You are here
Green News
South Africa’s top court blocks Shell’s offshore oil exploration right
After a five-year long legal battle, the Constitutional Court of South Africa has blocked Shell and local partner Impact Africa’s permit to explore for oil and gas off the country’s East Coast, in a landmark victory for local communities and civil society.
“Today’s judgment makes me feel very happy and proud that the ocean is not for profit for mining companies,” said East Coast resident and environmental campaigner Siyabonga Ndovela.
The verdict culminates a years-long process in which non-profits Sustaining the Wild Coast, Natural Justice, Greenpeace Africa, and others took legal action against Shell, Impact Africa and the South African government for failing to consult affected communities – a legal requirement in the country.
The Constitutional Court ruled that Shell and Impact Africa had not complied with resource governance law, had failed to meaningfully conduct public consultation and had failed to consider the impact on climate change, cultural rights, livelihoods and ecological harm.
The ruling references last year’s landmark advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice, which states that countries have a legal duty to prevent and repair damage to the climate system. The South African judges argued climate change “transcends borders” and that states’ obligations “must be understood within the broader framework of international law.”
“This case must also be understood against the backdrop of well-documented struggles by coastal communities to protect their land, marine resources and ways of life in the face of extractive activities that they believe threaten their very existence,” wrote Justice Narandran Kollapen.
Protesters march to the Constitutional Court in 2025 (Photo: Ihsaan Haffejee/GroundUp)The Constitutional Court found that the exploration right had been unlawfully granted by the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources.The ruling upholds a 2022 regional court decision against Shell and overturns a 2024 appeal that allowed the company to conduct fresh public consultations under the original exploration right. Today’s decision means the right, initially granted in 2014, must be set aside.
Celebrating the decision, Sherelee Odyar, oil and gas campaigner at Greenpeace Africa, told Climate Home News that the court confirmed “serious failures” in the awarding of exploration rights to Shell and Impact Africa, which “can not simply be corrected later”.
The Wild Coast is a biodiversity hotspot which has been conserved over generations by coastal communities who rely on the ocean and land. “Our land and sea are central to our livelihoods and our way of life. Over generations we have conserved them, and they have conserved us,” reads the founding statement in the case.
A Shell spokesperson said it noted the ruling, responding that “we are committed to responsible offshore exploration, meaningful stakeholder engagement and environmental stewardship.”
The Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources did not respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.
“Renewed strength” for communitiesThe ruling adds to a series of legal challenges brought by civil society groups against oil companies and the government as South Africa has expanded oil and gas development since 2014 under Operation Phakisa, a plan aimed at “unlocking the economic potential of the oceans”.
On the West Coast, Walter Steenkamp, Chair of Aukotowa Fisheries Cooperative, which is involved in a separate ongoing legal action against TotalEnergies, said that “today’s court case gave me renewed strength.”
The case could also set a precedent for future oil developments, said Alessandro Mazzi, legal governance researcher at the University of Wageningen. He added that the verdict “sends a strong signal to investors that where projects affect people’s land, livelihoods and environment, meaningful consultation and genuine ecological assessment are an integral part of responsible investment”.
Janet Solomon, coordinator of advocacy group Oceans not Oil, said that the Court’s emphasis on democratic participation, culture, livelihoods and the health of future generations in handing down the verdict signals a shift in jurisprudence on environmental governance, saying that this focus “may prove to be the judgment’s most enduring legacy.”
The post South Africa’s top court blocks Shell’s offshore oil exploration right appeared first on Climate Home News.
In Australia, a Home Battery Boom Has Helped Cut Wholesale Power Prices in Half
A little more than one year ago, Australia rolled out a program to heavily subsidize home batteries, part of a larger effort to make use of the huge volumes of solar energy that were going to waste. On Friday, officials announced that more than 500,000 batteries had been installed under the plan, helping to slash wholesale power prices roughly in half.
Burnham feels the heat
New coal mine openings slow as East Asian demand plateaus
The world saw the lowest amount of new coal mine capacity brought online for at least 10 years in 2025, according to a new report, as clean energy displaces coal for electricity generation in East Asia.
A report by Global Energy Monitor (GEM) found that new coal mine capacity declined by nearly 40% from 2024, the second consecutive year new mine capacity has hit a decade low. This represents an acceleration of a steady decline that began in 2019.
The slowdown in new coal mine openings was driven by China and Australia, where new additions fell by 44% and 96%, respectively. In China, the report said this was partly due to solar and wind displacing coal for electricity generation – although coal rebounded in the first half of 2026 – and the National Energy Administration implementing new rules to curb new mine openings.
In Australia, a 96% reduction in new coal mine capacity was driven by shrinking demand from the countries that import Australian coal for electricity, like Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, the report said.
This trend is likely to continue, according to GEM, as the Australian state of New South Wales recently banned new coal mines on undeveloped greenfield land. South Korea has promised to stop building coal-fired power plants that cannot capture and store the emissions produced. Meanwhile, Japan is pushing for a post-Fukushima nuclear revival to displace coal.
This Australian coal community is co-designing its own green future
Globally, growth in coal demand has slowed over the last few years and the International Energy Agency expects it to plateau through to 2030 because of the growth of renewable energy, nuclear and fossil gas.
Openings down, pipeline upBut while new coal mine openings fell, the amount of global coal mine capacity proposed increased by 11%. This was almost entirely driven by a spate of projects in the eastern Indian states of Jharkhand and Odisha.
“If built,” the GEM report says, “the projects would commit India – a country with no formal coal phaseout timeline – to years of coal expansion and would put a 1.5C-aligned transition away from fossil fuels farther out of reach”.
The Indian government says it needs to increase coal production to meet growing electricity demand from economic growth and from dealing with heatwaves. It plans to open more than 20 new coal mines to meet its coal production targets.
Because of energy security concerns, India is also aiming to produce chemicals with Indian coal rather than imported gas. China is also pursuing this strategy, although the Global Energy Monitor report said that Indian coal’s high ash content means the South Asian nation will find it harder to make chemicals from coal.
Nations agreed at COP26 five years ago to “phase down” coal power – a commitment that China and India successfully pushed to weaken from “phase out”. At COP28 in 2023, governments agreed to transition away from all fossil fuels in energy systems.
Since then, wealthy nations have partnered with coal-producing countries like South Africa, Vietnam and Indonesia on plans to transition from coal to clean energy. But, after preliminary talks, India and these governments did not agree a JETP.
The post New coal mine openings slow as East Asian demand plateaus appeared first on Climate Home News.
The EPA’s data on cancer risk from air pollution has gone dark
Darya Minovi was mapping pollution from medical sterilization plants across the country when many of the communities she was speaking to began asking the same question. The facilities emit ethylene oxide, a potent carcinogen, and those who lived nearby wanted to know how much the emissions were increasing their cancer risk. She turned to data compiled by the Environmental Protection Agency to find out.
The resulting maps, published in 2023 by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit where Minovi is a researcher, revealed that more than 14 million people lived in a 5-mile radius of ethylene oxide-emitting facilities. Crucially, the map highlighted 23 sterilization facilities that the EPA had found emit ethylene oxide at levels that definitively contribute to elevated cancer risk. The project helped raise awareness and was used to push the government to tighten limits on ethylene oxide emissions.
But now, the cancer risk data that made Minovi’s analysis possible has quietly gone offline. After more than two decades of sharing this information with the public, the Environmental Protection Agency has omitted cancer risk estimates from its latest update to national air pollution data. The agency is continuing to release raw pollution figures, but it is no longer providing information on the additional cancer risk that the emissions cause. It has also not updated its searchable U.S. map of cancer risk from air pollution with the most recent data.
The risk assessments are routinely used by communities to understand the effects of the pollution in their neighborhoods, as well as by journalists and nonprofits to inform the public and hold polluters accountable. Withholding this information would shift the burden of interpreting pollution data — a technically demanding task requiring specialized experience and an understanding of EPA protocols — onto the public, Minovi said, making it harder for communities to access this vital public health information.
“At the end of the day, the people who are living in communities with concentrated sources of pollution are frankly the ones to lose,” she said. “They end up caught in a bureaucratic and political tug of war, and they’re not being protected as they should be.”
An aerial view of Louisiana’s “Cancer Alley,” an 85-mile stretch of land along the Mississippi River with hundreds of industrial facilities that pose a higher risk of cancer for local residents. Giles Clarke / Getty ImagesThe Trump administration has made it significantly more difficult to access environmental data. So far, the administration has modified or removed nearly 2,000 webpages and datasets on science, climate, and environmental topics. Last year, the EPA discontinued a tool that allowed the public to search its inventory of facilities that handle large volumes of hazardous substances by ZIP code. It also shut down an environmental justice screening tool known as EJScreen, which was the EPA’s flagship tool for tracking environmental hazards across the United States and mapped industrial pollution hot spots alongside demographic data, revealing which communities face the greatest health risks. And some of the agency’s webpages about pollutants, like ethylene oxide, have been modified to remove information about cancer risks and emphasize their industrial usefulness.
Inyang Uwak, a research and policy director for Air Alliance Houston, a nonprofit advocacy group in Texas, said that the administration’s cuts tend to prioritize industries at the expense of public health.
“It’s unfortunate because this data is highly useful to organizations such as ours that use it,” she said, adding that scientists and policymakers also need the data to make informed decisions. “It’s a disservice to public health in general.”
Left: The Environmental Protection Agency’s webpage on ethylene oxide in 2024. Right: The updated page in 2026, which removes mentions of health risks and emphasizes the carcinogen’s industrial usefulness. Grist / EPA.govThe EPA has been publishing the cancer risk data periodically since 2002 as part of a program called the Air Toxics Screening Assessment, which details the concentrations of dozens of toxic pollutants across the country down to the census block level. The agency began releasing the data on an annual basis in 2022, but the information is typically several years out of date because of the time required to compile the information. As factories and other polluting facilities are built, shut down, or expand, local pollution levels can change dramatically. The yearly updates to the cancer risk data provided communities with the most current information available about those changes.
Had the updates arrived on schedule this year, the agency would have released data on the cancer risk from emissions in 2022. Instead, the most recent update was published a year late and represents emissions data from 2021.
It was only made available on a public-facing webpage this summer after Tai Lung, a senior advisor for federal data policy at the Federation for American Scientists, reached out to the agency. Lung had previously worked at the agency for more than a decade as the lead of EJScreen, which also used the data, before the Trump administration suspended him alongside 170 colleagues.
Carolyn Holran, an EPA spokesperson, told Grist that the agency “will continue posting the annual nationwide air toxics emissions and concentrations data when it becomes available,” but did not address the missing cancer risk data. Holran also did not answer Grist’s questions about why it did not release the cancer data this year and whether the agency is still making this calculation internally.
“EPA is committed to fulfilling our core mission of protecting human health and the environment and ensuring clean air for all Americans, while following gold standard science,” she said.
Lung said the agency’s decision will make it harder for the public to understand how pollution affects their health. “So now we’re just sharing this raw data, which really means nothing to anybody,” he said.
Read more about ethylene oxide Breast cancer, dizziness, headaches: El Paso residents ask if a warehouse’s toxic emissions are to blame Naveena Sadasivam & Diego Mendoza-MoyersThe United States has one of the highest cancer incidence rates in the world. Nearly 40 percent of all Americans will receive a cancer diagnosis at some point in their life, and more than 2 million new cases are diagnosed each year. Living near industrial sources of certain pollutants, like benzene, formaldehyde, and ethylene oxide, can increase a person’s chances of developing cancer. Louisiana’s so-called “Cancer Alley,” neighborhoods near the Houston Ship Channel, and the southeast side of Chicago are all home to a concentration of industrial operations and have become cancer hotspots.
Cancer risk assessments are at the core of the regulatory work that the EPA does. The EPA has long set “acceptable thresholds” for how much exposure to industrial pollution is allowed in an area. The agency’s generally follows limits of one additional cancer case per 10,000 people exposed over their lifetime. (The agency has also said that cancer exposure would ideally be far lower, at one in a million.) When a new polluting facility applies for a permit or when the agency considers new rulemaking, it assesses whether the change will raise the cancer risk in the area above this threshold.
Many of the administration’s regulatory changes fall into one of two patterns, said Denice Ross, director of the Data Policy Institute at the Federation of American Scientists and a former U.S. chief data scientist during the Biden administration.
An Earth Day rally outside the EPA offices in Ann Arbor, Michigan, in 2025.Jeff Kowalsky / AFP via Getty Images Protesters rally against a global energy conference in Houston earlier this year. Ronaldo Schemidt / AFP via Getty Images
The first is the deliberate removal of data that conflicts with the administration’s priorities, or casts its policies in an unfavorable light. Information and projects that focused on diversity, social justice, gender, and climate issues were among the first to disappear, she said.
The second trend is data being lost as a consequence of the sweeping funding and staffing cuts to scientific research at agencies and institutions. There is now more red tape and political approval needed to accomplish tasks that were once routine, she said.
The services that agencies provide “have historically been invisible infrastructure,” Ross said. “There’re so many things that we take for granted about federal data in our lives, and the people aren’t taking that for granted anymore.”
Some of these cuts contradict President Donald Trump’s own policies. In 2019, during his first term in office, Trump signed the OPEN Government Data Act, a law that established government-wide requirements to make federal data more useful and accessible to the public. Federal law also requires agencies to provide adequate notice when substantially changing or ending significant sources of information, such as the Air Toxics Assessment. But many of the recent changes are “just sort of quietly happening behind the scenes,” Ross said. “And if you don’t know where to look, you won’t find it.”
Read more about ethylene oxide Trump EPA moves to repeal regulation of cancer-linked chemical ethylene oxide Naveena SadasivamRecently, some organizations have begun preserving lost EPA tools, like EJScreen, by recreating them or releasing unofficial copies. But these versions still rely on updates to federal data and do not carry the same authority as government assessments. Many communities also don’t have access to the expertise or training necessary to interpret raw EPA data, said Elizabeth Bechard, a public health manager at Moms Clean Air Force, a nonprofit advocacy organization. The group often uses EPA data to equip families fighting against polluting industries in their communities with the data they need. Ending the cancer risk assessment, Bechard said, will make it harder for people to get involved.
“The public deserves to have that information about that risk so that they can be equipped to push back,” she said. “We’re trying to protect people. It’s not just a math equation.”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The EPA’s data on cancer risk from air pollution has gone dark on Aug 14, 2026.
Congress may kill the federal heat rule before OSHA can
July was the hottest month on record in the United States, with three heat domes — slow-moving, high-pressure systems that trap heat and humidity in place — afflicting large swaths of the country. The most recent of these contributed to an 18-day extreme heat warning in Phoenix, Arizona, the state’s second-longest stretch on record. Yet, in the face of these extreme heat events, representatives in Congress last month advanced a bill that would block the nation’s workplace regulator from finalizing a rule to protect workers from heat stress. What gives?
H.R. 6213 was introduced last year by Representative Mark Messmer from Indiana, who celebrated the House Committee on Education and the Workforce’s recent vote in support of the legislation. The bill seeks to undermine a proposed federal rule that has been languishing under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA. The rule — which would ensure workers have access to rest, shade, and water on the job — was drafted under the Biden administration. Messmer has described the proposed rule as “unnecessary,” saying it would present a burden to employers.
In response to a request for comment, the communications director for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, Audra McGeorge, did not share a timeline for a full vote on the bill. “The Committee doesn’t control the Floor schedule,” she said. But labor advocates are nevertheless alarmed by the progress H.R. 6213 has made, especially at a time of record-breaking summer temperatures.
“The passage of this bill would set a terrible precedent,” said Juanita Constible, a senior advocate on environmental health at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “It signals a shift away from our current deliberate, data-driven process to kind of a Wild West, where Congress decides whether workers are at risk or not. And I don’t think that’s its role.”
Since OSHA first went public with its proposed rule on preventing heat illness and injury in 2024, the agency has been through multiple comment periods, including public hearings. Experts say the proposed rule’s requirements are relatively straightforward and commonsense. Objections tend to come from pro-business groups, which argue that such regulation would be onerous, stifle growth, and cost too much money. But advocates like Charlotte Brody, vice president of health initiatives at the BlueGreen Alliance, insist that “the OSHA rule, like most OSHA rules, is based on good science.”
