori, Italy. Photograph: LaPresse/AlamyThere are signs that Europe’s policymakers may be amenable. The commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, is scheduled to start a “strategic dialogue” on the European car industry in January. The rightwing government, of Giorgia Meloni in Italy is leading the charge to relax the emissions rules. Germany’s chancellor, Olaf Scholz, has also signalled willingness to ease the fines, although he is running for re-election in February after the collapse of his three-way coalition.Acea’s director general, Sigrid de Vries, called for the EU to recognise that the rules risk “stalling the transition, rather than nursing it” and are doing damage to European industry. “Nobody expected us to be in such dire straits when it comes to the transition now,. We’re in a very different world in many ways,” she said.Acea is hoping for changes such as allowing manufacturers to make up for missed targets with higher electric sales in later years. Another option is a phase-in period that would in effect allow manufacturers to fall short of their targets in the first year.Luca De Meo, the chief executive of Renault and Acea’s president, recently said the industry risked losing up to €16bn in “investment capacity” if things were left unchanged. The top risk he cited was fines. Carmakers will pay €95 for every gram by which average carbon dioxide emissions rise above a target 93.6g for each kilometre.However, the €16bn figure is disputed. Lucien Mathieu, T&E’s cars director, said it was based on 2024 sales, ahead of new models. It was “like judging an athlete’s performance based on their practice session the year before”, he said.De Vries acknowledged that €16bn was an “envelope” figure that illustrated the size of the change that needed to “somehow be digested”, rather than an actual forecast.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Business TodayGet set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morningPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionA Dacia Spring. Photograph: Adina Munteanu/AlamyNew cars, just in timeWhatever the actual cost, one part of the calculation is the cost of steep discounts to the industry. While carmaker profits fall, it also benefits another important group, consumers, who pay less for the cars they rely on.Five years ago this newspaper reported that 2020 was set to be the year the electric car would go mainstream, as the first stage of the five-yearly EU rules kicked in. The number of electric models launched in 2020 duly doubled that year to 19, according to the data company Marklines, and sales surged. Something similar has happened this time: after 26 EV models were launched in 2023, there were 45 over the course of 2024 and at least another 35 are already scheduled to go on sale next year.Roberts said it was credible to think that carmakers had held back models. “Selling a BEV [battery electric vehicle] for VW in December is basically worthless for them,” he said. “If you can delay selling that EV to 2025” then it helps to avoid fines, Roberts said.Mathieu agreed. “Carmakers are holding back from launching more affordable models until next year. Why sell EV models this year when you need them next year?” he asked.For that reason, most analysts expect that sales of electric cars will rise sharply in 2025 across Europe – leaving 2024 as a minor blip before the transition accelerates.But some analysts and campaigners are concerned that the lobbying for relaxed rules could harm Europe’s industry in the long term. Every time Europe’s carmakers stumble, China’s ranks of EV startups, led by BYD, take another step forward. EU tariffs on Chinese cars ranging from 21% to 38.1% are not thought likely to stop the companies from winning customers across Europe.“Weakening the targets will definitely not help the industry as they will fall further behind the Chinese,” said Mathieu. It would be “rolling out the red carpet for the Chinese manufacturers”.

