Latest news with #UniversityofMontana
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Health
- Yahoo
Ethical questions swarm scientists after discovery that could wipe out pesky mosquitoes
Scientists have developed methods to wipe potentially disease-carrying mosquitoes off of the face of the Earth. But, should they? The implications of such a monumental call remain unknown and bioethicists say they are not 'in favor of remaking the world to suit human desires.' 'The eradication of the mosquito through a genetic technology would have the potential to create global eradication in a way that just felt a little risky,' Christopher Preston, a University of Montana environmental philosopher, recently told The Washington Post. However, we have the technology, which largely targets the female mosquitoes responsible for biting and spreading malaria, dengue, Zika, and other nasty pathogens. Using genetic tools, researchers can edit the genetic makeup of mosquitoes and make the females infertile. In January, scientists in Australia that they were able to alter male mosquitoes to produce venom proteins in their semen that can reduce the lifespan of females. This week, researchers at the University of Maryland said they have successfully created a 'sexually transmitted disease' that would deliver a deadly fungal infection to the females. 'It's essentially an arms race between the mosquitoes and us,' University of Maryland professor Raymond St. Leger said in a statement. 'Just as they keep adapting to what we create, we have to continuously develop new and creative ways to fight them.' The fungus is called Metarhizium. Sprayed on male mosquitoes, it works by producing neuroteoxins that kill when they are injected into a female mosquito. It is harmless to humans. 'The fungus additionally made infected mosquitoes less able to sense insecticides, and much more susceptible to them, so it's really a double blow against them,' St. Leger said. This could be great news in the fight against mosquito-borne illness. Last year, the rare but serious eastern equine encephalitis virus forced New York to declare an 'imminent threat,' a New Hampshire man died, and public parks and other areas closed in Massachusetts as the virus spread. This year, cities across the country have reported cases of West Nile virus, and authorities started spraying adulticide in Houston's Harris County. Malaria also continues to be a leading cause of preventable illness and death, resulting in 608,000 deaths across 85 countries in 2022. But, just how far should humans take the war against mosquitoes? It can be easy to overlook the role they play in our ecosystems. They are an important source of food for fish, frogs, and pollinators, including birds and bats. But, they are also pollinators themselves, and their primary food source is flower nectar — not blood. Of the more than 3,000 species on Earth, just 400 can transmit diseases to people, and most of them don't actually feed on humans at all, Yvonne-Marie Linton, research director at the Walter Reed Biosystematics Unit, told Smithsonian Magazine. Mosquitoes have been around buzzing around since dinosaurs roamed the Earth some 200 million years ago. Earth is currently in the middle of a human-fueled biodiversity crisis, including massive insect loss driven by agriculture and related pollution, in addition to climate change-driven disasters and other events. Without insects that pollinate billions of dollars in crops in North America, we'd have a lot less food and other products. Mosquitoes are one of the only species people have posited should be eliminated. Still, they are the world's deadliest animal. And, especially during the hot and wet summer months, the risk for disease is increasing. Human-caused climate change is creating more favorable conditions for mosquitoes, resulting in population expansion. That's especially true along U.S. coasts. But, even in droughts, they can be 'extra bitey.' 'It's believed that they alone, by transmitting disease, have killed half of all human beings who have ever lived,' St. Leger noted. 'Being able to eliminate mosquitoes quickly and effectively will save people all over the world.'