For example, the proposed rule would require employers to develop safety plans for workers that would kick in when the heat index reaches 80 degrees Fahrenheit, the point beyond which the vast majority of heat deaths in the workplace occur. (The heat index, which takes into account humidity as well as air temperature, is sometimes referred to as the “feels like” temperature.) When the heat index surpasses 90 degrees, additional measures would then be required. The rule would also instruct employers to create plans to acclimatize workers to laboring under extreme heat. As Brody noted, 3 out of 4 occupational heat deaths happen within the first week of work.
Read Next The climate movement gave this Texas tribe millions and a global platform. No one checked its story. Tristan AhtoneThe vote in the Republican-controlled committee fell along party lines. In a statement to Grist, Representative Adelita Grijalva, a Democrat from Arizona, argued that H.R 6213 erases “the progress we’ve made to establish one, uniform national heat standard,” she added. Before being elected to Congress last year, Grijalva spearheaded a heat safety ordinance for Pima County, Arizona — a first of its kind in the state — while serving on the Pima County Board of Supervisors. Representative Mark DeSaulnier, a Democrat from California, referred to the outcome of the vote as “just another example of how the balance of power between capital and labor has become dangerously skewed in this country, increasingly favoring the interests of big corporations over the safety of workers.”
In a press release, Messmer stated a federal rule as “rigid” and “one-size-fits-all” as the Biden-era standard is redundant when states can pass and enforce their own workplace safety regulations. But that isn’t necessarily true. Texas and Florida, for example, have preempted municipalities within their states to create standards that would keep workers safe from heat illness and injury. Representatives for Representative Messmer did not respond to a request for comment.
Texas and Florida notwithstanding, Constible says, the fight to ensure worker safety during extreme heat has shifted to the state level. Virginia, for example, recently kicked off its own rule-making process on this issue. Unions and labor groups also have an important role to play, she added.
“At the state level, they’re hearing loud and clear from workers that it’s dangerous and scary out there and that they should be doing something about it,” Constible said. “Certainly the hot weather we’ve had the last two years has helped, I think, change hearts and minds on this issue.”
Legal experts say it is surprising that Congress would move to prohibit OSHA from enacting a rule that hasn’t even been finalized yet. In fact, OSHA had already indicated the agency was pivoting away from the Biden-era heat rule and would publish a supplemental proposal toward the end of this year. As Jordan Barab, a former OSHA deputy assistant secretary, noted on his blog, a supplemental proposed rule is used when OSHA seeks to make “significant substantive changes” to an original proposal. Representatives for OSHA did not respond to a request for comment.
“It’s unusual, I would say,” said Romany M. Webb, deputy director at the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. “It would not be beyond the Congress’ authority to do something like this. It just doesn’t normally do this.”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Congress may kill the federal heat rule before OSHA can on Aug 14, 2026.
Unions demand laws on maximum work temperatures
We Are Water: Metaphor As a Tool for Environmental Policies Communication
On Sept. 16, 2025, an estimated 100,000 people flooded the streets of Cuenca, Ecuador’s third-most populous city, in one of the largest environmental mobilizations in the country’s recent history. Protesters marched under a simple slogan: “We are water.”
The demonstration was aimed at stopping mining projects in Quimsacocha, a fragile, high-altitude ecosystem that supplies water to hundreds of thousands of people across southern Ecuador. But beneath the immediate conflict over mining lies a deeper struggle over how people understand their relationship with the natural world.
For decades Ecuador has been at the center of a global experiment. In 2008 it became the first country in the world to recognize the Rights of Nature in its Constitution, transforming ideas rooted in Indigenous cosmologies into enforceable legal principles. Yet translating those ideas into political reality has proven far more difficult than writing them into law.
To understand how environmental movements bridge radically different worldviews — from Indigenous understandings of territory to the language of constitutional law, science, and public policy — I spoke with David Fajardo Torres, an environmental activist, lawyer, and member of Yasunidos, a movement defending Ecuador’s ecosystems from extractive industries.
Our conversation explored how narratives shape environmental conflicts, why metaphors such as “We are water” can mobilize entire communities, and what Ecuador’s experience reveals about the challenges of communicating across competing visions of nature, development, and progress.
This interview was conducted during a research visit in Ecuador in November 2025, carried out as part of the research field work for a Ph.D. dissertation in philosophy and social communication.
Environmental movements often struggle to turn complex ecological issues into stories that people can relate to. Yet in Cuenca the slogan “We are water” helped mobilize more than 100,000 people. What makes that metaphor so powerful?
In Cuenca one of our most powerful narratives connects the city — not merely as an urban center, but as a territory shaped by a long and ancient history — to water. We are water people. That idea has become the central metaphor that unites communities and guides our resistance to mining projects.
These projects threaten the páramos, the high-altitude Andean ecosystems that serve as natural water reservoirs. The páramos regulate water flows, sustain extraordinary biodiversity, and supply freshwater not only to Cuenca, but also to the Amazon basin and Ecuador’s Pacific coast.
El Cajas National Park is a high-altitude wetland area with many lakes, streams, and páramo ecosystems that store and filter water. Photo by Alice Deliau.For us the phrase “We are water” is both symbolic and literal. Human beings are made largely of water, but the expression goes beyond biology. It reflects how we understand ourselves: as part of rivers, lakes, forests, and páramos rather than separate from them. It allows us to connect three dimensions of Cuenca at once — Cuenca as a city, Cuenca as a territory, and Cuenca as an ecosystem.
This narrative has proven remarkably effective. During the mass mobilization in September, many people referred to the protest as Cuenca’s Fifth River, a reference to the city’s historic nickname, Santa Ana de los Cuatro Ríos — the City of Four Rivers. The metaphor captured something deeper than political opposition to mining. It expressed a biocultural identity in which water is not merely a resource but a defining part of who we are. Without its rivers, Cuenca would not exist.
On Sept. 16, 2025, an estimated 100,000 people flooded the streets of Cuenca with the message “Kimsa cocha no se toca” (“Quimsacocha Is Not to Be Touched”), uniting communities to protect one of Ecuador’s most important water sources from pollution from mining activities. Photo by Alice Deliau.Cuenca’s identity is rooted in conflict between nature and industry?
Cuenca was founded three times: first by the Cañari people, then by the Incas, and later by the Spanish colonizers. Despite these very different civilizations, all three settlements shared one essential foundation: water.
The valley is crossed by four rivers and countless smaller waterways known as quebradas, which remain just as important to the region’s ecological health. Water has shaped every chapter of Cuenca’s history and every layer of its identity.
This is not a new conflict. As early as the colonial period, local authorities faced a choice between gold and water. Extracting mineral wealth often threatened the water sources on which communities depended. Time and again, Cuenca chose water.
That choice continues today. For more than three decades, local communities have defended water sources in areas such as Quimsacocha and Río Blanco against mining projects, gradually building support far beyond rural communities and into the city itself.
In 2021 nearly 80% of voters in a local referendum supported a ban on mining in the páramos that supply water to the region. Four years later, tens of thousands of people returned to the streets to reaffirm that decision. For us this is not simply an environmental debate. Water remains the foundation of our identity, and defending it means defending the future of Cuenca itself.
Cuenca, Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception. During the mass mobilization in September 2025, many people referred to the protest as Cuenca’s Fifth River, a reference to the city’s historic, colonial nickname, Santa Ana de los Cuatro Ríos — the City of Four Rivers. Photo by Alice Deliau.One of the recurring tensions in environmental politics is whether nature should be protected because it serves human needs (anthropocentric view), or because it possesses intrinsic value and rights of its own (biocentric). Is this a real conflict, or are we dealing with different ways of understanding the same relationship between humans and nature?
That’s a very good question. In Ecuador we are increasingly realizing that it is impossible to fulfill human rights without also respecting the rights of nature. Most human rights ultimately depend on healthy ecosystems.
If we destroy the ecosystems on which we depend, we undermine the very conditions that make a dignified life possible. For us, that is the central horizon: living with dignity.
This idea is deeply connected to the philosophy of Sumak Kawsay. It is often translated as “good living,” but that translation is incomplete. A better interpretation would be vivir en plenitud — living in fullness or living in harmony. At its core, Sumak Kawsay is about flourishing alongside nature, not apart from it.
From this perspective, there is no fundamental separation between humanity and nature. We are one species within a much larger web of life. Ecology, after all, is the sum of the relationships that sustain life on this planet. Every species, every ecosystem, plays a role within that network.
The problem is that modern capitalist societies have encouraged us to see not only a distinction between humans and nature, but a hierarchy. Humans are placed at the top, while nature is reduced to an object that exists to serve our needs.
You mentioned anthropocentrism and biocentrism. In Ecuador, however, we increasingly speak about ecocentrism. Ecocentrism shifts the focus away from individual actors — whether humans or nature — and toward the relationships that connect them. It is not about separating humanity from nature, but about understanding the complex web of relationships that makes life possible.
Scientific concepts such as ecology increasingly emphasize relationships, ideas that seem to resonate with many Indigenous worldviews. Can scientific language serve as a bridge between Indigenous knowledge and the modern industrial world?
It can, and I think it is one of the keys — but not the only one. In many cases Western science is only now beginning to understand ideas that Indigenous peoples have lived with for centuries: the importance of relationships, diversity, and interdependence. The difference is that modern science often seeks universal explanations, a single framework capable of describing the world as a whole.
Indigenous worldviews tend to operate differently. They do not necessarily aspire to explain everything through one universal lens. Even among Indigenous peoples, there is enormous diversity. The Shuar and the Amazonian Kichwa, for example, have distinct ways of understanding the world.
For the Shuar, the forest is not an external environment but a community to which they belong. The Amazon is so rich and biodiverse that it provides everything necessary for life. Because they see themselves as part of that living system, the goal is not endless accumulation or growth but maintaining the relationships that sustain life.
Mining companies often argue that modern science allows them to extract resources responsibly. They present environmental studies and technical expertise as evidence that mining can coexist with ecological protection. How persuasive is that narrative?
One of the biggest mistakes is to focus only on what can be measured. Statistics and technical reports are important, but they never tell the whole story.
In Ecuador we work with a concept known as the dialogue of knowledges — a conversation between different ways of understanding the world. This idea is reflected in our Constitution, particularly in the articles recognizing the Rights of Nature.
Take the concept of Pachamama. It is often translated as “Mother Earth,” but that translation is incomplete. Pacha refers not only to the Earth, but to the space-time in which life unfolds — the Earth, the stars, the sun, the moon, and the cycles that connect them. Mama means mother. In that sense, Pachamama is closer to a living cosmos than to a simple environmental concept.
Nature, by contrast, is a concept that emphasizes relationships. Those relationships are not confined to the planet itself. Life on Earth depends on the sun, the moon, and countless natural cycles that can be observed scientifically — from the tides to seasonal rhythms. In Ecuador’s Constitution, Pachamama and nature are treated as equivalent concepts, allowing us to defend the Rights of Nature through both scientific and Indigenous knowledge.
As a lawyer specializing in the Rights of Nature, I build cases using multiple forms of knowledge. We rely on science, Indigenous knowledge, and the knowledge of rural and peasant communities, all of which are essential for understanding and defending ecosystems.
The problem is that many mining companies rely on a very narrow understanding of science. Their science is designed primarily to facilitate extraction and economic growth. It leaves little room for dialogue between different ways of knowing.
I am not criticizing science itself. There is a science that seeks to understand nature, question its own assumptions, and engage with other forms of knowledge. That kind of science is indispensable. But there is also a science that serves capital, markets, and extractive industries. The challenge is to distinguish between the two.
For us, the Rights of Nature are possible only through a genuine dialogue between scientific and Indigenous knowledge. Otherwise we risk reducing Pachamama to a slogan or falling into simplistic narratives about nature that fail to address the complexity of the living world.
Rivers Puyo and Pastaza, November 2025. Puyo and Pastaza rivers support Amazonian aquatic ecosystems: provide habitats for fish, amphibians, insects, and riverside plants. They also help maintain rainforest biodiversity, but are sensitive to pollution, deforestation, and urban growth. Photo by Alice Deliau.What do you mean by the narrow narrative of Pachamamismo?
For us, Pachamamismo can become a shallow narrative when it reduces complex realities to slogans. Much of the contemporary discourse around Pachamama risks becoming symbolic rather than transformative.
To challenge the narratives of mining companies and extractive industries, we need something deeper: a genuine dialogue between different forms of knowledge. And when I speak of science, I do not mean only biology or physics. I also mean anthropology, sociology, law, and other disciplines. Indigenous peoples, too, possess their own systems of knowledge, law, and social organization. What matters is the conversation between them.
This is important because knowledge itself is never fixed. What a society considers rational, scientific, or legitimate changes over time. The challenge is not to replace one worldview with another, but to create a dialogue between them.
At the heart of the conflict over mining and extractivism lies a struggle between two competing visions of development. One assumes that development follows a universal path, with nature treated primarily as a resource and humans placed above it. The other begins from a different premise: that humans are part of nature and that development should strengthen, rather than undermine, the ecological relationships on which life depends.
For us the key question is not whether development should occur, but what role human societies should play within the ecosystems they inhabit. The answer will be different in every territory. The ecological realities of Cuenca are not the same as those of Poland, just as their histories and relationships with nature are different.
In Cuenca our responsibility is to protect water sources, páramos, rivers, and lakes. That requires adapting our institutions and planning systems to ecological realities rather than forcing ecosystems to adapt to economic demands.
Today, we have powerful tools that help us think this way. The Ecosystem Approach developed by the IUCN and the concept of planetary boundaries developed by the Stockholm Resilience Centre both remind us that human societies operate within ecological limits. Those limits are not obstacles to development; they are the conditions that make life possible.
Republish this article for free! Read our reprint policy.The post We Are Water: Metaphor As a Tool for Environmental Policies Communication appeared first on The Revelator.
Will the world’s drying lands get relief from COP17 in Mongolia?
Starting on Monday, about 10,000 government negotiators, scientists, journalists and campaigners will gather at a purpose-built venue in a national park in Mongolia’s capital Ulaanbaatar to discuss how to stop land turning into desert as the world warms.
Drought is currently sweeping much of the Northern hemisphere, leaving normally green urban parks looking like dry savannah, causing crops to fail, food prices to rise and billions to be shaved off economic output.
On Wednesday, Britain’s prime minister chaired an emergency meeting of the government’s Cobra committee. These are usually reserved for wars, terrorist attacks, riots and pandemics – but this one was on the extreme heat and drought the UK has been suffering since May.
With many countries facing far worse with fewer resources than the UK, the issues to be discussed at the UN’s COP17 summit in Mongolia – often overlooked – should be nearer the top of policy-makers minds.
But what is COP17? What will be decided and announced there over the next two weeks? How does it relate to climate change and how will it help restore the lands on which we all rely for our food, water and other essential resources? Climate Home News explains all below.
What is COP17?It is the conference of parties (COP) to the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). The parties are 196 governments, which includes all of the countries recognised by the UN.
The convention was conceived at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, at the same time as the other two larger “Rio trio” conventions on climate and biodiversity.
While the climate convention’s COP takes place every year, the UNCCD COP happens only once every two years. COP17 will be its seventeenth gathering.
Negotiators at COP16 in Riyadh (Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou) What is desertification?It is the process by which land degrades and becomes more like a desert, making it harder – and sometimes impossible – to grow crops or graze livestock there.
Climate change and other human activities – like excessive irrigation which depletes ground water – are making this process worse, causing poverty, hunger, health problems, forced migration and loss of species.
It’s a widespread problem. The UN estimates that half a billion people live within areas that have experienced desertification since the 1980s and that two-fifths of the world’s land is degraded.
What has it got to do with climate change?The planet’s climate is heating up, mainly due to humans burning fossil fuels, and drying out its land. This kills plants and exposes the soil which can then be blown away by wind and washed away by water.
Without a top layer of soil, plants struggle to grow again and the land gets closer to being a desert. So combating desertification is a way of adapting to climate change.
It is also a way of lessening the pace of climate change, as land degradation releases carbon dioxide previously stored in healthy soils and plants.
What will be negotiated at COP17?The main issue is what form a new initiative to tackle drought could take. The last COP saw Africa push hard for this to be a protocol – a kind of binding sub-treaty to the UNCCD.
But the US, Europe, Argentina and others argued that would take too long to set up, cost too much and take money away from what can be spent on the ground. They prefer a legally weaker alternative – a framework instead of a protocol.