Business
CO2
Government

Jimmy Carter, nation’s longest-living former president, dies at 100

Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter has died at age 100, the Carter Center said Sunday. The big picture: As the nation's 39th president, Carter said he tried to forge a "competent and compassionate" U.S. government. A former peanut farmer and U.S. Navy nuclear physicist, Carter led a life of service that started well before his first elected office on the Sumter County, Georgia, Board of Education — and endured long after his presidency.He has often been called the "nation's greatest former president" for the humanitarian work he conducted in his more than four decades after Washington.Carter, the nation's longest-living former president and first to reach triple digits, began receiving hospice care at home in February 2023 after a series of short hospital stays, the Carter Center announced at the time. Driving the news: "Jimmy Carter, 39th president of the United States and winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize, died peacefully Sunday, Dec. 29, at his home in Plains, Georgia, surrounded by his family," per a statement. Carter's son, Chip Carter, said in the statement that his father "was a hero, not only to me but to everyone who believes in peace, human rights, and unselfish love.""The world is our family because of the way he brought people together, and we thank you for honoring his memory by continuing to live these shared beliefs," Chip Carter said. Flashback: Carter's wife of 77 years, Rosalynn, died in November 2023 at the age of 96. The former first lady, a lifelong mental health advocate, had been diagnosed with dementia earlier in the year and entered hospice days before her death.A 99-year-old Jimmy Carter traveled to Atlanta for her memorial service and attended her funeral in their hometown of Plains. President Biden and first lady Jill Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and first gentleman Doug Emhoff, and former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attended the Atlanta service.All living former first ladies — Melania Trump, Michelle Obama and Laura Bush — were also there.Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter had the longest presidential marriage, per AP. Carter greets people as he leaves after the funeral service for Rosalynn Carter at Maranatha Baptist Church on Nov. 29, 2023, in Plains, Ga. Photo: Alex Brandon/Pool/Getty ImagesLooking back on Carter’s lifeCarter was born on Oct. 1, 1924, in the small farming town of Plains, Georgia, at a hospital where his mother worked as a nurse. He was the first future president born in a hospital.Carter, the oldest of four, grew up picking peanuts on his family's farm. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1946, becoming the first future president to graduate from the academy. That same year he married Rosalynn, a fellow Plains native who had known Carter her entire life.Carter served in Norfolk, Virginia, and Hawai’i before joining the Navy's nuclear submarine program in Schenectady, New York, as a nuclear physicist. When his father died in 1953, Carter resigned to run the family's farms and seed and supply company with Rosalynn — against her wishes. Following a stint on his local Sumter County Board of Education, Carter ran for the Georgia State Senate in 1962. While he initially lost in the Democratic primary, he successfully proved his opponent had won based on voter fraud. A judge threw out the results, and Carter held the office for two terms. After a failed gubernatorial campaign in 1966, Carter was elected governor of Georgia in 1970. While his campaign sought the support of segregationists, his inaugural address shocked many when he declared "the time for discrimination is over." His administration emphasized ecology, efficiency in government and the removal of racial barriers. The Carters at an inaugural ball in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 1977. The two were married for 77 years. Photo: Warren K Leffler/PhotoQuest/Getty ImagesCarter's presidential term Though largely unknown in national politics, Gov. Carter announced his candidacy for president in December 1974 and accepted the Democratic nomination in July 1976. (An Atlanta Constitution editorial declared: "Jimmy Carter is running for what!?")On Nov. 2, 1976 — during the country's bicentennial year — Carter and his running mate Walter Mondale defeated incumbent Republican President Gerald Ford.Carter's presidential victories included arranging the Camp David Accords that established a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, the ratification of the Panama Canal treaties, and the normalization of diplomatic relations between the U.S. and China.Under his administration, 8 million jobs were created and the budget deficit decreased. He championed environmental and renewable energy policies, had solar panels installed on the White House, protected more than 100 million acres of land in Alaska, and signed the Environmental Protection Agency's "Superfund" hazardous waste cleanup program into law.Carter championed a wave of industry deregulation including aviation, transportation and telecommunications, established the Department of Education, and appointed record numbers of women and people of color to government positions.But his term was marred by rising energy costs, climbing inflation and interest rates, and a struggle to negotiate the release of 52 Americans held hostage in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.In 2023, the New York Times confirmed that in 1980, allies of Carter's political opponent, former California Gov. Ronald Reagan, secretly urged Iran not to release the hostages until after the election — something Carter allies had long suspected. (The hostages were released minutes after Reagan's inauguration in 1981.)What he said: Carter often recalled how proud he was to have kept the U.S. out of war for his four years in office."We kept our country at peace. We never went to war. We never dropped a bomb. We never fired a bullet. But still we achieved our international goals," he told The Guardian in 2011. Carter in his hometown of Plains, Ga., following a press conference about receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. Photo: Steve Schaefer/AFP via Getty ImagesPost-presidencyAfter his defeat to Reagan in 1980, the Carters returned to Plains and the family peanut business, which had been run into debt while in a blind trust during his presidency.In 1982, he and Rosalynn founded the Atlanta-based Carter Center — which today houses his presidential library and an active, influential nongovernmental organization focused on "waging peace, fighting disease and building hope."The center has undertaken a broad range of global programs, including conflict negotiation, election monitoring, and funding treatments to eradicate diseases such as river blindness and Guinea worm.Carter was awarded the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to bring peace to international conflicts and advance democracy and human rights.From the end of his presidency until 2020, Carter regularly taught Sunday school at his home Baptist church, often with hundreds of people lining up overnight to attend. Since 1984, he and Rosalynn remained devoted to one of their favorite causes: volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, which builds and restores homes for individuals and families in need.In 2015, Carter told reporters that doctors had discovered a form of melanoma that spread to his brain. Remarkably, four months later he announced that he was cancer-free.In March 2019, at 94 years and 172 days, he became the longest-living former president in U.S. history. He and Rosalynn attended every presidential inauguration since his own in 1977 until 2021. President Biden and first lady Jill Biden visited the Carters in April 2021. Biden and Carter built a long-standing friendship over decades. (In 1976, the first presidential endorsement that then-Gov. Carter got from an elected official outside of Georgia came from a young Sen. Biden.)Carter leaves behind four children — John William (Jack), James Earl III (Chip), Donnel Jeffery (Jeff), and Amy — and more than two dozen grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Former Democratic President Jimmy Carter has died at age 100, the Carter Center said Sunday. The big picture: As the nation's 39th president, Carter said he tried to forge a "competent and compassionate" U.S. government. A former peanut farmer and U.S. Navy nuclear physicist, Carter led a life of service that started well before his first elected office on the Sumter County, Georgia, Board of Education — and endured long after his presidency.He has often been called the "nation's greatest former president" for the humanitarian work he conducted in his more than four decades after Washington.Carter, the nation's longest-living former president and first to reach triple digits, began receiving hospice care at home in February 2023 after a series of short hospital stays, the Carter Center announced at the time. Driving the news: "Jimmy Carter, 39th president of the United States and winner of the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize, died peacefully Sunday, Dec. 29, at his home in Plains, Georgia, surrounded by his family," per a statement. Carter's son, Chip Carter, said in the statement that his father "was a hero, not only to me but to everyone who believes in peace, human rights, and unselfish love.""The world is our family because of the way he brought people together, and we thank you for honoring his memory by continuing to live these shared beliefs," Chip Carter said. Flashback: Carter's wife of 77 years, Rosalynn, died in November 2023 at the age of 96. The former first lady, a lifelong mental health advocate, had been diagnosed with dementia earlier in the year and entered hospice days before her death.A 99-year-old Jimmy Carter traveled to Atlanta for her memorial service and attended her funeral in their hometown of Plains. President Biden and first lady Jill Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and first gentleman Doug Emhoff, and former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton attended the Atlanta service.All living former first ladies — Melania Trump, Michelle Obama and Laura Bush — were also there.Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter had the longest presidential marriage, per AP. Carter greets people as he leaves after the funeral service for Rosalynn Carter at Maranatha Baptist Church on Nov. 29, 2023, in Plains, Ga. Photo: Alex Brandon/Pool/Getty ImagesLooking back on Carter’s lifeCarter was born on Oct. 1, 1924, in the small farming town of Plains, Georgia, at a hospital where his mother worked as a nurse. He was the first future president born in a hospital.Carter, the oldest of four, grew up picking peanuts on his family's farm. He earned a Bachelor of Science degree from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1946, becoming the first future president to graduate from the academy. That same year he married Rosalynn, a fellow Plains native who had known Carter her entire life.Carter served in Norfolk, Virginia, and Hawai’i before joining the Navy's nuclear submarine program in Schenectady, New York, as a nuclear physicist. When his father died in 1953, Carter resigned to run the family's farms and seed and supply company with Rosalynn — against her wishes. Following a stint on his local Sumter County Board of Education, Carter ran for the Georgia State Senate in 1962. While he initially lost in the Democratic primary, he successfully proved his opponent had won based on voter fraud. A judge threw out the results, and Carter held the office for two terms. After a failed gubernatorial campaign in 1966, Carter was elected governor of Georgia in 1970. While his campaign sought the support of segregationists, his inaugural address shocked many when he declared "the time for discrimination is over." His administration emphasized ecology, efficiency in government and the removal of racial barriers. The Carters at an inaugural ball in Washington, D.C., on Jan. 20, 1977. The two were married for 77 years. Photo: Warren K Leffler/PhotoQuest/Getty ImagesCarter's presidential term Though largely unknown in national politics, Gov. Carter announced his candidacy for president in December 1974 and accepted the Democratic nomination in July 1976. (An Atlanta Constitution editorial declared: "Jimmy Carter is running for what!?")On Nov. 2, 1976 — during the country's bicentennial year — Carter and his running mate Walter Mondale defeated incumbent Republican President Gerald Ford.Carter's presidential victories included arranging the Camp David Accords that established a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel, the ratification of the Panama Canal treaties, and the normalization of diplomatic relations between the U.S. and China.Under his administration, 8 million jobs were created and the budget deficit decreased. He championed environmental and renewable energy policies, had solar panels installed on the White House, protected more than 100 million acres of land in Alaska, and signed the Environmental Protection Agency's "Superfund" hazardous waste cleanup program into law.Carter championed a wave of industry deregulation including aviation, transportation and telecommunications, established the Department of Education, and appointed record numbers of women and people of color to government positions.But his term was marred by rising energy costs, climbing inflation and interest rates, and a struggle to negotiate the release of 52 Americans held hostage in the U.S. Embassy in Tehran.In 2023, the New York Times confirmed that in 1980, allies of Carter's political opponent, former California Gov. Ronald Reagan, secretly urged Iran not to release the hostages until after the election — something Carter allies had long suspected. (The hostages were released minutes after Reagan's inauguration in 1981.)What he said: Carter often recalled how proud he was to have kept the U.S. out of war for his four years in office."We kept our country at peace. We never went to war. We never dropped a bomb. We never fired a bullet. But still we achieved our international goals," he told The Guardian in 2011. Carter in his hometown of Plains, Ga., following a press conference about receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002. Photo: Steve Schaefer/AFP via Getty ImagesPost-presidencyAfter his defeat to Reagan in 1980, the Carters returned to Plains and the family peanut business, which had been run into debt while in a blind trust during his presidency.In 1982, he and Rosalynn founded the Atlanta-based Carter Center — which today houses his presidential library and an active, influential nongovernmental organization focused on "waging peace, fighting disease and building hope."The center has undertaken a broad range of global programs, including conflict negotiation, election monitoring, and funding treatments to eradicate diseases such as river blindness and Guinea worm.Carter was awarded the 2002 Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts to bring peace to international conflicts and advance democracy and human rights.From the end of his presidency until 2020, Carter regularly taught Sunday school at his home Baptist church, often with hundreds of people lining up overnight to attend. Since 1984, he and Rosalynn remained devoted to one of their favorite causes: volunteering for Habitat for Humanity, which builds and restores homes for individuals and families in need.In 2015, Carter told reporters that doctors had discovered a form of melanoma that spread to his brain. Remarkably, four months later he announced that he was cancer-free.In March 2019, at 94 years and 172 days, he became the longest-living former president in U.S. history. He and Rosalynn attended every presidential inauguration since his own in 1977 until 2021. President Biden and first lady Jill Biden visited the Carters in April 2021. Biden and Carter built a long-standing friendship over decades. (In 1976, the first presidential endorsement that then-Gov. Carter got from an elected official outside of Georgia came from a young Sen. Biden.)Carter leaves behind four children — John William (Jack), James Earl III (Chip), Donnel Jeffery (Jeff), and Amy — and more than two dozen grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