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Officials take bold steps to prevent grizzly bear encounters: 'Economic burden that comes with sharing landscapes with large carnivores'
Montana is home to a particularly important 8-foot, 800-pound keystone species that stakeholders are joining forces to safeguard while protecting ranches and humans too. According to early-May reporting from the state's NonStop Local, $2.25 million in federal funds will be invested in local organizations to help reduce dangerous and costly wildlife encounters. The omnivorous grizzlies have almost no natural predators except for humans. Their North American population began to decline rapidly when settlers colonized the West throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. For sport, for profit, and to protect growing livestock counts, grizzlies were hunted in droves. By 1975, they'd been almost entirely wiped out in the region, per the University of Montana's Grizzly Bear Recovery Program, and grizzlies were placed on the endangered species list in the contiguous United States. "Today they remain in only about 6% of their original range," according to the Center for Biological Diversity. "Just a few of the threats faced by these persecuted predators are loss of major food sources due to climate change, genetic isolation, and, primarily, increased human-caused mortality." Wildlife encounters are well-known to pose dangers to animals and to humans. Preventing such interactions — often exacerbated by human development pushing into animal habitats and by climate changes that force animals on the move — can help to keep everyone safe while mindful of both ecosystem balance and ranchers' bottom lines, as they worry for their livestock and livelihoods. It's certainly critical to protect an endangered species that, if gone, would throw the entire ecosystem out of order, but ranchers and homeowners have expressed intense frustration in managing grizzly encounters. "There's an economic burden that comes with sharing landscapes with large carnivores," Nathan Owens, policy director at Heart of the Rockies Initiative, told NonStop Local. Heart of the Rockies will be administering the $2.25 million in federal money that comes as an allocation from the Department of the Interior and the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The funding is set to support an effort unfolding over the course of three years and across 1.2 million acres "to support grizzly bear conflict prevention efforts like range riding, carcass pickup, electric fencing, bear resistant garbage infrastructure, and outreach and education efforts," according to Owens. Issues regarding grizzly bears have been contentious in Montana in the past. For example, a 2020 University of Montana survey found that about half of Montanans support enough hunting to achieve a population target, while 17% said grizzlies should never be hunted. And the Montana Free Press previously reported that, in 2018, Tribes in the state signed a formal letter in opposition to neighboring Wyoming's plans to initiate a hunting season for grizzly bears. Owens noted that the funds would be dispersed to multiple communities and groups across the state, including two Tribes. The announcement comes as some conservation organizations across the country have experienced uncertainty with federal funding in 2025. The Blackfoot Challenge, one of the groups set to help protect grizzlies and farmers in the region, faced a temporary freeze before it was resolved earlier this year. Should the government be paying people to hunt invasive species? Definitely Depends on the animal No way Just let people do it for free Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "That gives us the ability to continue on with our mission," Blackfoot Challenge executive director Seth Wilson told NonStop Local. "Until we knew more about our federal funds, we would only be able to construct one grizzly bear fence that would keep newborn livestock safe from grizzly bears. We're now able to do four fences this season." Plans for animal management that take into account the welfare of vulnerable species and the society built up around them can help to protect both, ensuring strong, biodiverse ecosystems and leading to a more environmentally friendly future. In addition to nurturing biodiversity in our own yards and neighborhoods, voicing support for pro-environment policies can make a difference. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Remember homeless Pennsylvania veterans this Memorial Day
The Fallen Soldier Memorial is located at the University of Montana in Missoula. (Tim Lambert/Pennsylvania Capital-Star) When I began teaching courses on homelessness and poverty at Gettysburg College more than 20 years ago, I regularly noted to my students that I often found common cause with a wide range of people from across the political spectrum when it came to seeking solutions and providing services for homeless veterans. While some people certainly still make the right noises in this regard, the current obsession with wiping the slate of the federal government clean and starting from scratch now is putting many veterans at-risk. Homelessness is a tragedy that affects far too many Americans, and the reality is that'[h]omelessness remains more common among veterans compared to non-veterans.' Veterans are especially vulnerable to a number of risk factors related to homelessness, including substance abuse, PTSD, mental health issues, low income, and economic instability. Unfortunately, veterans who fall into homelessness are also particularly prone to remaining unhoused, as research indicates that, '98% of homeless veterans have a chronic pattern of homelessness.' As the Pennsylvania Department of Military and Veterans Affairs notes in this regard: 'For some, taking off the uniform and acclimating to a non-military life comes with social challenges and can ultimately lead to hard times, such as being homeless. U.S. military