Negotiations went late into the last night of talks in Riyadh, with the Saudis hosting informal consultations, but eventually governments had to agree to disagree and pick up talks again in Ulaanbaatar.
As Earth dries out, countries fail to reach drought agreement
Governments will also negotiate a new policy on protecting rangelands and pastoralists from degradation. Rangelands are areas where animals graze. They cover around half the Earth’s land and include almost everything other than forest, deserts, farms, glaciers and cities. Pastoralists are people who herd animals on these rangelands, often moving from place to place to find fresh pasture.
COP17 host country Mongolia has a lot of both – and pushed successfully for the UN to declare 2026 the International Year of Rangelands and Pastoralists. It is keen to agree a decision at COP17 bringing those issues more to the forefront of the UNCCD.
Negotiators will also debate the UNCCD’s post-2030 strategic framework, which they hope to adopt at COP18 in 2028. Campaign groups like the World Wildlife Fund want a stronger focus on biodiversity and nature-positive food systems.
What will happen when?The COP will formally open with a ceremony on Monday August 17, followed by opening statements by governments and the adoption of the agenda.
Negotiations will begin, mostly behind closed doors for two weeks until the closing plenaries on Friday August 28.
While talks rumble on in the background, the second week will see senior government representatives including ministers get involved, with a “high-level segment” running from August 24-26.
A delegate at COP16 in Riyadh (Photo: IISD/ENB | Anastasia Rodopoulou)They will discuss issues like drought resilience, finance and pastoralist communities. This is likely to be when any announcements – of new funding, for instance – are made.
On Monday August 24, there will also be an open dialogue between government officials and civil society members. Here, local practitioners are likely to share stories of how they are helping their communities reverse land degradation. UNCCD prides itself on being a bottom-up convention.
Unlike climate COPs, which often end a day or two over time, UNCCD COPs usually finish on the evening of their last day and – while they have gone late into the night – have never run into the next day.
What else should we watch out for?At the last COP two years ago, host Saudi Arabia led the creation of an initiative called the Riyadh Global Drought Resilience Partnership to help 80 of the poorest nations deal with drought.
It received $12 billion in pledges, mainly from Gulf-based development finance institutions. Saudi Arabia is expected to report back on whether these pledges have been delivered and how the money will reach those in need now.
There are also hopes that governments will announce financial support for Mongolia’s Rangelands Flagship Initiative, which aims to mobilise investment in projects to fight land degradation.
Who will preside over COP17?While the last five and the next two climate COPs have been or will be presided over by men, COP17 will be woman-led with Mongolia’s foreign minister, Battsetseg Batmunkh, as president.
Mongolia’s foreign minister and COP17 president Battsetseg Batmunkh (Photo: Uugansukh Byamba)This will also be the first COP for the UNCCD’s new executive director Yasmin Fouad. Before being appointed environment minister in her native Egypt, Fouad was a scientist and lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s special report on desertification. She played a key role at the COP27 climate summit in Egypt in 2022.
Although Saudi Arabia’s UNCCD COP presidency is ending, the Gulf power house will likely continue to be influential. It has supported the COP financially as part of the Riyadh-Ulaanbaatar action agenda and will be following up on initiatives announced two years ago.
While Saudi Arabia is often blamed for obstructing progress at climate talks, as a desert nation it is generally thought to have played a constructive role at UNCCD COPs.
What are the negotiating dynamics?The UNCCD has six main negotiating groups: Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean, the Northern Mediterranean, Central and Eastern Europe, and developed donor countries. Governments can also speak in their own capacities.
While divisions between the Global North and Global South do exist at UNCCD COPs, they are not as stark as at climate COPs. The Global South’s umbrella group – the G77 and China – usually only speaks on finance issues, on which developing countries tend to be united.
Civil society groups are present but not as vocal or as confrontational as at climate COPs. There are generally no protests and campaigners tend to try to hold governments accountable more quietly. There are likely to be far fewer journalists than at climate COPs too.
What role will the US play?While the US has left the UN’s climate convention, it remains in the UNCCD and is expected to bring a delegation of officials from its departments of agriculture and state. It is likely to resist any renewed push from Africa for a drought protocol.
The post Will the world’s drying lands get relief from COP17 in Mongolia? appeared first on Climate Home News.
A Bicycle Journey Across Brazil to Find a Vanishing Savanna
In “Here There Was Cerrado” — the Second-Place Winner of the 2026 Yale Environment 360 Film Contest — Natascha Otoya shows how industrial farms are plowing up the Brazilian savanna, changing the flow of water, and skewing human memory of the landscape.
The climate movement gave this Texas tribe millions and a global platform. No one checked its story.
In May of 2017, Juan Mancias became an overnight sensation in France. Standing over 6 feet tall with a mane of salt-and-pepper hair, a medicine wheel-emblazoned ribbon shirt, beaded belt, and feathered medallion bearing the seal of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, he was conspicuous on the streets of Paris, and he had a message: French banks were financing the desecration of sacred Native lands and burial sites. They were, he said, aiding in the ongoing ethnic cleansing of Indigenous people in Texas through their support of natural gas pipelines and export terminals.
“It’s the same thing for 500 years,” Mancias told Observatoire des Multinationales. “We were occupied by the Spanish, by the Mexicans, then by the Texans, then by the Americans. And now it’s the oil industry.”
Three months before Mancias arrived in France, the last camps at Standing Rock emptied. For nearly a year, thousands of Indigenous water protectors and environmental allies had gathered near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation in North Dakota to protest the Dakota Access Pipeline, or DAPL. Oil was now flowing through DAPL, but activists and environmental organizations kept the momentum of the protests going.
In South Texas, Mancias had been fighting the same battle on a different front. He and Bekah Hinojosa, a grassroots activist in the Rio Grande Valley, spent weeks organizing against the proposed Rio Grande terminal and Rio Bravo Pipeline. The $18-billion projects would carry tens of millions of tons of natural gas each year to the export terminal in Brownsville, where it would be liquefied and shipped overseas as LNG. The battle led them to collaborate with Rainforest Action Network on a study documenting what it identified as the projects’ threat to the area, which included Carrizo/Comecrudo lands. The proposed industrial corridor, Mancias said, threatened the tribe and Garcia Pasture, a village site near Brownsville with human burials, ruins, and a rare coastal ecosystem the World Monuments Fund, an organization dedicated to raising global awareness of endangered cultural heritage sites, declared “threatened by natural resource extraction.”
“It used to be one of the places that we would gather as different clans and set up our lean-tos and be there for awhile while we were fishing,” Mancias said. “That’s why we were real concerned.”
The report circulated. People were paying attention.
Read Next 5 takeaways from our investigation into the ‘ghost’ tribe that got millions in climate funding Tristan AhtoneLes Amis de la Terre, or Friends of the Earth France, saw an opportunity: French banks — including BNP Paribas and Société Générale — were, at the time, still financing DAPL and petrochemical industries in South Texas, including the Rio projects. Organizers believed they could pressure them to stop.
“We had a broad objective of trying to prevent more financial flows and loans going from France to this project,” said Lorette Philippot, with Les Amis de la Terre, who worked on the campaign. “We had the difficulty to try to mobilize people on a project that was happening far away with impact on people that were far away.”
By early spring of 2017, Rainforest Action Network, Sierra Club, and Les Amis de la Terre had a plan: Mancias and Hinojosa, who was a Sierra Club campaigner at the time, would travel to France to help launch an international divestment campaign. They would work alongside Indigenous activists and allies involved with Stand Up With Standing Rock, a European solidarity tour aimed at demanding banks divest from oil and gas projects in North America.
Over the next week, they appeared in nearly a dozen print and radio outlets, including Le Monde and Radio France. They spoke at rallies. They built a symbolic oil pipeline inside a Paris branch of the bank Société Générale. A video of Mancias discussing Indigenous rights went viral. The pair were applauded by shareholders at BNP Paribas and booed by those at Société Générale. Mancias even secured a meeting with newly elected President Emmanuel Macron’s diplomatic advisors, where he explained how the United States government ignores Indigenous rights in Texas.
“It was a very strong narrative and it helped us mobilize a lot of media at the time because there were these chiefs coming to France to address French companies,” said Philippot. “It was very strong, it was very new, so it helped really create attention.”
Juan Mancias, center, appears at a demonstration in front of the George R. Brown Convention Center ahead of Super Bowl Live events in Houston in 2017. Marie D. De Jesus / Houston Chronicle via Getty ImagesIn the wake of Standing Rock, the global climate movement was eager to elevate Indigenous voices in the fight against fossil fuels, and Mancias stepped up. By leveraging the story of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe as a victim of ethnic cleansing at the hands of fossil fuel interests, the European campaign eventually helped push the two banks to withdraw from U.S. oil and gas projects. This high-profile victory launched Mancias and the tribe into the international media ecosystem, transforming them into environmental media darlings.
Mancias’ visit to France was a massive public relations victory for the climate movement.
But an extensive review of historical and genealogical records reveals that key documents underpinning Mancias’ claims to being of Carrizo/Comecrudo descent contain significant historical inconsistencies and cannot be verified or authenticated. His platform instead rests on family lore that has generated immense financial and social capital for Mancias, who is the group’s chairman, while fueling a broader trend that has detrimental global repercussions for Indigenous Peoples and the fight to address climate change.
“At the time we met him in the United States, Juan Mancias was clearly recognized as a representative of Indigenous communities,” said a spokesperson for Amis de la Terre France. “Regardless of his origins or ancestry, we believe that everyone has the right to oppose LNG projects and their financiers.”
Everyone had a reason to believe the story Mancias told. And somewhere in the years of campaigns and headlines, the question of whether it was true fell away. The story worked, and that was enough.
If you’re a Native reader, you know the word pretendian — its history, the personalities attached to it, and the debates over identity and “pretendian hunting.” The next two paragraphs are not for you. Feel free to skip ahead.
Pretendian — a portmanteau of “pretend” and “Indian” — describes someone who poses as Indigenous but is not. The term has broken out of Indian Country in recent years, with coverage, unmaskings, and think pieces by Indigenous and non-Indigenous writers alike in outlets ranging from The Atlantic and National Public Radio to the New York Post and others as far away as Aotearoa, New Zealand. You know these people; some of your friends and family may even be pretendians, and the problem is bigger than your weird aunt with high cheekbones waving the results of a recent DNA test. Instead, tribal nations and international bodies agree that Indigeneity is a political identity requiring verifiable citizenship within a historically continuous community.
The consequences of false claims to Indigenous identity are not abstract and have brought pretendians significant financial, professional, and cultural benefits. In 2017, three fake Cherokee tribes received $300 million in federal contracts by claiming minority-owned business status. Twin sisters Amira and Nadya Gill received more than 158,000 Canadian dollars earmarked for Inuit kids after pretending to be tribal members. Scholars Elizabeth Hoover and Andrea Smith built careers on bogus claims of Indigenous identity. Perhaps most famously, an investigation by the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. in 2023 found that Buffy Sainte-Marie, the internationally known singer whose career spanned nearly six decades, had falsified her claims of tribal identity and was born in Massachusetts to Italian and English parents.
Tribal Recognition 1011 of 5Stories are powerful, and in the world of climate action, an idealized Indigenous narrative can be more malleable, and more valuable, than facts. In France, the story of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe provided exactly what activists needed to pressure international banks into divesting from oil and gas: a moral front line. It was a victory built on a collective willingness to believe a story that no one bothered to question, let alone investigate.
In the years since he returned from Paris, Mancias has transformed the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, which lacks federal and state recognition, into a formidable environmental force. He has raised more than $5 million from major philanthropic foundations and joined heavyweights like Earthjustice and World Monuments Fund, and he has engaged with several United Nations agencies to battle oil and gas terminals, President Donald Trump’s border wall, and Elon Musk’s SpaceX.
Those partnerships have allowed the Carrizo/Comecrudo to behave as a tribal nation in the public eye while evading the responsibilities — and burdens of proof — genuine sovereign nations must bear. That has brought financial windfalls and international influence, revealing a troubling shadow recognition system, one in which well-heeled environmental organizations, well-meaning but unwitting journalists, and trusting international human rights bodies unknowingly prop up unverified Indigenous groups and pretendians to wage the climate war at the expense of legitimate Indigenous Peoples, tribes, and organizations.
For Indigenous policy experts, the elevation of unverified groups by environmental organizations represents a systemic issue that extends far beyond any single region. Speaking broadly about the nationwide trend of illegitimate actors and unverified groups entering the environmental movement, Kyle Whyte, a member of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation and a climate justice scholar at the University of Michigan, noted the widespread damage caused by this dynamic.
“It’s actually hurting, I would say at an exponential rate, the possibility for Indigenous people to be major players in climate change,” said Whyte. “It’s completely undermining the potential that tribal nations and Indigenous people have.”
Juan Mancias, as seen in the Carrizo/Comecrudo YouTube video “Teaching of the Hands.” Courtesy of Juan ManciasThe Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, which also goes by Esto’k Gna, claims historical connection to the Texas Gulf Coast and Rio Grande Delta, a region with a thin record of its Indigenous history. While many primary documents about tribes in the region exist in the official archives of Spain, Mexico, and Texas, as well as parish records and municipal files, these threads have rarely been woven into a cohesive narrative.
Spanish archives from the 16th through 18th centuries contain information on more than six dozen distinct groups in the region, but do not describe a unified “Comecrudo” or “Carrizo” tribe. Instead, Comecrudo, which is Spanish for “eats food raw,” and Carrizo, which translates as “river cane,” were simply derogatory, catchall descriptors colonizers applied to bands, tribes, communities, and groups that likely knew little of each other. These fragmentary colonial records capture little of the lived history of South Texas Indigenous communities, reducing complex human beings and societies to scattered chalk outlines of births, baptisms, and geographic displacements.
Indigenous homelands in South Texas have played a reluctant host to the shifting, militarized edge of the Spanish, Mexican, and, later, Texan and American frontiers. Nearly 50 years of perpetual war against Native peoples into the late 19th century ended in forced removal and genocide. By the 1870s, many surviving tribal nations had been pushed out of the state altogether, including the Waco, Kiowa, and Tonkawa, all of which are now based in Oklahoma — a brutal reminder of Texas moxie. Historians have called the state “a cauldron of racist violence.”
These landscapes appear in the Carrizo/Comecrudo video ‘Teaching of the Hands.’ Courtesy of Juan Mancias
Few authoritative books compile the Indigenous history of South Texas. The most prominent, Martín Salinas’ Indians of the Rio Grande Delta, was praised for painstakingly compiling what one reviewer called the “recorded sherds of Indian existence” in the lower Rio Grande Valley. Those sherds, created by Spanish colonizers and military leaders, document Carrizos and Comecrudos at Spanish missions into the 19th century, and is punctuated by an 1886 visit from noted Swiss ethnologist Albert Gatschet, who found elderly Comecrudos living on the riverbanks of the border town of Reynosa Diaz. Some could still speak their language, which he wrote down, but after Gatschet the tribe disappears from the historical record.
For more than a century, the prevailing academic and historical consensus has held that Gulf Coast groups like the Carrizo, Comecrudo, and Karankawa ceased to exist as distinct societies by the late 1800s. According to the Texas State Historical Association, leading anthropologists, and historians, the surviving populations of South Texas died from colonial violence and disease, or they were assimilated into Mexican and Tejano society, leading to their de facto extinction as distinct cultural groups. To modern scholars, these tribes simply do not exist today.
According to Mancias, those scholars are wrong. He insists the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe and its history, culture, and language survived.
Mancias claims that in the 1940s, his grandfather, Juan Ramirez Mancias, a Carrizo/Comecrudo chief, led 29 tribal families from their traditional homelands along the Rio Grande 600 miles north to the Texas Panhandle. There, the families adopted identities as Mexican farmworkers and deliberately assimilated into the Hispanic population. The Mancias family, however, secretly maintained its Indigenous identity, language, and oral histories — the only people to keep the tribe alive. Mancias has said he knew as a child that he was Indigenous, and that he was dismissed and marginalized for it. He claims to have endured anti-Indian racism and expulsion from school for fighting his tormentors, but he never abandoned his convictions or his grandfather’s orders to “go get our land back.” Mancias says he is the hereditary leader of the tribe due to his family’s singular role in preserving its identity and history, and that those convictions have fueled his mission of protecting his ancestors’ homelands from billionaires, pipeline companies, banks, and the federal government, while rebuilding those homelands one parcel at a time.