Business
Education
Energy

Plans to transform an iconic San Francisco highway into a park ignite recall furor

San Francisco residents voted to permanently close the Upper Great Highway to cars and turn it into a park. That sparked a recall effort against a local lawmaker.

SAN FRANCISCO —  On a recent Sunday on the far edge of the Outer Sunset, a cozy oceanfront neighborhood with rows of pastel bungalows, hundreds of people enjoyed a stretch of the iconic coastal road known as the Great Highway. A dad taught his kid how to ride a bike. A young couple strolled with their baby in a bassinet. Two surfers hauled their boards toward the crashing Pacific waves. A day later, the same swath of asphalt was covered with cars, transformed back into a commuter route for thousands of drivers who use the Great Highway to get to work, the airport, school or other parts of town.This two-mile stretch, known as the Upper Great Highway — which starts at the tip of Golden Gate Park and runs south along Ocean Beach — has become a political traffic jam in recent years, with locals clashing over how best to use the historic avenue as coastal erosion and sea level rise threaten its future. Division over the Upper Great Highway’s fate adds to an ongoing debate between so-called urbanists who want to see the city develop more green space and promote public transportation, and those who rely on their cars and worry about traffic. (Paul Kuroda / For The Times) The dispute reached a new fervor in last month’s election, when the majority of San Francisco voters approved a controversial ballot measure to permanently close the Upper Great Highway to cars and convert it into a full-time park, instead of a weekend-only promenade. The measure, Proposition K, passed with nearly 55% of the vote. The bulk of support came from voters on the city’s east side, in neighborhoods closer to downtown and miles from the beach. Voters in the Sunset and Richmond districts, west side neighborhoods that will be most affected by the closure, overwhelmingly voted against the measure.The stark division added to an ongoing — and very San Francisco — debate between so-called urbanists who want to see the city develop more green space and promote public transportation and those who rely on their cars and worry about traffic. It’s also sparked tension between old-timers clinging to their neighborhood’s middle-class roots and other city residents who embrace the coast as an urban oasis. The fight could cost one local politician his job.Soon after Proposition K passed, opponents organized a recall petition against Supervisor Joel Engardio, a Democrat elected in 2022 to represent the Sunset and other west side areas who helped get Proposition K on the ballot. San Francisco Supervisor Joel Engardio, a Democrat elected in 2022 to represent the Outer Sunset and other west side neighborhoods, is facing a recall against for his support of Proposition K. (Jeff Chiu/Associated Press) Recall organizers say Engardio abandoned the neighborhoods he represents by backing an initiative his constituents clearly didn’t want. “This recall is based on the fact that he just betrayed the district,” said Vin Budhai, an Outer Sunset resident who campaigned against Proposition K and filed the recall petition. Budhai said residents fear that closing the highway will push traffic into the neighborhood, polluting the air and making the sleepy streets unsafe. He worries about workers who either can’t afford to work from home or don’t have the option to bike or take public transit to their jobs. “There’s a conversation going around about how we should utilize our roads, but that conversation doesn’t include the driver,” he said. The recall petitioners are waiting to be cleared to collect signatures to qualify for the ballot in a special election before 2026. If it’s successful, Engardio would become the latest in a string of local politicians who have been removed from office in the last three years. In 2022, San Francisco voters recalled progressive Dist. Atty. Chesa Boudin and three school board members over voter frustrations during the pandemic. In November, East Bay voters ousted two other progressives, Oakland Mayor Sheng Thao and Alameda County Dist. Atty. Pamela Price. Engardio said that he was “humbled” by the votes in his district against Proposition K and that he was dedicated to working with the opposition to address traffic and road safety concerns before the Upper Great Highway closes to cars, possibly by next spring. But he also sees a unique opportunity to reimagine the historic highway in the face of climate change. Already, a southern extension of the Great Highway near the San Francisco Zoo is slated to close because of erosion and other environmental concerns. City officials estimate closing the Upper Great Highway to cars and rerouting traffic through other eastern roadways would add only three minutes to drive times.“Do we keep it as a road with less utility? Or do we turn it into an ocean-side park that could have huge benefit to generations of people and the local economy and be good for the environment?” Engardio said. “This has the potential to be transformational, not just for the Sunset but for all of San Francisco.”Drama over the Upper Great Highway goes back to the pandemic, when city officials closed the road to cars as part of a broader effort to free up outdoor recreation space. In 2021, the city modified those rules to allow traffic during the week while reserving the road for pedestrians during weekends. The highway transitions into a park beginning at noon on Fridays and until 6 am on Mondays. In the November 2022 election, advocates frustrated with the anti-car rules organized a ballot measure to reopen the highway to vehicles full time. Voters rejected the measure, Proposition I, with more than 65% of the vote. As a compromise after that election, the Board of Supervisors approved a three-year pilot program to keep the split use of the road. In June, Engardio and four other supervisors sponsored an ordinance to put Proposition K before voters, rather than having the 11-member board decide the highway’s fate. “I felt that it is better for everyone to have an equal vote and equal say on what to do with their coast, because the coast belongs to everyone,” Engardio said. Engardio said he had confidence that his district wanted a park. Many west side voters rejected the 2022 measure to reopen the road full time to cars, and a coalition of Outer Sunset residents campaigned for the weekend promenade and Proposition K. “This idea came from Sunset residents. And I’m the Sunset supervisor,” he said. City officials recorded more than 420,000 weekend visits to the park in 2023, making it the third-most-visited park in the city, after Golden Gate Park and the Marina. A separate study from the city estimated up to 26,400 weekly visitors for a full-time pedestrian promenade. The San Francisco controller’s office also estimates shutting down the road to cars could save the city up to $700,000 annually in sand removal and other maintenance issues that regularly close down the highway. Supporters of Proposition K celebrated its passage as a unique opportunity to transform the road into a park accessible to all people, with paved portions for the elderly or disabled, and teeming with native plants and restored sand dunes. And they’re adamant that local businesses and restaurants will benefit from the increased foot traffic. “The temperature over the past few months on this issue has really overlooked the incredible positive opportunity that San Franciscans had,” said Lucas Lux, an Outer Sunset resident and “Yes on K” campaign manager. “You’ve opened the coast to be enjoyed by more people as part of daily life in San Francisco.”Lux and other supporters of the new park hope it will eventually become as popular as the JFK promenade in Golden Gate Park. Voters in 2022 approved another measure to close it permanently to cars, and it has since become a favorite recreational road, now decorated with art installations, ping-pong tables, a piano and lawn chairs. But bitterness still simmers through the west side. (Eric Risberg / Associated Press) Matt Boschetto, who ran unsuccessfully for supervisor representing the nearby Inner Sunset neighborhood, said he sees the closure of the Upper Great Highway as San Francisco abandoning working-class people. “I’m not trying to silence urbanist views and people who want to see more open spaces and people who are concerned about the climate and concerned heavily about housing,” he said. “But you also gotta respect the other view of San Francisco as well.” Boschetto ran a campaign committee against Proposition K that raised roughly $239,000, with at least $65,000 from Boschetto’s family members. In comparison, a committee backing Proposition K raised more than $780,000, including $350,000 from Jeremy Stoppelman, co-founder and chief executive of Yelp. “We did the best we could,” Boschetto said. “I feel like maybe history might not be on our side, but morally I feel like it was a victory in a lot of ways. I think it’s really mobilized the west side.” The California Coastal Commission this month voted to grant San Francisco’s permit to make the road into a park. Opponents were disappointed but said they hope Mayor-elect Daniel Lurie, who takes office in early January and opposed Proposition K, slows implementation of the closure. In a statement, Lurie said that he was “committed to respecting and upholding the will of the voters” and that his administration “will work hand in hand with residents on both sides to ensure that the measure is implemented thoughtfully.”As for Engardio, he said he is also dedicated to spending the next many months working with outraged voters to address road safety and traffic concerns. He said he respects the “democratic right” to organize a recall against him, but hopes that voters consider how he has worked on other issues important to the district during his time in office, including public safety and organizing popular night markets to support local businesses. “At this point, I have to only look forward,” he said. “I can’t undo the past.”

Business
Climate
Nature

A filing error put more than 90,000 acres of Yakama Nation land in the hands of Washington state

More than 170 years later, the Yakama are still trying to get their land back.