veterans are estimated to make up a large portion – 11 percent – of homeless adults.' Although PTSD and related disorders certainly loom large amongst the risk factors for veteran homelessness, it is important to keep in mind that the number one reason for homelessness in America today is actually the lack of affordable housing. As reported in the Independent in its recent coverage of Elon Musk's baseless claim that 'the word 'homeless' is a 'lie' and 'a propaganda word,'' the reality in the United States today is that '[t]he primary driver of homelessness, particularly among families, is a lack of stable affordable housing, with evictions, overcrowded housing, domestic violence and job losses sending homeless families into shelters and onto the streets.' Currently, the curtailing of rental assistance seems poised to tip tens of thousands more Americans out of housing. Experts suggest that many of us are more vulnerable to such risks than we'd like to imagine, and veterans are especially so. Given this reality, it is particularly alarming that under the Trump Administration, the VA recently 'has ended a new mortgage-rescue program that so far has helped about 20,000 veterans avoid foreclosure and keep their homes.' As did the Obama Administration before him, Trump has claimed that he will end veteran homelessness. It is only fair to note that the Obama Administration had some successes in striving towards that goal. In this current environment, however, it is difficult to reconcile Trump's rhetoric in this regard with sweeping executive actions demolishing some of the key federal players in this effort. To cite one staggering recent example, '[t]he US Interagency Council on Homelessness, which helps coordinate federal housing aid to cities, was targeted for elimination by a Trump executive order in March.' Moreover, according to the New York Times, the president seeks to end permanent supportive housing for an estimated 300,000 people considered chronically homeless. Many are veterans. Veterans are more vulnerable than the general population to the sweeping demolishment of the federal government. This is not simply because the 'Department of Veterans Affairs is planning to cut 83,000 jobs, slashing employment by over 17% at the federal agency that provides health care for millions of veterans' It is also in part because 'nearly 30% of federal workers are veterans, half of whom are disabled. This means that veterans, who make up 6.1% of the U.S. population, are disproportionately affected by federal worker cuts.' Because the vast bulk of the VA workforce provides veteran healthcare, 'cuts to VA workers mean cuts to health care.' Since veterans as a group rely so heavily on Medicaid, cuts to that program disproportionately disadvantage veterans. Furthermore, because '[w]orking-age veterans face an elevated risk of experiencing food insecurity compared to their nonveteran peers,' cuts to food assistance programs also hit veterans harder than other groups. The news is not all bad, and in our own region in Pennsylvania, efforts to help house homeless Vets have been laudable and even inspiring. For example, a tiny home project for veterans experiencing homelessness opened last year in Harrisburg. In addition, the commonwealth offers VETConnect Services, and there are a number of local private organizations dedicated to helping veterans at risk of homelessness. This includes a dedicated veteran aspect of the 211 program, which allows those in need of services to dial 211 to find help. In the end, though, only on the national level can we find the resources to coordinate efforts and to tackle challenges on this scale. In any case, it is only reasonable to expect the federal government that recruited and ordered these veterans into harm's way to take the lead in seeking to offer them whatever services they need. I am a Pennsylvania Quaker, a member of the pacifist religious organization that founded this Commonwealth. Quakers do not embrace military service, to be sure, but we do embrace ideals of honor, service, and integrity, and we believe strongly in honoring social contracts. If someone feels moved by their conscience to perform military service and is true to their ideals, I do not condemn that person. Indeed, many such folks number amongst my closest friends, and even some of my family members. I believe that those who serve this country selflessly in any capacity deserve recognition and support for doing so, and not merely in terms of lip service. If a veteran's military experience results in the need for special accommodations, medical care, drug or alcohol rehabilitation, housing assistance, or similar services, I think that we should take special care to meet such needs. My own father, a proud veteran of the U.S. Army, died homeless in 1988. He was a chronic alcoholic and estranged from his family, so I am sure that there are those out there who will claim that he brought his fate upon himself. I have always maintained, however, that we can do better as a nation, and that civilized people care for the most vulnerable amongst the population without regard to blame or shame. I have spent much of my adult life trying my best to live this truth, through regular active service in my community, through educational opportunities for my students, and through leadership roles on boards and within service organizations. Veterans Day was established to remember those who have fallen in defense of this country. Let us also remember on that day those who have served with honor but have fallen on hard times. Christopher Fee has taught service-learning courses on homelessness, poverty, affordable housing, and rural education for over twenty years. Fee is Graeff Professor of English at Gettysburg College and a Member of the Eisenhower Institute College Advisory Board. Fee is a Member of Menallen Monthly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers). Fee is also Co-Clerk of the American Friends Service Committee Northeast Region.