“They almost annihilated us,” Mancias told a reporter in 2024. “That genocide continues.”
The story Mancias tells echoes the Book of Exodus in the Bible: a multigenerational quest to return home that requires concealed identities, years in hiding, and a history physically carried forward — ending, at last, in a hard-fought, triumphant return.
“This is pretty standard for people to make a life out of a story like this,” said Kim TallBear, who is Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate, author of Native American DNA: Tribal Belonging and the False Promise of Genetic Science, professor at the University of Minnesota, and an expert in Indigenous self-definitions. “This is a pretty standard hiding-out-in-the-wilderness kind of thing, and it is very common in the South.”
When ‘Hiding’ Doesn’t Hold Up1 of 4Mancias said around a dozen of the 29 families who moved north remain active in the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, but would not provide a full list or contact information for them. But he said his ancestral claims go back even further. He has told journalists his lineage starts with Chief Naz’tazea, a Carrizo/Comecrudo warrior, and his son, Manuel Cavazos — the lone survivor of an alleged massacre of more than 300 Carrizo/Comecrudo people in 1801 at the hands of Spanish soldiers, acting with Catholic priests, along the Devils River in South Texas.
The sole basis for this claim is an unverified 19th century document that Mancias insists he discovered in the archives of the Texas Railroad Commission — a find he has repeatedly said corroborates his family’s oral history and confirms his relation to Naz’Tazea and Cavazos. According to Mancias, the report details an 1871 incident in which surveyors for the Gulf, Western Texas, and Pacific Railway stopped work after excavating an earthen mound containing the skeletal remains of more than 300 people. The document chronicles a subsequent military investigation during which an elderly Cavazos testified through a Spanish and Apache interpreter about the slaughter and his miraculous survival.
Mancias has recounted the story many times. In 2002, he read the alleged report aloud while testifying before the Texas Senate on the need for a state agency for Native American affairs, including a quote he attributed to Cavazos: “As I have said many times before, even though I am old, it will never pass in my eyes on what happened to my family when I was a little boy of 11.” In 2019, Mancias provided additional passages to a reporter, including a particularly graphic recollection from Cavazos that Spanish soldiers “put our little ones on spear tips and held them up for all to see. My sister was with child and Long Spears cut her with their knives where her unborn baby slept.”
‘I didn’t make it up.’
Juan ManciasMancias has been inconsistent about when he discovered the document. He told Grist that he had to threaten the state Railroad Commission to release it in the late 1980s, but also told Texas state senators that he’d discovered it only the week before his 2002 testimony. He has also placed the discovery in 2005, and in a recent interview claimed the report was not translated until 2023 because it was written in what he called “Castilian/Galego” Spanish. That translation, Mancias said, was done with the help of reporter Frank Hopper at Indian Country Today, now ICT, but the article in question was published in 2019.
“I didn’t translate the story,” Hopper wrote in an email. “I don’t have the original document. I tried researching the massacre online but could find very little.”
Mancias would not share the document despite repeated requests, blaming technological issues and suggesting that state officials may have altered or removed it from public viewing. “I know that it exists somewhere, and maybe they changed it, so I can’t do anything about them changing it,” he said when confronted with our findings.
Extensive searches of digital and physical repositories within the Texas State Library and Archives Commission found no evidence that the report exists. Instead, it revealed multiple discrepancies and historical anachronisms in Mancias’ story.
Mancias has been inconsistent on where the massacre occurred, with the railroad report naming two counties that did not exist at the time it was allegedly created and hundreds of miles from the traditional territory of the Carrizo/Comecrudo. He claims the document was written in a dialect of Spanish that would not have been used by an American railroad company operating in Texas almost 30 years after statehood. His chronology has also been historically illiterate: There weren’t any railroads operating in the area until nearly a decade after the discovery of the human remains purportedly occurred. None of the individuals named in the deposition, including the interpreter and a former Civil War captain, were found in the military and genealogical databases examined.
“I doubt any railroad survey crews would have been in such a remote area 10 years before the tracks were being laid,” said Rick McCaslin, the Texas state historian. “I strongly doubt that an Anglo company would have a deposition in Spanish without a translated version to accompany it.”
Don Hofsommer, a railroad historian and author of several books on the topic, also noted that the Texas Railroad Commission — the agency Mancias claims held the report — was not established until 1891, two decades after the alleged survey. “Typically, railroads did not move that sort of information to the public domain,” said Hofsommer. “It’s extremely unlikely that such a document would have migrated, and I can’t see any reason why it would have migrated to the Texas Railroad Commission. Improbable.”
“I didn’t make it up,” said Mancias.
The Texas Railroad Commission did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
Mancias has cited the purported document as evidence to his claims in federal court. In 2019, he sued the federal government, alleging genocide against the Carrizo/Comecrudo people, the desecration of sacred sites, and the use of discriminatory waivers to expedite border wall construction. He asserted “absolute land sovereignty” over six South Texas counties and sought sweeping remedies: an immediate halt to border wall and energy development, the transfer of land from corporations to the tribe, and $1 trillion in reparations — including $400 billion up front and $200 billion annually for 500 years.
When a judge required Mancias to specify the basis for alleging that the Carrizo/Comecrudo held a legal interest in the territory, Mancias submitted the text of the alleged Devil’s River report but did not produce a physical copy. Mancias later dismissed the lawsuit after the government challenged his legal standing to sue as an unrecognized tribe. In 2020, Mancias cited the railroad report in a Sierra Club lawsuit challenging the Trump administration’s border wall, but neither he nor the environmental group provided the original document in the court filings, instead referencing the article Hopper wrote for ICT in 2019.
The alleged report is the only documentary evidence Mancias has publicly referred to in order to establish his connection to the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe.
A lack of proof extends to his other ancestral claims, including the foundational lore of his activism: a childhood command from his grandfather to “go get our land back.” When pressed by the judge in his 2019, $1-trillion lawsuit against the federal government about whether he held traditional title to the lands he was suing over, Mancias admitted that while his grandfather claimed to own land in Peñitas, Texas, the family had “never been able to find a recorded deed or a document verifying this.”
A typed transcription of the purported 1871 interview with Manuel Cavazos, submitted by Juan Mancias as an attachment in the federal lawsuit Mancias v. United States of America. PACERGrist also reviewed census, birth, baptism, marriage, and death records spanning the mid-18th century to the end of the 20th century from across Texas and in Tamaulipas and Nuevo León, Mexico. They show Mancias descends from a well-documented colonial family with deep roots in northern Mexico, including at least three documented Indigenous ancestors born in Mexico between approximately 1770 and 1800. They lived six to seven generations ago and are among the roughly 64 to 128 direct ancestors a person has at that generational depth. However, parish records show this Indigenous ancestry likely originates from the Sierra Madre Oriental mountains, not the Rio Grande Delta, the historic territory of the Carrizo/Comecrudo. More crucially, those ancestors are found on Mancias’ maternal line, not paternal — the foundation of his Indigenous claim. Those genealogical records also do not support Mancias’ assertion that he is related to Manuel Cavazos — the historical paper trail breaks at the precise generational link required to connect Mancias to the Devil’s River survivor. Nobody by that name, or the name Naz’tazea, appears in any records, including those by Gatschet, the Swiss ethnologist. Mancias did not respond to a detailed request for comment outlining our findings.
“If you go back six generations, that’s a lot of ancestors,” TallBear said. “Why are you focusing on the one who might or might not have been Indigenous? Even if there’s an actual Indigenous person, who cares? That’s not a claim. Ancestry alone is not a claim.”
That point is essential to understanding Indigenous identity. Tribal nations, the federal government, and international human rights bodies agree that Indigeneity is fundamentally a political and collective identity, not a private matter of individual racial descent or even blood quantum. As recognized by both the Bureau of Indian Affairs and international bodies like the United Nations, a group cannot simply self-identify into existence or reexistence; legitimate Indigenous Peoples must demonstrate historical continuity by tracing an unbroken line of political authority, typically through formal treaties, acts of Congress, or historical archives that document unbroken, collective lines to preinvasion and precolonial societies. When recognition politics shift from collective, land- and place-based rights toward individual rights that rest on ancestral claims, Indigenous Peoples, rights, and movements face compounding harms — a point scholars emphasize. To avoid that, and distinguish inherently sovereign tribal nations from groups composed merely of individuals claiming descent, the United States relies on a formal, if imperfect, legal system to vet claims of nationhood.
It’s important to note that recognition status indicates whether a group has governmental authority and collective political rights as a sovereign nation. It does not, in and of itself, validate individual Indigenous heritage, just as the lack of federal recognition does not invalidate it. But it does determine whether a group is a sovereign governmental authority or merely an association or nonprofit organization. Indigenous leaders and scholars say that failing to respect those political boundaries enables individuals and groups fraudulently claiming Indigenous heritage for professional, political, and financial gain, ultimately harming legitimate Native communities.
Mancias rejects these bedrocks of Indigenous identity.
“We don’t abide by the colonial mentality of a procedural recognition process,” he said, referring to the tribe’s lack of political status.
Still, Mancias submitted a letter to the Bureau of Indian Affairs, or BIA, in 1998 with the intent of petitioning for federal recognition of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe. Although Mancias frequently cites the multimillion-dollar cost of the process as the primary barrier to proceeding, documents obtained through the Freedom of Information Act show the group continues to interact with the agency. In March 2016, Mancias and his daughter Christa Mancias submitted a signed letter to the BIA to officially update their tribal council roster and maintain the petition.
This is a scanned copy of an envelope, postmarked March 28, 2016, containing an update to the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe’s 1998 letter to petition the Department of the Interior for federal acknowledgment. Grist obtained it through a Freedom of Information Act request. United States Department of the Interior via FOIAThe financial barriers and public condemnation of the recognition process haven’t stopped Mancias from emulating those federal systems. Since the 1990s, when Mancias established a nonprofit under the tribe’s name and began fundraising, he has created a tribal government with himself as the hereditary leader, recruited members, and issued identification cards. During the Texas Senate hearing in 2002, Mancias claimed the tribe had 352 members. By 2009, that figure had risen to 9,000 and by 2017 to 17,000 before tumbling to 2,500 four years later. It jumped again to 6,500 in 2024. This year, Mancias claims 30,000 members, a surge that would require adding roughly 65 members every day for an entire year. Mancias said membership is granted through lineal descendancy.
“It’s family connections,” said Mancias. “Because of the blood that runs through us.”
That recruitment strategy helped bring in Christopher Basaldú, one of the tribe’s most prominent and outspoken members. Basaldú grew up in South Texas hearing family stories of his Indigenous heritage, but that changed when he met Mancias. According to an article featuring Basaldú, who did not return requests for comment, Mancias asked for his family names and where his relatives were born, then declared: “Those are my families, too. We’re related. You’re Carrizo.” Basaldú has since co-founded the tribe’s closest ally fighting oil and gas terminals, the South Texas Environmental Justice Network, along with frontline activist Bekah Hinojosa, whom Mancias also claims is a “distant cousin.”
Presented with our findings, Hinojosa said, “I’m not aware of any familial ties with Juan Mancias.”
Over the last two decades, global leaders have increasingly looked to Indigenous Peoples for solutions to climate change. That shift started in 2004 with the release of the landmark Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, which pushed Indigenous ecological expertise into the mainstream. Three years later, the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues — among the largest global gatherings of Indigenous leaders and advocates — dedicated its annual session to climate change, helping establish Indigenous stewardship as a pillar of global environmental policy.
Institutional acceptance deepened in 2014, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change formally recognized Indigenous expertise as an important resource for climate adaptation, a stark departure from earlier reports that marginalized or ignored those perspectives. The following year, the Paris Agreement wove Indigenous ecological knowledge into its framework.
Then came Standing Rock. Nearly a year of intense protest put Native people in the international spotlight and pushed the Indigenous climate movement to the fore.
Juan Mancias addresses a crowd in Zuccotti Park during an environmental justice rally in New York City in June 2024. Gina M. Randazzo / ZUMA Press Wire / ShutterstockEventually, the federal government caught up. In 2021, the Biden administration elevated Indigenous traditional ecological knowledge to federal policy and established an interagency working group to ensure Native stewardship informs decision-making. “Tribal and Native communities have stewarded these lands since time immemorial,” said Brenda Mallory, who chaired the White House Council on Environmental Quality, at the time. “Their voices and their expertise are critical to finding solutions to address the climate crisis, an issue that disproportionately affects tribal and Native communities.”
Mounting recognition brought an unprecedented flood of money. In 2021, a coalition of governments and private funders unveiled a $1.7 billion pledge to support Native-led land defense, the largest investment ever in Indigenous climate action. By the time world leaders gathered in Brazil last year for the COP30 international climate summit, that commitment had expanded to an additional $1.8 billion for Indigenous and locally led conservation efforts. If the climate crisis is a defining marker of this century, Indigenous Peoples are becoming keystone parties in the fight to address it.
How an Indigenous Claim Can Attract Millions1 of 5When that unprecedented funding reaches legitimate tribal nations, the impact is undeniable. “One million dollars that goes into an entity with accountability and due process and cultural integrity could allow [it] to actually do things that lower carbon footprints or protect themselves from the fossil fuel sector,” said Whyte, the University of Michigan professor.
But the sudden influx of money also created a lucrative new pathway for bad actors. That shift led some funders and advocacy groups to unwittingly elevate people and organizations with no legitimate claim to indigeneity, said Whyte. “After Standing Rock and during the Biden administration, you have philanthropy and federal resources focused on Indigenous people,” he said. “They didn’t have a lot of long-term relationships with tribes or with Indigenous people with legitimate organizations.”
Historically, financial support for Indigenous people and organizations has been dismal. A 2019 Native Americans in Philanthropy report found that between 2002 and 2016, large U.S. foundations gave, on average, 0.4 percent of their total funding to such communities and causes. Similarly, tribal leaders quoted in a 2021 study from the Center for Effective Philanthropy reported that nonprofits had denied requests because program participants were already deemed successful.
“We interpreted that as, They just want to fund drunk, starving Indians on the reservation or on skid row in the city. They’re not interested in what Native American leaders can contribute to society,” said one survey participant. These misconceptions, fueled by racist stereotypes, have been documented in other studies. Research has also found that philanthropy fundamentally misunderstands Indigenous experiences, tribal sovereignty and governance, and organizations operating in Indian Country — to say nothing of the growing problem of people fraudulently claiming Native identities.
“They didn’t understand, for example, that maybe in a certain region there was a legitimate tribal nation or Indigenous organization that was representing actual communities,” Whyte said of philanthropy in general. “They didn’t understand that there’s a difference between a group that is a nonprofit and a state-recognized tribe and a federally recognized tribe. Or in another country, a group that has a certain status. They didn’t know anything about it, and often, they were sucked in by these very powerful stories.”
Those same blind spots plague news coverage, where journalists with little or no understanding of Indigenous affairs are ill-equipped to engage in critical reporting or recognize when sources mislead them.
Vetting Indigenous Identity1 of 3Media access is essential for the well-being and civic participation of legitimate Indigenous nations. But it can also grant visibility and credibility to illegitimate individuals and groups whose claims go unscrutinized, and non-Native reporters often feel overwhelmed by the complexities of Indigenous identity, a vulnerability that is easily exploited. Many fail to do basic research or ask tough questions about a source’s tribal ties for fear of causing offense or because they are rushing to meet a deadline, said Sunnie Clahchischiligi, who is Diné and president of the Indigenous Journalists Association. “I think it’s just carelessness and laziness,” she said.
That can create an echo chamber because, as the Indigenous Journalists Association warns, “once a fraudulent claim is published in one news article, especially in Indigenous-led media, other media tend to follow without verification.”
That echo chamber has benefited Mancias and the Carrizo/Commecrudo Tribe, which have appeared in more than 70 stories, blogs, and press releases since 2016. They have received frequent coverage from outlets ranging from ICT and Inside Climate News to PBS, The Guardian, and The Texas Tribune.
Inside Climate news and ICT were among the most prolific outlets covering Mancias and the tribe. Grist presented the findings of this investigation to them and asked about their editorial policies for covering unrecognized groups and whether reporters examined primary documents to corroborate Mancias’ claims. Both outlets provided statements but did not answer the questions or explain their fact-checking protocols or policies covering unrecognized Indigenous groups.