It was barely a choice. In 1855, a time when the ink of border lines on United States maps had scarcely dried, Yakama Chief Kamiakin was told to sign over the land of 14 tribal nations and bands in the Pacific Northwest — or face the prospect of walking “knee deep” in the blood of his people. Legend has it that, when he put pen to paper, he was so furious he bit through his lip. By signing, he ceded over 10 million acres across what is now known as Washington state. In return, the Yakama Nation was allowed to live on a reservation one-tenth the size of their ancestral lands, about 100 miles southeast of Seattle. But the story doesn’t end there. The treaty map was lost for close to 75 years, misfiled by a federal clerk who put it under “M” for Montana. With no visual record to contradict them, federal agents extracted even more Yakama land for the nascent state, drawing new boundaries on new maps. One removed an additional 140,000 acres from the reservation, another about half a million, and still other versions exist. By the time the original map was discovered in the 1930s, it was too late. Settlers had already made claims well within reservation boundaries, carving the consequences of this mistake into the contours of the land. Non-Native landowners remain to this day. The Yakama want that land back. Most tribal members know the story of Kamiakin and his bloodied lip when he signed the treaty. Ask Phil Rigdon, a Yakama citizen and nationally recognized forester. As the superintendent of the Yakama Nation Department of Natural Resources, he deals with a medley of issues, but his most important work is getting the reservation land back. After working on this for nearly 20 years, he knows that it takes time and an entire community to make the progress they want. “It’s a family thing for us, as we do this business,” he said. Pahto, also known as Mount Adams, looms over the western edge of the Yakama reservation. In 1972, President Richard Nixon signed an executive order acknowledging that the mountain had been mistakenly excluded from the reservation. Maria Parazo Rose / Grist Pushed up against the eastern slopes of the Cascade Range mountains, the Yakama reservation is over a million acres — but not all of it belongs to the tribe. The primary non-tribal landowner on Yakama Nation is the state of Washington, which owns close to 92,000 surface and subsurface acres of state trust land within the reservation’s boundaries, in addition to other types of land holdings.  As part of the Enabling Act of 1889, the federal government gifted tracts of land to states when they graduated from territories to join the Union. These parcels, known as state trust lands, are considered resources in perpetuity: States can sell or lease these lands to make money from grazing, timber, and other activities. The profit is then used to fund a state’s institutions: universities, jails, hospitals, and, especially, public schools.  These lands can be a meaningful revenue source. A Grist investigation from earlier this year found that state trust lands across the Western U.S. that send money to land-grant universities paid out about $6.6 billion dollars from 2018 to 2022. Read Next The extractive industries filling public university coffers on stolen land Tristan Ahtone, Robert Lee, Amanda Tachine, An Garagiola, Audrianna Goodwin, Maria Parazo Rose, & Clayton Aldern Washington’s state trust lands, including those on the Yakama reservation, are managed by its Department of Natural Resources, or DNR. The state is eager to return the lands back to the tribe; it recognizes that a return would both complete the Yakamas’ ownership of the reservation and support the region’s environmental health. However, the state’s efforts are dictated by legal policies and priorities that ensure the land is exchanged only on the condition that Washington is compensated for the lands’ value, even though it was wrongfully taken.   Grist has reported on over 2 million acres of state trust lands that exist within the borders of 79 reservations across the Western U.S. Our investigation has shown that extractive industries, like mining, logging, and oil and gas drilling, operate on that land that generates billions of dollars for state entities. But the Yakama Nation’s history with state lands is singular in its legal morass.  When the treaty map was “misfiled,” two main areas on the reservation were repeatedly depicted as non-tribal land on incorrect replacement maps. One is along the northern border of the reservation, known as Tract C. The other is Tract D, in the reservation’s southwestern corner.  Today, nearly 71,500 acres of surface and subsurface state trust lands on Tract D, and 19,700 acres on Tract C, send revenue to Washington’s institutions, mostly benefitting public K-12 schools. The map the Washington DNR uses to reference the Yakama reservation still marks Tract C as a “disputed area.” Prior to settler colonialism, the ancestral Yakama homeland stretched for 10 million acres — from Pahto (Mount Adams) in the west past Nch’i-Wàna (the Columbia River) in the east. In 1855, the Territory of Washington was just two years old, and settlers aimed to make it a state. That year, the United States forced a treaty upon the people of Yakama Nation, who were subsequently confined to a reservation — ceding roughly 90 percent of their more than 10 million acres. To establish the reservation, negotiators relied on natural features to define its boundaries. 6 Yakama Nation v. Klickitat Cnty. Commencing on the Yakama River, at the mouth of the Attah-nam River; thence westerly along said Attah-nam River to the forks; thence along the southern tributary to the Cascade Mountains; thence southerly along the main ridge of said mountains, passing south and east of Mount Adams, to the spur whence flows the waters of the Klickatat and Pisco rivers; thence down said spur to the divide between the waters of said rivers; thence along said divide to the divide separating the waters of the Satass River from those flowing into the Columbia River; thence along said divide to the main Yakama, eight miles below the mouth of the Satass River; and thence up the Yakama River to the place of beginning. The according treaty text and map illustrated a reservation that stretched from the Cascade Range eastward to the Yakima River, with a southern boundary south of Mount Adams. But the treaty map disappeared shortly after the treaty's signing, throwing the reservation boundary — especially the southwestern edge — into dispute. Subsequent federal surveys would seek to delineate this boundary. The Schwartz survey, conducted in 1890, cut nearly a half-million acres out of the reservation relative to the understanding reached in the treaty. A federal report released in 1900 fixed some of the more obvious errors of the Schwartz survey but failed to appropriately reflect the southwestern boundary of the reservation. The Supreme Court ruled in 1913 that the Yakama reservation extended to the main ridge of the Cascade Range. In the early 1920s, a new federal survey implemented this correction — but still used an unnatural straight line to denote the southwestern side. Despite the recovery around 1930 of the 1855 treaty map, which prompted a new federal survey of the boundary in 1932, the southwestern boundary of the Yakama reservation would remain in dispute. This 120,000-acre section of land, highlighted in a mid-20th-century Yakama claim to the Indian Claims Commission, became known as Tract D. The litigation of Tract D — which appropriately captures the natural geographic boundaries of the 1855 treaty — would define the next seven decades of Yakama land claims. Today, between surface and subsurface rights, more than 70,000 acres of Washington state trust lands sit within Tract D. What happened to Tract D? Scroll to continue Parker Ziegler and Clayton Aldern / Grist The boundary errors have been acknowledged by authorities ranging from Harold Ickes, the Secretary of the Interior during the Franklin Roosevelt administration in the 1930s, to former President Richard Nixon in the 1970s. But none of these acknowledgments were legally binding, said attorney Joe Sexton of Galanda Broadman law firm, based in Washington. That is, until the 2021 9th U.S. Circuit Court case of the ​​Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation v. Klickitat County, for which Sexton and Galanda Broadman, along with attorneys for the tribe led by Ethan Jones, argued the Yakamas’ case.  It started with a jurisdictional dispute over a criminal prosecution: In 2017, Klickitat County arrested a minor and enrolled tribal member for a crime in Tract D. The county claimed that the tribe had no jurisdiction over Tract D, since it wasn’t reservation land; the tribe declared the opposite. The Yakama Nation sued Klickitat County for stepping outside its jurisdiction; the county argued that Tract D was not included when the reservation was created. Sexton’s job was to prove that it was.   “If they had lost this, they would’ve really been brokenhearted about the fact that future Yakamas would not be able to consider this part of their reservation,” Sexton said.  With Sexton’s argument about interpreting and honoring treaty language, the Yakama Nation ultimately won the case, confirming that Tract D was and had always been a part of the reservation, within the original boundaries. This was further validated when, the following year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the county’s appeal against Yakama Nation. The case also set a meaningful precedent for how the Tract C boundary, which has had no such adjudication, might be approached in court, Sexton said.  While the court’s decision was monumental, it did nothing to address the continued existence of state trust lands on the reservation. Under the U.S. Constitution, federal treaties with tribal nations, as with other sovereign entities, are considered the supreme law of the land. Washington also has its own state Supreme Court decision, which expressly holds that tribal treaties are binding law. The Treaty with the Yakama of 1855 precedes the federal 1889 Enabling Act that distributed state trust lands, so it should have precedence. In other words, because the treaty was signed first, the subsequent expansion of state trust lands on Yakama land, due to incorrect maps, shouldn’t have happened.  “The Treaty of 1855 trumps it,” Sexton said. “There’s no question about that.” But because of how Western property law works, the state has legitimate legal claim to those lands.  It goes back to how the U.S. perceived its right over the land upon which it was building itself: Empowered by the Doctrine of Discovery, a Catholic decree authorizing colonial powers to claim land, the government decided that all of the land and everything on or under it was federal property until it was turned into a state, or national park, or reservation. Whoever had the property deed, which was initially held and then granted by the federal government, was in charge. And deeds are the key to ownership, Sexton said, seen to be almost as powerful as treaties, even though they’re not listed in the Constitution.  So despite the fact that the U.S. gave away Yakama land to which it no longer had any right, because it fell within the bounds of the reservation, the federal government’s distribution of trust lands to Washington state is still recognized as a legal transaction.  Washington has the ability to decide how these trust lands are handled. But because so much time has passed since the state’s inception in 1889, generations of settlement and ownership have been established in the area, and state beneficiaries have come to count on trust lands as a revenue source — which means it is unlikely that Washington would return the trust lands on the reservation to the tribe without some form of compensation.  “State officials, they’ll claim that the law ties their hands. But I don’t know that it does,” Sexton said. “And if it does, they’re certainly not working to change the law in any actual way.” Klickitat Meadow, like many of the forest meadows on Tract C of the reservation, is where the headwaters of the Klickitat River begin. Many Yakama tribal members come to this closed part of the reservation to hunt and gather food, and learn about the land. Maria Parazo Rose / Grist The October sun shone through fall-colored leaves above the truck Phil Rigdon drove into the forests of Tract D. Along a rolling ridgeline, he pointed out groves of pine stands.  “We call this area Cedar Valley, even though there’s no cedars here,” Rigdon said, gesturing out the window. “It was the homesteaders that called it Cedar Valley. And so I don’t know why it stuck.” Rigdon stepped into the superintendent role for Yakama Nation’s Department of Natural Resources in 2005, coming with a bachelor’s degree in forest management from the University of Washington and a master’s degree from the Yale School of the Environment. He steers land management across the entire reservation. But before that, Rigdon was a forester. In these backroads, he recognized copses of trees he once knew as saplings he planted decades ago, now stretching 40 feet tall.  “You never think you grow up, but holy shit,” he said. “Now you’re like the big trees, you’re the old growth.”  Driving through Tract D, there was a clear contrast between different parcels of the forest. Some were densely packed or dotted with stumps — those owned and managed by the state or private interests. The forest on tribal land, meanwhile, was thinned out, full of mature trees with thick trunks. Branches stretched into air. Thinning out trees has many purposes: It decreases the material that feeds wildfires, it enables a more complex plant system, and it slows the spread of insects and disease. It creates a healthier forest.  Both the state and private industry harvest timber more aggressively than the tribe, though Rigdon acknowledged that the state manages forest much better than private industry, which does more clear-cutting. After all, the state DNR must manage state trust lands so that schools and other institutions receive revenue years into the future.  This isn’t to say the tribe doesn’t log. They cannot tax people, as a tribe, so they harvest enough to help fund their government institutions, which partly depend on timber as a revenue stream. But the Yakamas’ approach is to view land as a continuum, to be managed for the very long run. They pay attention to the overall environment, making decisions based on what allows the entire ecosystem to work as it should. Their harvesting practices double as a way of maintaining forest health — the priority over revenue generation.  “What we leave on the ground actually is usually more valuable than what we take,” Rigdon said.  The tribe values land for more than its potential economic worth: There is kinship, memory, medicine. Like when Joe Blodgett, a tribal member and Rigdon’s cousin, described the Klickitat Meadow, he didn’t bring up the golden grass or jagged peaks on the horizon. He talked about weekends fishing with his dad. Klickitat Meadow is in the Tract C part of the reservation, checkerboarded with state trust lands and tucked up in the mountains behind roads that require four-wheel drive. This area, and others like it, is where Blodgett and other members of Yakama Nation learned to gather food and about their connection to the land.  “It gets back to the importance of what our resources are offering us,” Blodgett said. “They’re making a sacrifice, they’re making that offering. And we’ve got to appreciate that.” Read Next The extractive industries filling public university coffers on stolen land Tristan Ahtone, Robert Lee, Amanda Tachine, An Garagiola, Audrianna Goodwin, Maria Parazo Rose, & Clayton Aldern Blodgett manages the Yakima Klickitat Fisheries Project, a tribal initiative that works on restoring sustainable and harvestable fish populations. His work involves overseeing environmental restoration projects, like in the Klickitat Meadow, which has been far too dry. A warmer climate played a part in this, but the full reason is more nuanced. A history of state-sanctioned sheep grazing permitted on adjacent state trust lands led to grazing on the meadow that never should have happened. Large herds, which wouldn’t normally be in the area, compacted the dirt so much that water can no longer percolate into the ground to feed the streams and rivers that start in mountain meadows like this.  Actions that damage the environment in seemingly small ways add up, Blodgett said. Scale matters. But by the same token, small environmental mitigation practices also add up to meaningful improvements. In a meadow stream nearby, for example, the tribe has built human approximations of beaver dams that slow the water and help it absorb into the ground. Solutions like these are called “low tech,” but the simplistic name belies their necessity for other projects to succeed.   For example, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is ready to move forward with the removal of the Bateman Island Causeway, an unauthorized, artificial land bridge in the Columbia River that connects Bateman Island to the shore. Tribes have long advocated for its removal, given its disturbance to the surrounding ecosystem. Removing it will restore fish populations off the reservation, but Blodgett said the situation won’t get better without cold water coming down from the mountain streams on the reservation. That’s where the low-tech fixes come in.   “They’re equally important,” Blodgett said of the low-tech fixes and bigger infrastructure projects. “You’re going to see the biggest bang out there when you pull that causeway out. But if [fish] don’t have these types of systems to go back to, you’re just going to continue to spin your wheels.” Climate change adds pressure to the Yakamas’ environmental restoration efforts. Because the effects of a rapidly changing environment are becoming more prevalent, Blodgett and other Yakama experts know that they have to take faster, bigger action to stay ahead of and be resilient to even harsher future conditions. It will require landscape-scale restoration projects, more sustainable management of forests, and smarter water- and land-use practices — big projects for which the Yakama Nation would need cohesive control over its reservation, without pockets of state or private ownership.  The Yakama Nation has a plan for land reclamation. The tribe began buying land back from companies and private landowners in the mid-1990s, returning close to 40,000 acres. One of the bigger single acquisitions was a deal with a private landowner to buy back roughly 7,500 acres in Tract C for about $5 million. But the remaining 19,700 surface and subsurface acres of state trust land in Tract C have proved to be elusive; the tribe has been negotiating to reacquire those lands for over 20 years.  The complications come from the Enabling Act rules that govern Washington state’s financial responsibility to its beneficiaries: The state cannot lose money from state trust lands. In practice, were the state to return trust lands to Yakama Nation, it would need to be paid however much that land is worth, or receive land that is the equivalent value of what they exchange. Without that compensation, public schools and other institutions will feel the financial pinch.  Between 2021 and 2023, the state trust lands within Yakama reservation generated $573,219.85 — which is .16 percent of all the revenue that state trust lands across Washington state produced in that same time period. Washington does have one avenue for transferring state trust lands from the DNR to other entities, as long as those lands are deemed financially “unproductive.” The Trust Land Transfer program’s benefit is that the state legislature funds land exchanges, instead of an entity, like a tribe, buying it back. But you have to have a legislature willing to do that. It’s a unique program, one that the DNR says they operate in the spirit of collaboration with the tribes.  Read Next How schools, hospitals, and prisons in 15 states profit from land and resources on 79 tribal nations Anna V. Smith & Maria Parazo Rose The state trust lands on Tract C are eligible for this program and are on the final list of this year’s proposed transfers, with “minimal long-term revenue potential.” The state DNR has requested $15 million from the state legislature to return roughly 9,900 surface acres to the tribe. Per state policy, the state would retain the rights to any subsurface materials under these lands, even if the surface rights go to the tribe. The DNR would use the payment money to purchase new lands in place of the transferred trust lands, to continue supporting beneficiaries. Comparatively, Tract D, which courts confirmed is a part of the Yakama reservation, is still productively generating revenue and not eligible for the Trust Land Transfer program. The legislature could theoretically fund a direct transfer to compensate the DNR and its beneficiaries for the Tract D state trust lands, but that would be a hefty price tag. So, instead, the state has brought in the federal government to facilitate an exchange, given that it has more resources and holds so much land in the area. The DNR has identified federal lands off reservation that they want and now it’s a matter of negotiation, said Commissioner of Public Lands Hilary Franz.  “The reason this situation exists is because the federal government created a situation of injustice to the tribes. To right the situation doesn’t mean you create a wrong,” Franz said, explaining that giving those trust lands away without an exchange would unfairly take revenue away from schools and other beneficiaries. “It means, federal government, you made the wrong allocation of lands to the state for trust lands, when it should have gone to the tribe. Now, correct that … and you make the tribes whole and you make our schools whole.” Franz said that if the legislature doesn’t approve funding for the Tract C Trust Land Transfer — though she is confident they will — the DNR would likely approach it in the same way as Tract D, negotiating with the federal government for a direct transfer. Otherwise, the alternative would be the arduous process of amending the state constitution and federal Enabling Act. But, Franz said, that’s too hard. Hard, but not impossible. Section 11 of the 1889 Enabling Act, dealing with lands granted to support schools, has been amended eight times, most recently in 1970. Washington’s state constitution has been amended 109 times, one of the most recent in 2016 for a redistricting issue. The state legislature will decide whether or not to fund the Tract C trust land transfer in the spring of 2025. But no matter how the issue of trust lands is resolved between the Yakama Nation and Washington state, it sets a meaningful example for tribes on the 78 other reservations where trust lands exist. One cool morning last October, about 170 years after the Yakama treaty signing, a crowd of about 90 people gathered in a dusty clearing next to the Klickitat River on the southwest corner of the Yakama reservation, in Tract D. Cupped by pine-covered hillsides, they were there to commemorate the groundbreaking of long-awaited upgrades to the Klickitat Hatchery. On October 11, 2024, the Yakama Nation hosted a groundbreaking ceremony for updates to the Klickitat Hatchery. Seen here are Yakama staff, joined by Tribal Chairman Gerald Lewis (far left) and Tribal Councilman Jeremy Takala (far right). Maria Parazo Rose / Grist It had been run by the state until 2006, when it was turned over to the tribe; tribal members have managed it back to health, holding things together with duct tape and determination. Over the low rumbling of river water, representatives from the county, state, federal, and tribal governments praised the collaborative effort that had gone into restoring the hatchery. The tribe was also celebrating the forthcoming return of the land the hatchery is located on. On December 13, Washington state transferred the title to the 167 acres and all the hatchery facilities from the state Department of Fish and Wildlife, or DFW, to the Yakama Nation. Bill Sharp, coordinator for Yakama Nation Fisheries’ projects, has worked on environmental restoration projects for 35 years. He’s white, a non-tribal member. To him, navigating the title transfer with the DFW has been faster and easier than land transfers with the state DNR. The presence of state trust lands on the reservation, he said, is an insult to injury. “Can you just clean the slate, say, ‘Our bad, here it is, all back’? That’s how it should go,” Sharp said, about the state trust land return efforts. “But the way things were funded, and the easements and restrictions that white people put on top of that — those things just really get in the way of doing what’s right.” What is the right way to settle an injustice? Who is justice for? Rigdon, Blodgett, and other Yakama experts working on this issue know that land return is a long game, even on their own reservation. They’re in it for the very long haul, which means that each new challenge is just another day — and that every win, like with the hatchery, is cause for celebration.  “I’ve always had the opinion that you can never lose if you never stop trying,” said Sharp. “So as long as the Yakama are here, and they live and breathe, they’re going to keep fighting to protect the resources that sustain their lives. And we all benefit from that, everyone, whether you’re a tribal member or not.” Read Next Top 5 takeaways of our investigation into state trust lands Tristan Ahtone At the end of the ceremony, the faint smell of a warm, fresh salmon meal slipped into the air, prepared by Yakama staff for the festivities. After the closing speeches, the crowd moved like a wave, chattering about this and that while they waited in a winding line. A row of tables held trays of salad, salmon, bread, and grapes. Folks from state and federal organizations sat with their tribal counterparts, full plates in hand. The Klickitat County commissioner was there, her presence marking a fresh page in the tribal-county relationship.  Kids squirmed in plastic chairs before bolting across the grass to play between bites. The salmon was simple and smoky, well-salted. People ate what they wanted and took what they needed. Some came up for second helpings. Anyone could walk away with a heavy box of leftovers for a later meal. For a moment, at least, there was no competing for resources or space. There was enough to share. This story was produced with support from Renaissance Journalism’s 2024-2025 LaunchPad Fellowship for NextGen Journalists, and the Nova Institute for Health 2024 Media Fellowship. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A filing error put more than 90,000 acres of Yakama Nation land in the hands of Washington state on Dec 20, 2024.