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gianforte vetoes bills that would have limited executive, judicial privilege
Photo illustration by Getty Images. Gov. Greg Gianforte vetoed two bills respectively designed to make the executive and judicial branches of government more transparent to the public — but acknowledged the public's strong right to know in the Montana Constitution. In a veto letter, Gianforte also acknowledged his frustration with 'judicial activism.' House Bill 271 was aimed at ensuring transparency by the executive branch by limiting 'executive privilege,' or the governor's power to withhold specific government information. Senate Bill 40 would have required Montana Supreme Court deliberations to be recorded and, after a case closed, be made available to the public. Gianforte, a Republican, vetoed both bills on Friday using similar rationale, and proponents of HB 271, including the bill sponsor, soon pushed back against 'secret decisions' made by the executive branch. However, University of Montana law school faculty member Constance Van Kley said the rationales offer consistency, and she said members of the public don't lose any rights to information and remain free to request government documents. 'Fundamentally, what it reinforces is that … the existence of privileges from the right to know raises constitutional questions, and the scope of any privilege that is asserted against the right to know raises legal questions,' Van Kley said. In his veto letters, the governor said although the Montana Constitution 'contains some of the strongest — if not the strongest — rights to public information,' limitations exist. He said during the 1972 Montana Constitutional Convention, delegates acknowledged that privileges, 'such as judicial privilege,' shape the scope of the right to know, or allow for some information to be protected. Gianforte said legislators passed SB 40 'in response to rampant judicial activism,' and he understands and shares their 'deep frustration' and sees it 'as a threat to our constitutional order.' 'Time and time again, judges across Montana issue rulings that infringe on the Legislature's policymaking authority and a governor's ability to faithfully execute the laws,' Gianforte said in the letter. 'The effect of Senate Bill 40, however, will chill candor among justices against the public's interest and weaponize those discussions in future litigation. 'Legal arguments will no longer be properly focused on majority decisions of the court and discussion among justices may become less honest and robust.' Van Kley said the delegates in 1972 generally wanted openness in government, but with limits. 'At the Constitutional Convention, the delegates were really focused primarily on transparency and not exceptions to transparency,' Van Kley said. 'However, they did recognize that judicial deliberations were generally not open to the public already, and so that did seem to be on the delegates' minds as an exception to the transparency provision.' The governor used a similar argument in his veto of HB 271, although he also cited the Montana Supreme Court's order in O'Neill vs. Gianforte. In that case, a citizen and former government official, Jayson O'Neill, sued the Governor's Office after it would not provide him forms used to track legislation, citing executive privilege and the need for candor in decision-making. The Supreme Court found a gubernatorial privilege is 'necessary to the integrity of government,' but it also said it is not an absolute privilege, and the governor must meet 'a high bar' to keep information private. In the veto letter, the governor said HB 271 attempts to repeal a 'constitutional privilege,' and signing it into law would be contrary to the public interest. 'House Bill 271 categorically limits a governor's constitutional expectation of privacy where he is executing his constitutional duties,' Gianforte said in the letter. Democrat Rep. Ed Stafman of Bozeman sponsored the bill, and he said earlier this year that it would 'restore transparency and open government in the executive branch to what it has consistently been for at least 50 years.' In the earlier interview, Stafman also said Montana hadn't previously recognized executive privilege, the Supreme Court crafted a narrow decision based on common law, and the Legislature has the authority to overturn common law through statute, which his bill aimed to do. In a statement this week about the veto, Stafman said it allows a backslide in Montana's history of open government. 'Even as the judicial and legislative branches become more transparent, if we let the executive branch become the place where secret decisions are made and deals are cut, then that's where the public's constitutionally protected 'right to know' will die,' Stafman said. The Right to Know in Article II Section 9 of the Montana Constitution states the following: 'No person shall be deprived of the right to examine documents or to observe the deliberations of all public bodies or agencies of state government and its subdivisions, except in cases in which the demand of individual privacy clearly exceeds the merits of public disclosure.' House Minority Leader Katie Sullivan, D-Missoula, also said Montana's governor answers to the people, and previous governors, both Democrats and Republicans, have made documents available to the public. 'But Gov. Gianforte now sees himself above the law,' Sullivan said in a statement. 'He is hiding documents from the public, battling transparency requests in court, bending the rules, and making new ones, all to hide from the people. What is he hiding?' Van Kley said it would be difficult for other branches of government to claim privilege if HB 271 became law and was found to be constitutional. That's because, according to one view of privilege, it's reasonable to expect that privileges among branches 'should be roughly equivalent to each other,' said Van Kley, with the UM Alexander Blewett III School of Law. Van Kley argued on behalf of plaintiff O'Neill in front of the Montana Supreme Court, so would speak only generally about the Constitutional issues it raised when contacted by the Daily Montanan on Tuesday. In his veto letter, Gianforte discussed the same: 'The Legislature itself has legislative privilege. Senate Bill 40 upsets the separation of powers by eroding the privilege of one branch of government while retaining it in another.' Van Kley said the veto letter outlines a legitimate view of the separation of powers, and it is consistent with the veto letter for SB 40 which claims the judicial privilege is grounded in the separation of powers. The order from the Montana Supreme Court, however, said gubernatorial privilege is among the 'candor privileges,' such as those protecting the confidential relationship between a priest and churchgoer. The order said those privileges are rooted not in separation of powers but in the 'historical and practical need of society for candor between individuals and those from whom they are seeking counsel,' including government officials. Van Kley also said the vetoes take off the table any questions about the constitutionality of the bills, and she said a citizen can still request records and claim a constitutional right to examine documents in Montana. 'The veto is not going to privilege any documents that aren't already privileged,' Van Kley said. Now that a court ruling recognizes executive privilege 'to some degree,' Van Kley said she expects specific questions to emerge and end up litigated. In January 2025, the Montana Supreme Court directed the district court to do a private review of the documents O'Neill had requested to determine whether they were protected or could be released to the public. The case was filed in 2021 and is pending. Sen. Greg Hertz, R-Polson, sponsored SB 40, and he could not be reached for comment Tuesday by voicemail.