“The issues you raise about identity are ones [the reporter] included with nuance in his reporting on displaced and marginalized people seeking justice,” the executive editor at Inside Climate News told Grist in an email.
ICT also declined to discuss its vetting process or its publication of the unverified 1871 Spanish railroad document. Citing an organizational restructuring that occurred in 2021, the president of IndiJ Public Media, which runs ICT, said she “can’t speak to decisions made in the past” but added that the outlet “is committed to integrity and the highest journalistic standards.”
The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe operated on a tight budget for years after incorporating as a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit in 1999. The IRS repeatedly revoked and restored that status, and tax filings show the tribe reported less than $50,000 in annual revenue between 2012 and 2018. In 2016, a GoFundMe campaign raised just $3,000 to support a monthslong pipeline protest encampment.
Everything changed in 2019.
As Mancias’ celebrity grew on the heels of his 2017 Paris trip, the tribe began attracting philanthropic support. The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe has raised more than $5 million since 2019, largely from environmental and social justice funders like the Schmidt Family Foundation, First Nations Development Institute, Rockefeller Family Fund, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.
First Nations Development Institute, the Rockefeller Family Fund, and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation did not respond to detailed requests for comment. The Schmidt Family Foundation defended its funding and said identity verification is beyond its philanthropic mandate.
“While we resource many movements run by, and in service of, historically excluded demographics, we do not fund based on identity,” said Joseph Sciortino, executive director of the Schmidt Family Foundation. “Furthermore, it is not our place to interrogate the identity of those we support. Federal tribal recognition and matters of cultural legitimacy are incredibly complex and important subjects with significant social, cultural, and political implications. Our job as a philanthropy is to support important work, not to serve as the arbiters of who does and doesn’t get to be Indigenous.”
Philanthropic support helped the tribe in many successful campaigns. The tribe pushed French and Japanese banks to divest from LNG, disrupting financing for projects worth billions. It joined German activists to blockade European imports of fracked gas. It engaged in direct action to stop construction of the border wall and challenged Elon Musk’s plans to expand SpaceX operations in South Texas. As an accredited nongovernmental organization at the United Nations, the Carrizo/Comecrudo have weighed in on international negotiations, including a global plastics treaty.
Tori Cress, who is Beausoleil and a member of the Society of Native Nations, and Juan Mancias attend the International Indigenous Peoples Forum on Plastics in Busan, South Korea, in 2024. Kiara Worth / IISD / ENBMancias said the tribe is now working to protect threatened peyote habitats in South Texas, one of the few places in the U.S. where the psychoactive cactus, used as a sacrament in the Native American Church, grows wild. A spokesperson for the Native American Church declined to comment on this story.
It has accomplished all of this, Mancias said, with just five full-time employees, including his daughter. He also said much of the tribe’s money has gone toward buying land and paying taxes on it, a financial burden stemming from the tribe’s unrecognized status.
The Sierra Club has been one of the tribe’s most important allies. It has provided nearly $200,000 in grants and ongoing legal support, most recently in a lawsuit targeting SpaceX. The suit, filed by the environmental group SaveRGV in 2021 and later joined by the Sierra Club and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, challenged the closures of Boca Chica Beach on the Gulf Coast. The shutdowns can last as long as 12 hours and are meant to safeguard the public from any falling debris from the rocket company’s launches. The plaintiffs argued the closures violated the Texas Constitution’s guarantee of access to public beaches.
In June, the Texas Supreme Court unanimously ruled against them, holding that private parties do not have the right to sue to enforce public beach access.
Mancias has argued publicly that the closures infringe on rights protected under the federal American Indian Religious Freedom Act — but that law applies to citizens of federally recognized tribes.
“The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe are the original people of the Boca Chica Beach region,” Mancias has claimed. “The river is sacred to us. When we call for the rains, we go to the river because that’s where the rains come from. And we’ve been stopped, prevented from giving our prayers at Boca Chica beach by a billionaire’s pet project and the police.”
But the litigation wasn’t fought on that ground. The suit rested on Texas beach-access law, not federal Indian law, and the tribe appeared in the case not as a sovereign nation but as an incorporated nonprofit organization.
The Sierra Club did not respond to a detailed request for comment.
As an unrecognized group, the Carrizo/Comecrudo lack the legal standing to compel developers or governments to consult with them on projects impacting their claimed ancestral lands. Instead, Mancias has turned to international frameworks, specifically invoking the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, or UNDRIP, and the legal principle of free, prior, and informed consent, or FPIC. By leveraging these standards, the tribe has forged an effective strategy to legitimize its identity claims on the world stage, pressure international financial institutions, and attract philanthropic support.
Representatives of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe have argued that because companies like SpaceX haven’t consulted tribal leaders, they are violating UNDRIP. As part of its legal tactics, the tribe has demanded federal agencies obtain its free and informed consent before launching oil and gas projects. It has used similar arguments to pressure investors in France and Japan, contending banks are violating that standard by failing to consult with the tribe.
Although UNDRIP is universal in scope, its practical significance is greatest where Indigenous Peoples lack meaningful domestic protections, legal recognition, or recourse against state violence. In much of Latin America, Africa, and Asia, weak protection of Indigenous land rights — compounded by extractive pressure, organized crime, and impunity — has made defending Indigenous territory deadly. Indigenous people make up roughly 6 percent of the world’s population but account for nearly a third of the environmental defenders attacked in 2024.
The U.N. special rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous Peoples, Albert K. Barume, has tied that violence directly to the absence of secure land rights. “There is a crisis Indigenous people are currently experiencing, and it’s because many Indigenous Peoples are killed, many are under arrest, many live in hiding,” he told the U.N. Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in 2026. “This is because Indigenous Peoples’ land and territory are often not protected enough.”
Critics argue the framework was never intended to legitimize identity in the United States, where a system for establishing and recognizing tribal sovereignty already exists.
“They are literally using an argument that people in the world, that are being killed right now, actually need,” said Whyte.
The tribe’s closest ally in its international work has been the Society of Native Nations, or SNN, a Texas nonprofit founded in 2016 to combat historical erasure and promote the idea that “Indigenous peoples are still here in Texas.” It represents unrecognized tribes that receive no federal funding or support, including the Tap Pilam Coahulitecan Nation, Lipan Apache, Chichimeca, Tobotolobal, Mexica, and Purepecha.
The society started with help from Mancias.
For more than a decade, Mancias led the Central Texas chapter of the American Indian Movement, or AIM, a historic and controversial Native American grassroots civil rights organization. During that time he recruited Frankie Orona, an information technology entrepreneur from California who identifies as Tongva, Chumash, and Borrado, and is an enrolled member and environmental liaison for the San Gabriel Band of Mission Indians, which does not hold federal recognition status.
“Frankie became a member because he met me,” said Mancias.
Frankie Orona, who leads the Society of Native Nations and is co-chair of the Major Groups Facilitating Committee, is shown here at a committee forum in Nairobi, Kenya, on December 7, 2025. Anastasia Rodopoulou / IISD / ENBIn early 2016, Orona filed the paperwork required to incorporate their chapter, the American Indian Movement Of Central Texas, as a nonprofit. Riding the momentum of Standing Rock, the chapter mobilized against the Trans-Pecos Pipeline in West Texas. Later that year, AIM Central Texas members, including Mancias, protested at a resort owned by the CEO of Energy Transfer Partners, the company behind the Dakota Access and Trans-Pecos pipelines. Two weeks later, on October 20, Orona renamed the organization the Society of Native Nations because, he said, AIM’s radical history made it “very, very difficult” to work with other organizations.
In a written response to an email outlining our findings, Orona said the “AIM Central Texas chapter was not renamed or replaced by SNN,” the organization still exists, and it “remains entirely separate from SNN.”
That claim does not align with legal filings available through the IRS and the Texas Secretary of State. Those documents show that AIM Central Texas and the Society of Native Nations share the same incorporation date, state file number, and federal tax identification number. SNN’s own governing documents reveal a shared origin: SNN’s by-laws — including its entire preamble, structural goals, and mission statements — are drawn almost verbatim from bylaws the Des Moines, Iowa chapter of AIM used in the 1970s, many of which are found in contemporary AIM materials.
The bylaws of the American Indian Movement of Des Moines, left, as printed in the record of a 1976 U.S. Senate subcommittee hearing, are shown alongside the bylaws adopted by the Society of Native Nations in November 2016. Highlights indicate passages the two documents share, including the organizations’ purposes and both lists of objectives. U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary; Society of Native NationsOrona also insisted that “Juan Mancias was not part of creating SNN.”
The society’s financial growth has mirrored the rise of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe. After filing rudimentary tax returns for several years, the organization’s fortunes changed dramatically in 2019 when it began securing climate-action grants, including funding to “address threats of fossil fuel infrastructure and border wall construction on ancestral lands of the Carrizo Comecrudo Tribe.” By 2024, its reported annual revenue had reached nearly $777,000 with money coming from many of the same philanthropic funders supporting the Carrizo/Commecrudo Tribe.
A review of the organization’s tax filings reveals a history of reporting inconsistencies and revisions. The society has on three occasions between 2018 and 2024 reported different revenue for the same tax periods, and later filings reported substantially higher revenue for earlier tax years. In 2024, the society’s tax forms misattributed historical revenues to the wrong years and left the current year’s income column blank.
In his written response to Grist, Orona said SNN is aware of the discrepancies and is working with a new accountant to review its filings for the past three years. “This corrective process began before we learned of your investigation,” he said. “We acknowledge that the public filings contain reporting inconsistencies that need to be corrected. However, the placement of figures in incorrect year columns or inconsistent presentation across returns should not, without further evidence, be characterized as intentional misconduct or as proof that funds were missing, improperly received, or misused.”
Asked to speak in general about the structural risks of funding unverified organizations rather than sovereign nations, Whyte noted that such groups frequently lack the infrastructure to handle large grants. “When a group comes in that has no potential for self-governance, they often lie about who their members are,” he said. “It might be a few figureheads, usually one person that’s the point person for everything, and a few other followers, and if they do get money, they often don’t have the capacity to manage those funds, and the entire thing gets wasted.”
Ongoing financial support helped propel the Society of Native Nations onto the global stage alongside the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe. Both organizations gained accredited nongovernmental status within the United Nations, allowing them to participate in global conversations, forums, and negotiations.
Within the United Nations system, legitimate tribal governments can, and do, participate as sovereign nations in specific Indigenous-focused spaces, such as the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues. However, at the highest levels of global diplomacy — including the U.N. General Assembly, Human Rights Council, and Economic and Social Council — the U.N. remains exclusively for recognized Member States.
Frankie Orona is shown here attending a meeting of an International Institute for Sustainable Development working group in Geneva on June 20, 2024. Mike Muzurakis / IISD / ENBBecause the U.N. excludes Indigenous governments from participating as sovereign nations in these broader arenas, Indigenous Peoples have fought for years for “enhanced participation” — the ability for tribal governments to hold a dignified, permanent status to negotiate on global policies that directly affect them. Until that happens, the system forces a workaround: To gain access to high-level bodies and specialized agencies, Indigenous Peoples must participate through nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs.
Both the society and the Carrizo/Comecrudo have used this loophole to gain a level of international power and influence they could not exert in the United States. The society secured accreditation with UNESCO — the U.N. body protecting cultural heritage — in 2024 by highlighting its partnership with the Carrizo/Comecrudo. It also won recognition from the U.N. Environment Programme, or UNEP, where Orona now co-chairs the Indigenous Peoples Major Group, a position that helps shape high-level negotiations like the global plastics treaty that represent the interests of Indigenous Peoples worldwide.
Just 24 Indigenous-focused organizations are accredited observers to the United Nations Environment Assembly, the world’s highest decision-making body for environmental matters. Only four are from the U.S. One is the International Indian Treaty Council, which is among the oldest and most established Indigenous NGOs at the U.N. The others are the Society of Native Nations, Humanculture, and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas.
The society holds similar standing at UNESCO. Of the 10 NGOs from the United States with accreditation, only three focus on Indigenous issues: the Pacific Traditions Society, Cultural Survival, and the Society of Native Nations.
As accredited observers, NGOs cannot negotiate as sovereign governments. But groups like the Society of Native Nations and the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe receive a wide range of institutional privileges. Among other things, they can provide oral and written contributions to draft resolutions, access internal documents unavailable to the public, and interact directly with government delegations.
“The U.S., when they come with a delegation, you have members from the [Department of Justice] there sometimes, or [Health and Human Services],” said Orona. “You speak to states and you are able to influence policy that can impact generations and generations and generations yet to come.”
Read Next As climate change threatens their lands, Indigenous nations demand more power at the UN Dionne PhillipsYet despite granting this high-level diplomatic access, the U.N. does not verify whether these organizations actually represent historical Indigenous communities. In an emailed statement to Grist, a UNEP spokesperson confirmed that the agency “respects the principle of self-identification” and relies purely on standard nonprofit eligibility requirements for accreditation.
“UNEP, like other U.N. mechanisms, does not conduct determinations regarding the sovereign status, federal recognition, historical continuity, ancestry, or genealogical claims of organizations or individuals,” the spokesperson wrote, adding that accreditation “does not constitute endorsement or validation of such claims.”
That policy creates a structural conflict of interest for anyone looking to challenge a group’s credentials. Indigenous participation at UNEP is managed through the Indigenous Peoples Major Group. Because Orona currently serves as its co-chair, internal guidelines recommend that any official complaints or clarifications be brought to “one or both” co-chairs privately before being elevated to the broader group. A UNEP representative confirmed there is no specific conflict-of-interest procedure for this scenario, but did say that such a case wouldn’t be required to pass through a co-chair’s hands. Instead, concerns could be raised with the other co-chair or bypass the internal governance entirely by consulting UNEP’s Civil Society Unit.
Orona has become a fixture at U.N. summits, attending more than a dozen international events since 2024 in places like Geneva; Nairobi, Kenya; and Busan, South Korea. Mancias has also traveled internationally on behalf of the tribe and has, among other events, attended global conferences on fossil fuels and plastics in Kenya and Uruguay. He also participated in the 2024 plastics treaty negotiations in South Korea.
For Indigenous delegates, the presence of individuals and groups with unverified claims exercising this level of influence has been a longstanding source of frustration. Because the U.N. system relies heavily on NGO credentials and self-identification, it inadvertently creates a pathway to undeserved international legitimacy.
“This has been an issue of concern throughout the U.N. system regarding the representation of Indigenous Peoples, and it is really hard to know how to deal with it,” said Andrea Carmen, executive director of the International Indian Treaty Council. “None of us know everybody, and definitely we don’t know Indigenous Peoples’ from every region. We don’t want to exclude anyone unfairly, but we do hear these concerns expressed.”
The Right of ‘Peoples,’ Not Groups1 of 4The U.N. has no formal mechanism to verify if participants, tribes, or organizations are who they say they are. But having illegitimate actors in the system takes diplomatic oxygen and means from legitimate Indigenous Peoples.
“It is concerning when you hear about entities whose claims to being Indigenous aren’t substantiated, that may be taking funding, time, representation, and resources away from Indigenous Peoples’ and their organizations that are really struggling to participate,” said Carmen. “If some are truly not bona fide, they should not be speaking as Indigenous Peoples.”
Orona and Mancias have known each other for more than a decade. “We do a lot of ceremony together, we spend a lot of time up in South Dakota together, we Sun Dance together,” Orona said in an interview with Grist earlier this year. Later, Orona said in an email that their collaboration has been largely a professional relationship before later saying it was largely a ceremonial one.
“My association with a person through environmental and Indigenous rights advocacy should not be presented as proof that I authenticated every historical or genealogical claim made by that person,” he wrote. “Participation in SNN does not confer Tribal citizenship, federal recognition, sovereign status, or validation of a person’s genealogy. Likewise, SNN membership should not be portrayed as evidence that the organization has formally authenticated every identity claim made by every member or affiliated individual.”
Mancias’ ability to garner headlines and funding has required sharing the spotlight. Just up the Gulf Coast near Galveston, the unrecognized Karankawa Tribe of Texas has also been focused on environmental justice and protecting ancestral lands and artifacts from the petrochemical industry. This work has been led primarily by Sandra Love Sanchez, who claims Karankawa and Lipan Apache descent and is the tribe’s environmental liaison. She has cited Standing Rock as the catalyst for the tribe’s work.