Business
Climate
Food

Suggested Viewing

Voice of Vanilla

In the rainforests of Madagascar, vanilla offers hope to farmers hindered by the relentless tide of poverty and cyclones. How will the women responsible for vanilla cultivation weather the storms that threaten their livelihoods? Join us on this journey to uncover the truth behind one of the world’s most beloved spices and to support the women farmers at the heart of the vanilla industry.

Social Justice
Food
Business

The Story of a Forest

In 2004, a generation of activists arose in South Florida, carrying the passion of direct action groups like Earth First. and the deep analysis of the global justice movement that had swept the country in the preceding years. These activists sought local issues that exemplified the threats of corporate globalization. They stumbled upon a plan from biotech industry giants acting in collusion with the administration of then-Governor Jeb Bush to clear a vast swath of land in the Northeast Everglades of Florida to accommodate The Scripps Biotech Research Institute - And it was on. Over the next ten years, endless county zoning meetings were counter-balanced by dozens of civil disobedience arrests and a near-constant flow of news headlines about the battle: lawsuits, scandal, corruption, tree sits, endangered species, pranks, blockades, and a roller coaster of incremental victories followed by devastating losses for years on end. THE STORY OF A FOREST captures it all in a 1/2 hour documentary about the Palm Beach County Environmental Coalition (PBCEC) and Everglades Earth First!'s (EEF!) ten-plus year campaign to stop the Scripps Biotech development, with a focus on protecting biodiversity in the Briger forest and the Florida wetlands.

Activism
Forests
Business

Small Footprints: Crafting an Eco-Lodge in Wild Alaska

In 2008, a sustainable development project began in the middle of the Kenai Fjords of Alaska, 3 hours by boat from the nearest port of civilization. Told from the points of view of crew members, project coordinators and the Native Alaskan corporation that owns the land itself, the film is both a celebration of and a blueprint for sustainable construction, as well as an exciting battle against time and the elements deep within wild Alaska.

Sustainable
Business
Documentary

1948 and Counting

Reports on Costa Rica's ability to manage without a military since 1948, despite invasions based in Nicaragua. Addresses the role of private armies serving multinational corporations, and whether the country's civil guard is a military by another name. Places Costa Rica in the context of Central and Latin American populist struggles against US backed regimes in El Salvador, Chile, Panama, Nicaragua and Honduras. Touches on the colonial history and explores whether Costa Rica depends on US military backing, and whether it is able to maintain independence from the US.

Government
Business

Let There be Light

Genesis 1:3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. Taiwan was founded on agriculture in the early days. However, in the face of rapid urbanization, there was no time to build infrastructure such as sewage pipelines, and a large amount of sewage was discharged indiscriminately, causing severe water pollution. To connect domestic sewage to the water purification plant and turn it into water resources that can be continuously recycled, the sewage engineering team adopted a most humane "equation" to appease and compensate the residents disturbed by the project. They invited the residents to participate in the beautification design of the back alley, which was damaged by the engineering project, and hired old painters who have painted "Roman Holiday" and "Back to the Future" movie billboards, and new generation painters to create with colorful brushes. The colorful paintings make the originally dark, dirty, and smelly back alleys clean and bright, and people are more willing to enter the back alleys to make tea and chat, a secret paradise for locals is then created. Let’s walk into the back alleys and see how the light makers light up the back alleys with human touch and let the light penetrate the water, creating Formosa’s unique “Light Making Equation”. This action has been carried out since 2016 and will continue in the future.

Water
Business
Pollution

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.