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
‘It's been 50 years': Bill to update public transit law awaits governor's signature
Mountain Line, Missoula's community bus service, provides zero-fare fixed-route bus and Paratransit service in and around Missoula and the University of Montana. (Courtesy photo) Right now, the City of Billings MET Transit buses can't serve nearby Lockwood because of a 1973 law. Legislation awaiting a decision by Gov. Greg Gianforte would change that, as well as an issue regarding transportation districts highlighted during the past few years in Bozeman. If signed, House Bill 764 would make changes to Montana's urban transportation districts and bus systems. Under current law, transit systems owned by a municipality can't serve communities outside the city limits. Legislators also used the bill as an opportunity to revisit laws surrounding urban transportation districts. The new law would open up cities with larger transportation systems — like Billings — to expand their reach outside town. Rusty Logan, an assistant director with the City of Billings who leads MET Transit, said the legislation could potentially lead to new routes. 'It allows the city to more openly negotiate inter-local agreements to provide regional transit service,' said Logan, who is also the president of the Montana Transit Association. 'As far as the urban transportation districts goes, the intention of the bill was to make it easier to establish an urban transportation district; and in saying 'easier,' just easier to get the vote on the ballot so that the voters could decide.' Currently, municipal bus routes can't go further than eight miles from city limits. The bill adds language allowing municipalities to exceed that mileage if funded by another state, federal or non-profit source. The bill was brought by Rep. Brian Close, a Bozeman Democrat, whose community was part of the reason the legislation was brought in the first place. 'It's been 50 years since you looked at these statutes,' Close said during a House hearing on the bill on March 4. 'And I think the statutes need just a small amount of reform.' The 2020 census put the Bozeman population at more than 50,000 people, an important milestone as they were now federally required to create a Metropolitan Planning Organization. It also opens up the city for increased federal funding, including for transportation. While the Bozeman area already had some transit services run by a non-profit, a new funding structure had to be created in order to continue receiving federal funding. Gallatin Valley Urban Transportation District was formed in the wake of the changes to Bozeman's population. Creation of the district required 20% of all registered voters in the boundaries of the proposed district to sign a petition to get it on the ballot. It was a drawn out process, said Sunshine Ross, who is the transit director at Gallatin Valley Urban Transportation District. 'A lot of effort, a lot of time, but it really did pay off,' Ross said. Gallatin County voters approved the district, with 79% voting yes. HB 764 will simplify the process by allowing a county commission to put creation of a transportation district directly on the ballot. 'It eliminates this really onerous threshold,' said Jordan Hess, who is the CEO of Mountain Line and a former city council member in Missoula. Gallatin Valley was the fifth transportation district in the state, which includes larger cities like Missoula and smaller ones like Glendive, which is served by Dawson Urban Transit. The bill also gave a clear definition of 'direct transportation service,' saying it was 1.5 miles from the nearest route used by 'a vehicle that provides general or special service to the public on a regular and continuing basis.' Clarity was needed in cases where a property owner wanted to get out of the boundaries of the transportation district, which can be used to generate funding through taxes. 'Our board has had to essentially define the term in statute by policy, since it is not defined in statute,' Hess said. 'We're happy to be in a situation. We're happy to be in an environment where that's clarified and we're not having to interpret unclear statutes.'