The Karankawa are well documented in Texas history and once controlled nearly 300 miles of coast from Corpus Christi Bay to Galveston Bay. Yet for more than a century, history books and roadside historical markers deemed them “extinct,” like the Carrizo/Comecrudo. That narrative held until 2009, when retired U.S. Army veteran Enrique Gonzalez came forward and claimed to be Karankawa.
According to Gonzalez, rather than being wiped out in the mid-1800s, a band of Karankawa retreated to the Rio Grande Valley and secretly preserved the tribe’s culture. Gonzalez’s account marked a turning point. Since then, a growing network of people identifying as Karankawa Kadla — Kadla meaning “culturally mixed” to encompass other bloodlines, including non-Indigenous ones — has begun connecting online and with local historians.
“For many centuries we have been in hiding,” the tribe’s website declares. “We are hiding no longer.”
‘I think if you’re going to be doing these kinds of things, you have to be honest about who or what you are.’
Juan ManciasThe Karankawa have found common cause with the Carrizo/Comecrudo in a fight to save Donnel Point, a 2,300-year-old shell midden rediscovered along the La Quinta Ship Channel after having been assumed destroyed by dredging in the 1950s. When a local geologist stumbled across the intact site in 2025, organizers realized it was in immediate danger of development. The Karankawa and Carrizo/Comecrudo enlisted attorneys at Earthjustice to challenge the federal permitting process.
“By stopping this project, that would be protecting the land,” said Love Sanchez in an interview.
Earthjustice responded to a detailed list of questions about its vetting protocol with a statement reading, “At Earthjustice, we represent impacted communities across Texas to defend their health and significant places. We will continue to fight in the courts for our clients’ legal rights to protect their longstanding, generational legacy of stewardship.”
But Mancias has dismissed the Karankawa as fakes and latecomers riding the wave that followed Standing Rock. “If you follow the paperwork, they just got together, like, what, three or four years ago,” he said. “It became a fad after NODAPL. A lot of people got into the environmental stuff.”
Mancias claims that he too is Karankawa, and that the word comes from the Carrizo/Comecrudo language. “I know that we’re Karankawa for a fact,” he said. “The documentation is there. I think it’s just poor research, and people are just trying to fight and justify their Indigeneity.”
The Karankawa are not alone in facing Mancias’ skepticism. He has questioned the historical presence and true identity of the Lipan Apache in South Texas, an unrecognized tribe also heavily engaged in climate and environmental work at the domestic and international level. He claims that historical records provide no evidence the Lipan Apache ever lived in South Texas, and he attributes the name “Apache” to the Spanish word mapache: “A racoon,” said Mancias. “Everybody sees the racoon as a mischievous little thief and that’s what they would call a lot of the Native groups that had already started losing their identity.”
Mancias has also dismissed the legitimacy of the Miakan-Garza Tribe, arguing that the unrecognized group based in San Antonio is not a distinct nation but a Carrizo/Comecrudo clan. He claims it was formed by “old men” who emerged from the Chicano movement, discovered they were Indigenous, and sought to identify with a tribe. “If you know anything about the Garzas, it’s not really a tribe,” he said.
“I’m not going to fight anybody that claims to be Native because we got bigger fights to fight,” Mancias added. “But I think if you’re going to be doing these kinds of things, you have to be honest about who or what you are.”
A landmark study in the journal Science found that Indigenous nations in the United States have lost 98.9 percent of their land, the result of centuries of violence, unratified or broken treaties, and racist federal policy. The Dawes Act of 1887 alone stripped tribes of roughly 90 million acres, of which only 8 percent has been reacquired. Today, 42 percent of tribal nations have no land base at all, and those that do hold, on average, less than 3 percent of their historic territory.
Regaining stolen land is a long process. Tribes can often wait decades to see even the smallest parcel placed into trust — the legal step that turns public or private property into sovereign territory. Records obtained from the Bureau of Indian Affairs show the Ely Shoshone Tribe’s 1995 application to put land into trust was approved in 2024. The Pala Reservation’s 2003 filing was completed in 2023; the same year saw a 2006 submission from the Wind River Reservation approved.
The Carrizo/Comecrudo haven’t had to wait that long. Between 2022 and 2024, the tribe bought four properties in Cameron County, Texas, totaling 22.61 acres along the route of a proposed Enbridge pipeline. The deals were funded by grants from the Hive Fund for Climate & Gender Justice, Equation Campaign, the Schmidt Family Foundation, and NDN Collective.
“We selected these grantees for the demonstrated effectiveness of their organizing against fossil fuel expansion and related harms in South Texas and elsewhere,” Katie Redford, executive director of the Equation Campaign, said in an emailed statement. “That record, not a claim to Indigenous identity, is why we funded them.
“We do not adjudicate who is or is not Indigenous, and we would not consider it legitimate to try,” Redford said. “We find the premise of these questions — that a funder should be auditing a person’s bloodline — offensive. A tribe’s determination of its own membership is a core attribute of its sovereignty, and federal acknowledgment under 25 C.F.R. Part 83 is a political and administrative process, not a genealogical one. There is no single accepted standard a funder could apply, and any standard we invented would be our own imposition — which is the reason philanthropy has no business in this.”
Melanie Allen, CEO of Hive Fund, said in an emailed response that the organization’s grantmaking is focused on the transition to clean energy in the South. “We fund the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas as part of a broader ecosystem of grantee partners in South Texas working to protect the health and safety of communities by opposing fossil fuel buildout,” Allen said. “Specifically, we have funded the Tribe to contest the construction of several liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals in the Rio Grande Valley. We evaluate prospective grantee partners for charitable status, legal compliance, financial management, organizational capacity, and alignment with our mission, not Indigenous status.”
NDN Collective did not respond to requests for comment.
A $1.2 million check from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation was supposed to underwrite the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe’s plan to acquire 170 acres in Laredo for a community center and land trust. That deal fell through, according to Mancias, and most of that grant was rescinded, but a purported 3,400-acre donation in Sierra Blanca to restore the tribe’s traditional land base remains a work in progress. That land, he said, has been willed to the tribe, but the required paperwork is still being completed; around 700 acres of the donation is currently being leased, though Mancias would not say by whom.
Mancias hopes these acquisitions will make the tribe more “self-determining.” To that end, he said he is founding “the first Native American university in Texas,” which conceivably would teach future generations of Carrizo/Comecrudo to be financially and academically independent. “We want to say, ‘You can’t tell us what to teach anymore, we don’t accept your ideas of invasion and colonization because we’re not a conquered people,’” he said.
Mancias said he’ll work with Rice University or the University of Houston to obtain accreditation, and claims to have been in contact with the American Indian Higher Education Consortium, a nonprofit composed of the presidents of the nation’s 37 tribal colleges. The University of Houston said it was unaware of the project and is not an accrediting agency. The consortium declined to comment, and Rice University did not respond.
Still, Mancias’ efforts have attracted support from global institutions. For decades, Garcia Pasture — a sprawling, pre-Columbian village site and burial ground near Brownsville — has been listed on the National Register of Historic Places. But as plans for a massive oil and gas export terminal advanced on the site, international advocates took notice. In 2022, the World Monuments Fund designated Garcia Pasture an irreplaceable cultural site and “traditional territory of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas threatened by natural resource extraction” that “requires formal legal recognition to ensure its future.” The organization accompanied its announcement with a sprawling online exhibit supporting the tribe’s history and pledged to support its quest for federal recognition, citing “overwhelming historical evidence” that proves its connection to South Texas.
According to Frankie Orona, the Society of Native Nations plans to leverage its UNESCO accreditation to one day see Garcia Pasture formally recognized.
“We have had conversations about how we can help to support the tribe in doing that,” said Orona. “To acknowledge Garcia Pasture as a sacred site and try to help to recommend it to be seen and recognized as a UNESCO heritage site.”
In his written response, Orona said that statement was not a commitment to pursue a UNESCO nomination, only a reflection of “SNN’s general practice of looking for appropriate ways to support issues affecting Indigenous Peoples and culturally significant places.” He also said the society had not authenticated the historical or genealogical documents the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe cited.
The World Monuments Fund declined to comment on the findings of this investigation, and UNESCO did not respond.
Taken together, the tribe’s acquisitions are, relatively speaking, significant. A few tribes have managed to see vast tracts placed in trust — nearly 60,000 acres for the Santa Ana Pueblo in New Mexico, for example, and almost 39,000 for the Osage Nation in Oklahoma. But BIA data show nearly 70 percent of applications filed between 1995 and 2014 were for less than 50 acres. Many sought tiny slivers of land. The Puyallup Tribe, in what’s currently Washington state, filed paperwork for just 0.57 acres, and applications filed by the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in Minnesota included parcels as small as 0.684 acres.
“Rampant land dispossession has not been addressed with actual tribes,” said Whyte. “That’s well documented. It’s clear. I think the remedies are clear. Yet somebody that spins this narrative is then receiving resources and having a public profile, but there’s nothing behind it.”
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 AldernMancias’ side-stepping of the process that recognized tribes must endure limits how that land is protected. A community land trust, like the one the Mellon Foundation initially supported, can offer limited protection from fossil fuel and other development. Land placed into trust, however, is placed under the jurisdiction of a federally recognized tribe. It is no longer subject to state and local taxes, zoning laws, or eminent domain, and officially becomes “Indian Country,” allowing a tribe to exercise its inherent sovereign powers, manage land and resources as it sees fit, and deploy traditional ecological practices.
That has profound implications for biodiversity and the climate. A review of more than 600 studies shows conservation is vastly more successful when Indigenous Peoples and local communities have primary control or equal partnership over their lands. Positive outcomes have been achieved in 85 percent of the cases where that happens, compared to just 18 percent when Native peoples are treated merely as stakeholders or a community to be consulted.
“The Indigenous climate justice movement is all about the fact that you have, across the world, thousands of groups that for generations have been self-governing,” said Whyte. “These self-governing entities, in the territories where they are self-governing or where legally they should be able to self-govern, have a tremendous impact on climate change.”
Juan Mancias addresses attendees at a climate protest in New York City on September 19, 2023. Gina M. Randazzo / ZUMA Press Wire / ShutterstockIn a warming world, Indigenous identities — warped by centuries of abuse and misuse — have become potent vehicles for capturing public attention and sympathy. This too often includes recycling of old tropes, including the ecologically minded Indian made popular by Espera Oscar de Corti. Among the most well-known pretendians, de Corti is famous for his appearance as “The Crying Indian” in a Keep America Beautiful ad that aired on Earth Day 1971. De Corti, dressed as a Plains-style Indian in buckskin and braids, paddles a canoe past ship channels filled with trash before pulling up to a debris-strewn beach. “Some people have a deep, abiding respect for the natural beauty that was once this country, and some people don’t,” the narrator intones as trash thrown from a passing car lands at de Corti’s feet. The camera pans up to his face, where a single tear rolls down his cheek.
But that trope endures beyond nostalgia. Today, it appropriates and repackages genuine Indigenous scholarship, worldviews, and political struggles into simplified archetypes that can be easily consumed, circulated, and capitalized upon, from the crying Indian to the righteous water protector.
“The appropriation and use of that imagery can be attractive to NGOs entering into this space,” said Monte Mills, director of the Native American Law Center at the University of Washington. “Some of that is so deeply ingrained in the national consciousness. It’s hard to uproot.”
Members of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas gather outside the White House following President Joe Biden’s October 2021 proclamation of Indigenous Peoples Day. Andrew Harnik / AP PhotoIndigenous Peoples have long been imagined or appropriated to serve settler needs and anxieties. Phil Deloria, a Yankton-descended Harvard historian and author of Playing Indian, argues that Americans have always needed constructed images of “Indians” to define their own history and identity. From sports mascots to the Boy Scouts’ appropriation of Indigenous culture, Native iconography has been woven into narratives of national belonging.
“In the ’70s, you’ve got this ecological Indian thing happening,” Deloria said. In the 1980s, the self-healing, New Age Indian was in vogue. And then, “In the ’90s and aughts, you’ve got the postmodern Indian, who’s sort of ironic and hip and kind of cool,” Deloria added. “So one way to think about this is that climate change is just another one of these modernist crises where people imagine certain kinds of Indian-ness.”
For Mancias, that kind of Indian-ness has meant replacing buckskin with ribbon shirts and ball caps, trash by pipelines, tears by righteous anger.
“I’m no f*cking activist,” said Mancias. “I’m protecting our land and protecting our principles and our teachings and who we are. Cuz I was told, ‘Go get our lands back.’”
In February of this year, the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe graduated from press releases, niche blogs, and climate reporting to Hollywood with the release of Gaslit. The documentary, hosted by Jane Fonda and produced by Greenpeace, chronicles her travels through Texas’ oil fields, documenting “fossil fuel profiteering, environmental racism, and the lives of everyday people.” During her journey, Fonda visits the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe, and between sweeping images of the Gulf Coast and fossil fuel infrastructure, footage of Juan Mancias and Frankie Orona carrying an American Indian Movement flag flashes across the screen.
For viewers, there are no missing records, genealogical gaps, questionable family histories, or factual anachronisms. Instead, they see exactly what Mancias has manifested: a moral, Indigenous front line in the battle to stop climate change, with a story the world is eager to believe.
In the film, that story is delivered by Christopher Basaldú, the co-founder of South Texas Environmental Justice Network and alleged relative of Mancias. “We have the port selling us out, not listening to the tribe when we tell them these are sacred lands and we actually do have villages and archeological sites in the area that are being destroyed,” he says. “On top of that, in comes the billionaire conman of the world, Elon Musk. He’s polluting and destroying the area where we remember our creation.”
“When Gaslit was produced and published, our editorial review surfaced no dispute over the region’s Indigenous communities and gave us no reason to doubt Mr. Mancias’ statements,” said a spokesperson for the film. “Greenpeace USA respects Indigenous sovereignty and the right to self-determination as outlined in our Indigenous Peoples Policy, and also recognizes that Indigenous identity is a complex issue due to the far-reaching effects of colonialism. Therefore, we believe decisions on claims of Indigenous identity belong to tribal nations and communities, and follow that leadership.”
The fight against Musk and his company SpaceX has become Mancias’ primary focus these days. With the Texas Supreme Court dismissing the tribe’s claims earlier this year, the tribe has opened a new front: Working with the Center for Biological Diversity, South Texas Environmental Justice Network, and SaveRGV to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The groups hope to block a land swap that would give SpaceX more than 700 acres of a national wildlife refuge.
“Our Mothman prophecies come straight out of Texas and they talk about the coming of fracking,” Mancias said of prehistoric and historic petroglyphs found in the state. “It shows horizontal fracking and it shows the actual land movers, and then there’s the other ones that show SpaceX and Blue Origin and they show the rockets there.”
Of this, as with everything, belief is the only evidence he can offer.
Correction: This story originally misstated Joseph Sciortino’s title.
CREDITSThis story was reported and written by Tristan Ahtone and edited by Chuck Squatriglia and Katherine Bagley. Story art by Marty Two Bulls Jr., with art direction by Teresa Chin. Fact-checking was conducted by Elisângela Mendonça of Mongabay through the Indigenous News Alliance, as well as Angely Mercado. The story was copyedited by Jaime Buerger and Laura Mallonnee assisted in searching Texas state archives.
DISCLOSURES
- Tristan Ahtone contributed to the IJA Indigenous Identity Reporting Guide, the UNESCO Indigenous Peoples and the Media report, and the Vermont Public Radio Series “Recognized” cited in this story. He has delivered lectures through the Mellon Foundation’s Sawyer Seminar.
- Grist included Nick Tilsen, CEO of NDN Collective in its 2019 Grist 50 list of climate innovators. Bekah Hinojosa appeared on the 2022 Grist 50 and in our Looking Forward newsletter.
- Grist receives funding from Hive Fund, the Rockefeller Family Fund, 11th Hour Project, and the Schmidt Family Foundation. Funders play no role in Grist’s editorial decisions.
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The climate movement gave this Texas tribe millions and a global platform. No one checked its story. on Aug 13, 2026.
5 takeaways from our investigation into the ‘ghost’ tribe that got millions in climate funding
In 2017, Juan Mancias, the chairman of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas, traveled to France to help pressure two of the country’s largest banks into divesting from oil and gas projects in South Texas. He cast the fight as a new chapter in a centuries-long struggle to protect the tribe’s sacred lands. The campaign succeeded, and helped make Mancias an international climate figure. Over the next several years, he would use that status to bring more than $5 million in philanthropic funding to the unrecognized tribe.
An investigation by Grist found that the historical and genealogical evidence underpinning Mancias’ claim that he is the hereditary chief of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe cannot be verified. The foundational document he cites cannot be located or authenticated, and Mancias failed to provide it after multiple requests. Genealogical records trace his documented Indigenous ancestry to Mexico in the late 1700s on his maternal line, not the paternal line his claim rests on.
Read Next The climate movement gave this Texas tribe millions and a global platform. No one checked its story. Tristan AhtoneMancias’ case reveals an unofficial “shadow” recognition system, one in which environmental nonprofits, journalists, and international human rights bodies support unrecognized, and unverified, individuals and groups in the fight against climate change. Although the short-term gains are real — Mancias and his allies have stymied LNG expansion in South Texas — experts said they often come at the expense of legitimate Indigenous Peoples, tribes, and organizations.
Here are five takeaways from our investigation:
Marty Two Bulls Jr. / Grist The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas has raised more than $5 million for climate- and environmental-related efforts since 2019 despite holding neither federal nor state recognition.After incorporating as a nonprofit in 1999, the tribe operated on a shoestring for two decades and reported less than $50,000 in annual revenue for several years beginning in 2012. That changed soon after the protests at the Standing Rock Indian Reservation, when Mancias’ campaign in France made him an international climate figure. Philanthropists gave him money, environmental nonprofits provided legal assistance, and journalists chronicled his work.
Mancias’ primary evidence supporting his claims of Indigeneity — an 1871 railroad report describing an 1801 massacre — cannot be located or authenticated, and historians doubt its plausibility.Mancias has cited the document for two decades, including in federal court, as proof of his lineage and the tribe’s connection to South Texas, but he would not produce a physical copy. Extensive searches of repositories within the Texas State Library and Archives Commission found no evidence it exists, and Grist identified multiple anachronisms in its timeline and provenance with historians describing its existence as “improbable.”
Between 2022 and 2024, the tribe used philanthropic grants to buy four properties totaling nearly 23 acres along a proposed pipeline route in Cameron County, Texas.The purchases allowed the tribe to purchase land it describes as ancestral territory — a claim that cannot be verified — and sidestep the arduous federal process recognized tribal nations must navigate to reacquire land. That contrast is stark. Federal policies like the Dawes Act and the Morrill Act seized and redistributed millions of acres of expropriated tribal land to settlers and state institutions — dispossessions that have been exhaustively documented and largely unremedied. But records obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request show that recognized nations seeking to recover even a fraction of an acre can wait decades to acquire land, while the Carrizo/Comecrudo, with philanthropic backing, bought land in a matter of months. Unlike land reacquired by recognized tribes, parcels in Cameron County remain subject to property taxes and carry only limited protection from development.
The Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe of Texas and its closest ally, the Society of Native Nations, a Texas-focused intertribal organization, hold accredited observer status at the United Nations.Twenty-four Indigenous-focused organizations are accredited observers to the U.N. Environment Assembly, or UNEA, the world’s highest decision-making body on environmental matters. Four are based in the United States, including the Carrizo/Comecrudo and the Society of Native Nations.
SNN also holds accreditation at UNESCO, where it is one of three U.S. nongovernmental organizations focused on Indigenous issues. It secured that status by highlighting its partnership with the Carrizo/Comecrudo. Because the U.N. bars Indigenous Peoples and governments from participating as sovereign entities in its highest bodies, NGO accreditation is a convenient workaround that carries real privileges. These organizations can submit language to draft resolutions, access documents unavailable to the public, and engage directly with government delegations, including U.S. authorities that Orona told Grist have at times included officials from the Justice Department and Health and Human Services. Such access typically is reserved for the elected officials of federally recognized tribal nations.
At the U.N., the person who would consider challenges to the legitimacy of the Carrizo/Comecrudo Tribe or the Society of Native Nations leads the society itself.Frankie Orona co-chairs the Indigenous Peoples Major Group at the U.N. Environment Programme, or UNEP, whose internal guidance calls for referring complaints about participants to its co-chairs. Orona is executive director of the Society of Native Nations, which he built out of an American Indian Movement chapter that Mancias recruited him into. UNEP told Grist it does not have a procedure for addressing such a conflict of interest, though it said concerns could go to the other co-chair or directly to its Civil Society Unit.
This post has been updated to clarify SNN’s Texas-focused mission.
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline 5 takeaways from our investigation into the ‘ghost’ tribe that got millions in climate funding on Aug 13, 2026.
As Montana warms, Missoula’s first heat map reveals hidden hotspots
Researchers have found that the amount of green space and shade in a neighborhood can significantly shape temperatures. On average, neighborhoods with more trees and green space — instead of impermeable surfaces like pavement — can run anywhere from 1 to 7 degrees Fahrenheit cooler. The phenomenon, which has been well studied in major urban cities, is called the “heat island effect.” But researchers have done far less work examining how those trends play out in more rural parts of the country.
Missoula, Montana, is helping fill that gap. In 2024, Climate Smart Missoula, a local nonprofit, teamed up with the city and county of Missoula and secured federal funding for a heat mapping initiative. Last summer, teams of volunteers drove countywide transects with sensors recording second-by-second measurements of temperature and humidity. Then analysts with the climate adaptation consulting firm CAPA Strategies turned the data into a now-publicly available heat map for the county. It’s the first of its kind for the state and this region of the Rockies. (Cities in Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota also do not have heat maps.)
A humidity and heat sensor attached to a car window collect data to create Missoula County’s heat map.Ellis Juhlin
The research is especially important because Missoula has historically had warm, dry summers. Temperatures in the western Montana county climb into the 80s, with occasional stretches in the 90s, before cooling off sharply after sunset. But that pattern has shifted in recent years, with hotter summers and warmer nights. The area is already experiencing more days with temperatures above 90 degrees F each year. The county’s average annual temperature is projected to increase by 4 to 5 degrees F by 2050.
The change poses particular challenges for places like Missoula, where homes, buildings, and other public infrastructure were built for cooler climates. Montana has one of the lowest rates of residential air conditioning in the country. When the heat builds, Montanans don’t have the same infrastructure as Arizonans or Texans to keep cool.
The researchers found that temperatures can vary by nearly 20 degrees across Missoula County depending on the prevalence of shade from trees and other green spaces. Susan Teitelman, with Climate Smart Missoula, said their findings mirror heat maps in other larger cities across the country.
“What we’re seeing in Missoula mimics larger cities like New York and Boston,” she said. “You see the same thing happening everywhere: Poorer, hotter neighborhoods have fewer trees; wealthier, greener neighborhoods have lower temperatures.”
Alli Kane, the county’s climate action program coordinator, said some of the results weren’t surprising. Neighborhoods like the University District or the Rattlesnake, where large, mature trees provide shade, were significantly cooler than the Northside or Westside.
“Places where we anticipated we would have heat islands were downtown Missoula, around Southgate Mall, those areas that are more urban and more built up,” Kane said.
But there were surprises, too, including how dry, brown open lands, like an empty lot in town, acted as heat islands, according to Kane. These unmanaged and undeveloped spaces tend to be a magnet for invasive species that quickly adapt to hot and dry conditions. When they’re left unwatered and not replaced with native species, they can act as heat islands, Kane said. The research showed heavily forested places like Seeley Lake and Evaro, a rural area north of the city center with dense trees, also held on to heat overnight.
“You’ll see, especially in the morning map, they are retaining heat from the day before because of that really dense canopy, and so that effect is resulting in some of our highest-recorded morning temperatures,” Kane said.
Agencies like the National Weather Service have consistently identified heat as the most deadly weather Americans experience. Research from the University of Montana published in 2024 found that for every 1 degree Celsius temperature increase, 911 calls increased correspondingly by 1 percent. Many of those calls came from rural areas with older, retired populations that are more susceptible to extreme heat.
Read Next These psychedelic images reveal what your weather app isn’t telling you Matt SimonThe city and county of Missoula and Climate Smart launched a campaign called Stay Cool Missoula to build community resilience for extreme heat and attempt to prevent those deaths. Teitelman with Climate Smart Missoula pointed out that it’s critical to prepare communities for what is coming.
“Extreme heat is dangerous,” she says. “It is impacting Missoula and Montana. It’s impacting northern climates, and it’s an issue of equity.”
Teitelman leads Climate Smart’s efforts to plant trees in lower-income neighborhoods where tree cover is sparse or nonexistent. Having access to the heat map has helped her target those planting efforts. The map has been put to use in other ways too, like conversations around the proposed data center in Bonner on the banks of the Blackfoot River. That project was ultimately canceled by the property manager. But Kane said being able to showcase just how much warmer that area is, due to the amount of land cleared for industrial use, will help inform the county on future regulations and decision-making.
Missoula was one of 11 communities — including New Orleans, Memphis, Buffalo, and Moab, among others — that NOAA funded as part of a nationwide effort to map heat islands in 2025. But the work almost didn’t happen.
Like many federally funded projects related to climate change, it was targeted by the Trump administration. Kane, Teitelman, and their other partners had been awarded the grant from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Center for Collaborative Heat Monitoring Program in 2024. The money was allocated in the Inflation Reduction Act, the 2022 climate law passed by Congress. The Trump administration then terminated the funding in May 2025.
Read Next What federal cuts to science funding could mean for the Great Lakes Vivian LaAbout half of the money was spent or allocated to partners before the grant’s cancellation, but Teitelman said it was a team effort to carry out the work after funds were rescinded. Climate Smart, along with the city and county of Missoula, had the staff to continue the work, but they also relied on free assistance from CAPA Strategies and other national collaborators.
“They’ve done all this pro bono work for our community and other communities. That’s just been a boon for us and communities across the U.S. who got to do this heat mapping in light of federal funding being revoked,” Teitelman said.
Kane said the lack of funding doesn’t change the reality of a warming world.
“There has been so much disruption overturned because of what’s happening at the federal level,” she said. “But I do think that our local governments and our local organizations are pretty uniquely positioned to continue to work on this, and so we’re putting everything we can behind it.”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline As Montana warms, Missoula’s first heat map reveals hidden hotspots on Aug 13, 2026.
Heat 'not fit for humans' hits Britain
Pushing the climate crisis: How advertising fuels high-carbon lifestyles
Dr Victoria Harvey is a researcher and senior carbon consultant who focuses on the UK advertising industry.
Helen Phillips’ book, ‘Hum’, is set in a dystopian near future, in a city suffering the effects of climate breakdown and with dire air quality. Robots (the Hums) press advertising messages during conversations, meetings and even as they carry out medical procedures.
The Hums are vehicles for these ads, which are often for products like cosmetics, sweets or anything that might be relevant during interactions with humans. This advertising is poorly disguised, and merges with sentiments that lean towards concerns of well-being, convincing people how much better off they’ll be if they make a purchase.
While the novel is futuristic, the insidious way advertising permeates daily life is resonant of how adverts show up in our world today. And these ads are directly contributing to the worsening future climate Phillips describes in her book.
Already by the summer of 2026, Europe had seen a 57% increase in wildfires in just four years with western Europe recording the hottest ever June and July on record. We’re facing droughts and floods, as well as predicted hikes in food costs or even chronic food shortages – and that’s before the expected additional effects of a strong El Niño later this year.
Frequent flying and bigger burgersA portion of this climate breakdown is fuelled by over-consumption in richer countries, particularly of products that are high carbon – for which advertising can take some of the blame. Research shows that adverts drive citizens to consume about a third more goods and services in general, over and above what they might have purchased.
Yet despite a clear link between promoting high-carbon behaviours and climate breakdown, little advertising regulation exists in the UK. Take frequent flying for instance, one of the most carbon-intensive activities we can partake in.
EasyJet’s latest ad campaign is called “Drop Everything”. It encourages consumers to book cheap flights departing within the next 48 hours for presumably short or weekend getaways. Rather than a specific destination, “Drop Everything” promotes a mindset that encourages indiscriminate consumption of flying. The ads were shown on billboards with clever creative slogans, as well as on digital media and through influencer campaigns.
Airlines risk legal challenges by advertising jet fuel as “sustainable”, NGO warns
Overall, flight numbers are increasing. The UK Civil Aviation Authority reported the highest number of UK passengers in the first quarter of 2026 (more than 61 million, breaking previous records for travel between January and March). It seems we’re still not joining the dots between flying and a worsening climate.
And how about meat consumption? Scientists advocate for less meat-eating, especially beef which has the highest carbon footprint of nearly all foods. Yet adverts from McDonald’s proliferate, helping make it one of the highest-volume sellers of fast-food chain beef burgers. In 2024, the outdoor advertising budget for McDonald’s UK rose to £86 million, an increase of 71% on previous years.
A billboard carrying McDonald’s UK advertising for one of its biggest burgers, which won “Badvert” of the month in May 2026 (Photo: Badvertising) A billboard carrying McDonald’s UK advertising for one of its biggest burgers, which won “Badvert” of the month in May 2026 (Photo: Badvertising) Small share for sustainabilityWhile over half of UK ad professionals feel increasingly queasy about their profession and its effects on the climate crisis, the people running the show – the UK trade bodies – prefer to focus on the growth advertising brings.
In the first three months of 2026, they stated that UK advertising spend increased by 9.3%, reaching a total of £11.7 billion for that quarter, fuelling consumption and market growth.
But how many of those adverts actually promote low carbon goods and services? Kantar’s Sustainable Ads Tracker shows the percentage of ads featuring sustainability messaging in 2026 is around 4.3%. That’s woefully low, and much of this is made up of messaging that promotes recycling.
PR firm working for Shell wins COP30 media contract
Additionally, the industry continues to happily produce adverts for the large oil and gas corporations that are fuelling climate breakdown. These adverts only narrowly pass the Advertising Standards Authorities’ advertising codes, allowing the continued greenwashing of the world’s most polluting brands.
There is essentially no leadership from the UK trade bodies, likely because they are directly funded by the brands and advertisers themselves. They are essentially ‘ad shushing’ – pushing for indiscriminate growth and directing attention to their sustainability awards, while confusingly denying that adverts drive higher consumption overall.
Let’s ‘un-shush’Where does this leave us as we are subjected to hundreds, if not thousands, of persuasive advertising messages every day that support high-carbon lifestyles? Most ad professionals are unable to push back against this agenda at work, often due to the threat of job loss. The advertising trade bodies won’t take the lead as they work in service to big brands and advertisers.
NGOs urge Brazil to prevent fossil fuel capture of COP30 climate summit
So, who can push for the changes we need? Members of the public.
Through pressuring our city officials and governments, we can force through restrictions, such as the watershed bans on unhealthy foods on TV before 9pm in the UK. Through supporting the efforts of organisations such as Ad Free Cities and others, we can help achieve bans on outdoor advertising for fossil fuels, aviation, meat and even single-use plastics in cities and regions such as Amsterdam, The Hague, Edinburgh, Florence, Uppsala and many more.
If we’re serious about climate change and stopping big global brands pushing their high-carbon products onto us, then advertising restrictions are one of the best ways to achieve this. If we don’t want a world like the one Phillips describes in her book, we need to make our voices heard above the advertising noise.
The post Pushing the climate crisis: How advertising fuels high-carbon lifestyles appeared first on Climate Home News.
Feminist Cities: Democratising Urban Mobility
From its outset, urban mobility has been built for and by men, mainly with one specific journey in mind: home to work and then back again. Not only does this design marginalise women and ignore their care-driven living patterns, but it also means their safety is endangered in the public space. Across the Balkans, grassroots organisations are mapping inequalities and reimagining urban mobility through a gender-responsive lens.
You cannot easily fit women into a structure that is already coded as male.
– Mary Beard
The urban environment has never been gender-neutral. In critical discussions of gender inequality, the binary division of space into public and private spheres often emerges as a key theme. Public affairs – and, therefore, the public sphere and mobility – have been dominated by men since antiquity, whereas the private sphere has been viewed predominantly as the domain of women and family life. This understanding of space, according to feminist urban theory, both illustrates and reproduces traditional gender power relations.
Urban mobility dictates when and how people move and carry out their daily routines, as well as who gets to do what. As a system of transport infrastructure that enables movement throughout the urban environment, urban mobility has been conceived, designed, and built by – and for – those who govern the public sphere. As such, urban mobility often ends up preventing the free and safe movement of women. The various elements which make up this infrastructure – such as public transport, street layout, pavements, and lighting – are built according to the needs of men, forcing women daily to try and fit into a space and way of doing things that does not recognise them.
The infrastructure of movement in urban areas is governed by three principles that, throughout history, have been important parameters for the performance of daily tasks traditionally undertaken by men: speed, efficiency, and precision. These principles took the pater familias from point A to point B – from home to work – and back again. Analysing the movements that women make every day, we discovered a much more layered connection between locations and activities – something known as “trip chaining”. This phenomenon represents the practice of connecting the shorter distances that women cover during the day into one “branched” journey which is not linear; rather, it involves visiting additional important locations within an overall pattern of movement.
These points on the journey, where women stop for a short period, are part of a structural issue – namely, caring for the family and the community – involving tasks that are imposed on them, such as taking and collecting children to and from school, going to the gym, grocery shopping, paying bills, taking care of elderly family members, and other care-related and “emotional” work.
Urban mobility dictates when and how people move and carry out their daily routines, as well as who gets to do what.
Globally, women perform 76.2 per cent of unpaid work caring for others and typically choose to work near home so that they can combine paid work with unpaid caregiving responsibilities. Treating household chores and caring responsibilities as “women’s issues” is another mechanism by which gender inequality is reproduced within urban life and women’s spatial movement. Reclaiming their space and freedom of movement often begins in the family.
The gender gap is even visible when we talk about riding a bicycle: globally, women use this mode of transport up to four times less than men. In Europe, specifically, the difference between men and women’s use of cycling as a means of transport is 64 per cent in Spain, 54 per cent in France and the UK, and 42 per cent in Germany. This disparity is another result of the structural obstacles women face: they are more sensitive to traffic risks, fear violence by men, often carry groceries, and take children to and from school or nursery. All of these factors mean that their first choice of transport is usually not to ride a bicycle.
Women’s participation in urban life and their use of urban transport are strongly influenced by a sense of fear. Moreover, the paths and roadways they take every day are determined by which part of the city or which means of transport feels safe, and where there is the least likelihood of being attacked.
Fostering safetyWomen shouldn’t have to choose between freedom of movement and safety, and this has been recognised by a number of initiatives in southeast Europe. In places where urban mobility is most risky for women due to a culture of violence or the lack of suitable infrastructure, organisations are working to provide fundamental protection for women. One organisation that has taken up this cause is Space SyntaKs, in Kosovo. It has created a safety map of Pristina based on the experiences of women, who have largely been marginalised in the planning of urban spaces and traffic.
Security in this research is not simply a technical concept, but rather an indicator of what women depend on for their well-being and ability to function. Security starts from the right to a safe environment as a basic human right, which demands that policymakers actively address the problems women face every day in moving around the city. This research pays particular attention to subjective indicators, including feelings such as fear of any type of harassment, theft, and physical threats. It also focuses on how diverse the users of a given public space perceive it to be, and unlike previous research in this area, matches this data with objective indicators. These factors include the presence of street lighting, security cameras, public institutions, and stray dogs.
According to the research, not a single public space in Kosovo’s capital has attained even half of the maximum safety index score. Respondents expressed fear and identified threats such as verbal and physical violence by men, and these were mapped throughout the entire urban core of the city. The maps revealed that Pristina is not a safe place for women, and that the places they move in are virtually never completely safe from start to finish. Gender-responsive planning of urban areas and urban mobility begins with identifying important factors for the safe and free movement of women, as well as mapping locations where intervention can make movement safer.
Similar initiatives have taken place in Belgrade under the initiative “Don’t be afraid of the dark” by the collective Sestre, drugarice (“Sisters, friends”). This campaign is one of the responses to the question of security and the problem of violence by men against women in public spaces and transport, and it aims to map the city of Belgrade according to its “invisible boundaries” – places in which sexual attacks have taken place – and to make these places safer.
Sestre, drugarice has been effective in communicating important and alarming statistics, including that 64 per cent of women have been sexually harassed on the street, with 57.9 per cent of those being child victims aged between 13 and 17. It is particularly striking that 40.5 per cent of harassment took place on public transport. The results of an anonymous questionnaire created as part of this campaign show that public transport and bus stops are among the likeliest locations for sexual harassment incidents. Members of the collective organise women’s activist walks, advise them on how to feel safe in public spaces and on public transport, and call on women to actively help make their environment safer through “micro-actions”. One such initiative, called “Ada is ours”, saw members of the collective and the wider public take part in a feminist activist walk, tying bows around broken streetlights to get them repaired and to send the message that Belgrade belongs to women even after sunset.
According to the collective, and based on answers from respondents, the main forms of violence on public transport include verbal violence, unwanted physical contact, exhibitionism, secondary victimisation, and worse, stalking and attempted rape.1 In order to map and recognise these types of violence, it is important to use all available platforms to inform and educate women about what they mean. Only when such violence becomes visible do we perceive it as systemic, and are thus able to challenge that system.
That said, the very act of creating a mental map of streets and ways of moving as a basis for safety, actively assessing risks, giving out advice on safety to other women, and organising movement based on assumed family obligations all fall under women’s “emotional work”. By recognising this as work, we raise awareness of women’s position, create the possibility of sharing caregiving more equally within the family, place responsibility on the institutions that create public policies related to urban mobility, and preserve women’s emotional and cognitive resources and, ultimately, their lives.
In the sphere of gender-responsive urban planning and urban mobility, there is an ongoing debate about how to create a safe environment for women. Devoting parts of public space and transport infrastructure exclusively to women is one of the short-term solutions adopted by some city administrations to address the issue of male violence against women. This institutional measure has been deemed necessary in social contexts where public transport is the only way for women to move around if they are economically or socially marginalised.
Women’s carriages have been introduced in many countries, from Brazil to Japan. In the latter, sexual violence against women on public transport is so common it even has a special term: chikan. Nevertheless, countries that have responded to the problem of violence on public transport by segregating men and women do not report a significant reduction in the number of attacks on women, indicating that this mechanism does not address the root cause of the problem.
This is precisely the basis for criticising segregation: if women-only train carriages become the norm without any other major changes in public policy – the enforcement of penalties, education, and media campaigns – segregation by gender will place additional pressure on victims, discriminate against non-binary individuals, and send a message to men that their violence will be tolerated and movement and daily life planned around it. Women-only cars and spaces must not be the sole or permanent solution; instead, the city and public transport must be reclaimed, and safety for everyone established within shared spaces.
If we want to achieve the right to freedom of movement and safety for all, we must shine a light on how unsuitable the current urban mobility infrastructure is and how much it marginalises women. Women’s lives and movement patterns show us what complete institutional neglect looks like.
In the case of Podgorica, Montenegro’s capital, apart from the lack of adjustment to gender-sensitive indicators, we can see concrete examples of how unsuitable the transport system is for women with disabilities or mobility impairments. Despite committing more than a decade ago to ensure the accessibility of buildings and streets, Podgorica has utterly failed to do so. The city’s poorly built and badly maintained streets and pavements render movement unsafe for women who predominantly shoulder the responsibility of childcare, push prams, or use wheelchairs to get around. Narrow, uneven pavements full of open manhole covers and drains; inaccessible public transport stops; steep, slippery ramps unsuited to wheelchair tyres; and tactile paving not designed for the variety of shoes women wear – these are just some of the daily obstacles women encounter when getting around. These barriers prevent access to social, healthcare, educational, and professional opportunities, further intensifying the discrimination faced by marginalised groups.
Where women winThis is precisely the basis for criticising segregation: if women-only train carriages become the norm without any other major changes in public policy […] we send a message to men that their violence will be tolerated and movement and daily life planned around it.
Vienna boasts a long tradition of gender-responsive urban mobility. Since 2000, gender equality has been a priority in the Austrian capital’s urban planning. By integrating gender perspectives in all of its policies, the city has implemented projects to improve public lighting; widened pavements to accommodate wheelchairs; enhanced visibility in streets and passageways by installing street mirrors; and added benches and seating at bus stops, along pedestrian routes, and on public transport. This strategy stems from a recognition that women rely more frequently on these ways of moving around and spend more time waiting between short-distance trips.
Vienna’s response to “trip chaining” has been to build housing units as part of the “Women-Work-City” project, designed by women for women. In these units, women who provide care within the family and community can find kindergartens, doctors, and pharmacies all in one place, thereby reducing the time spent on these caregiving tasks. The goal of this project was to facilitate the caregiving work women perform.
Meanwhile, the city of Umeå in Sweden has taken even bolder steps. Widely known as “the most feminist city” in the world, Umeå includes a gender-responsive dimension in all its urban planning. In 2019, a prototype gender-sensitive bus stop was built in the city, designed to address women’s concerns about safety on public transport. Audible and visual signals indicate that the bus is approaching the stop, while rotating wooden booths enhance visibility, allow for monitoring of surroundings, provide shelter from the wind and other weather conditions, and create a sense of security within the public space.
In addition, Umeå has undertaken other feminist-inspired spatial interventions, including benches created for play and socialisation in collaboration with and catered towards teenage girls; constructing well-lit underground pedestrian tunnels featuring large central entrances and exits, as well as rounded wall corners to enhance visibility; prioritising snow removal services based on gender, taking into account that women walk and use public transport more frequently; and clearing pavements and public transport stops before roadways. In addition, the city organises a “Gendered Landscape” tour that connects existing feminist spatial interventions with those still needed to make the city truly a place for everyone. All of this has been reinforced by education, research, the integration of gender perspectives into urban mobility data, advocacy for the equal participation of men and women in caregiving, and women’s active involvement in decision-making.
In the UK, one factor that has improved women’s safety and strengthened a culture of zero tolerance for sexual harassment on public transport is the cooperation among the British Transport Police, the Metropolitan Police, the City of London Police, and Transport for London (TfL). After a 2013 TfL survey showed that 15 per cent of women using public transport had experienced sexual harassment in the previous year, and that about 90 per cent of cases were not reported, training was organised for 2,000 police officers on the public transport network with the support of feminist organisations. Only half a year after the launch of this initiative, the percentage of reported sexual harassment cases increased by 20 per cent, and the number of cases going to trial increased by 32 per cent.
As UN Women has noted, aside from improvements to the public transportation system, the active participation of men is a crucial step in the struggle to eliminate male violence against women in public transport. To that end, in Vietnam’s Ho Chi Minh City, the organisation has also opened so-called Male Advocacy Clubs, which bring men together for the purpose of educating and promoting gender equality in various spheres. One of the media campaigns by the club targeted the problem of sexual harassment of women in public spaces. The campaign’s message about preventing this type of violence reached as many as 8.5 million people.
Mobility for allTo build truly inclusive mobility, we must reclaim our parks, streets, and public transport. Moreover, to liberate women and make their movement safer, we must begin collecting gendered statistics and mapping the intersectional female experience of living in cities. Let’s react to systemic discrimination and violence, shout, write, unite, build a network of solidarity for each other, and create systemic solutions.
As women’s right to free movement is under threat, it is important to imagine a future of equal urban mobility – one where this right is guaranteed and respected, the provision of care is shared equally, and women participate actively in spatial planning and the creation of mobility policies. In such a future, women are healthy and safe, and they can freely socialise, create, educate, and improve their lives.
“What would transportation look like if it were designed by mothers? How would streets be different if they were made for women with disabilities? Which social groups are not represented in our infrastructure, and how can we change that?” – these questions can be the start of constructive conversations about building a fairer city. In addition to marginalised social groups, men must also take responsibility and be active participants in such discussions.
At the centre of these conversations should be a gender-responsive and intersectional understanding of women’s mobility issues. After all, it is from gender studies and feminist urban theory that the criticisms of male-centred urban mobility emerged. Women’s path to reclaiming common spaces passes from there, too.
This article first appeared in Serbian in Omorika. It is republished here with permission. Translated by Alex Melbourne | Voxeurop
- H. Cvetičanin Knežević, Koliko je sigurna tvoja vožnja? Istraživanje o seksualnom uznemiravanju, napadima i bezbednosti žena u javnom prevozu u Beogradu (Žensko udruženje Kolubarskog okruga, 2025), p. 5-6. / How safe is your journey? Research into sexual harassment, assault and women’s safety on Belgrade’s public transport (Women’s Association of Kolubara district, 2025), pp. 5-6. ︎
“We’ve gone backwards” – new plastics treaty text dims hopes for production curbs
A new draft text to revive deadlocked UN plastics treaty talks does not include specific measures on managing runaway plastic production, a growing source of greenhouse gas emissions, drawing criticism from some countries and campaigners that ambition for the global pact is shrinking.
After diplomats met in Nairobi early in July for the first time since negotiations fell apart a year ago, Chilean ambassador Julio Cordano, who is chairing the talks, released a first document last weekend, setting out elements of a possible treaty to tackle plastic pollution.
Cordano stressed this is an “informal reference document” rather than a negotiated text. But its structure is similar to a draft treaty and closely resembles the previous version rejected by governments during the last round of formal negotiations in Geneva.
The new text recognises the world’s “unsustainable” levels of plastic production and consumption, both of which are projected to nearly triple by 2060. But it contains no measures to stem that growth, critics say, pointing to what they see as a broader weakening of ambition.
They argue the document is increasingly aligned with the demands of fossil fuel-producing countries, including Gulf states, the US and Russia, which have pushed for the treaty to focus on managing plastic waste rather than limiting production.
“When you leave the countries that have the most vested interests in delaying meaningful action to shape the agenda, you end up with a text that does nothing to end plastic pollution,” said David Azoulay, environmental health programme director at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).
France disappointed with production omission“We’ve gone backwards rather than forwards,” Christina Dixon, a campaigner at the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), told Climate Home News. “A text that was rejected by the majority of countries in Geneva as being too weak and not ambitious enough has been repackaged one year later with some key elements removed and put out as a kind of sign of progress.”
A French diplomatic source told Climate Home News it was “disappointing” that the text lacked any concrete provisions on tackling “unsustainable” levels of plastics production and consumption. That is despite a majority of countries repeatedly advocating for curbs and scientists saying the world cannot put an end to plastic pollution without tackling the issue at source, they added.
Governments across Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific islands have previously called for efforts to limit the manufacturing of plastics to “sustainable levels”, but their efforts have been frustrated by strong and persistent opposition from a small group of fossil fuel producers, who see plastics as a growing market for oil and gas.
Weakening of production ambitionCordano told Climate Home News that the “concept” of sustainable production is still reflected in different parts of the new document.
But measures aimed at achieving that objective have progressively weakened over time. Initial versions of the draft treaty, dating back to 2024, included a standalone article with the option of setting a global target to reduce the production and consumption of primary plastics.
That disappeared from successive drafts published in Geneva last year. The last version nevertheless said data on plastic production could be considered in future assessments of whether the treaty was meeting its objectives. Observers saw this as an important provision that could have strengthened the pact over time and potentially kept the door open for a global production target.
The new text only mentions “sustainable production” in the preamble and includes an article saying that countries could improve the design of plastic products in order to contribute to “sustainable production”.
“There’s a war of attrition element,” said Dennis Clare, a negotiator for the Pacific island nation of Micronesia. “The countries that want to do less are dragging out discussions and gradually pressuring the more ambitious to compromise towards a lower common denominator.”
Little space for thorny discussionsCountries have twice failed to agree on a global plastics treaty at what were meant to be final rounds of negotiations in December 2024 and August 2025. After being selected as the new chair earlier this year, Cordano has been working to steer the process back on track through a series of informal meetings, hoping diplomats can find common ground ahead of the next formal negotiations scheduled for early 2027.
But he has been criticised for sidelining discussions on some of the thorniest issues. Cordano kept plastic production off the official agenda for the Nairobi meeting a few weeks ago. He said beforehand that countries could bring any issue to the table, but production did not feature in the summary of discussions subsequently published by the chair.
Clare said discussions on fundamental elements of the treaty, including production, had been “constrained” and that there was little space for them in Nairobi.
Cordano told Climate Home News the Nairobi talks had provided space both for “reaffirming positions and expressing new ideas”, adding that countries “remain free to raise all issues they consider important”.
Informal talks between negotiators are held behind closed doors and neither the media nor external observers can take part.
Workers sort plastic waste at a recycling workshop on November 17, 2025 at Xa Cau village, outside Hanoi, Vietnam. (Photo by Thanh Hue/Getty Images) Workers sort plastic waste at a recycling workshop on November 17, 2025 at Xa Cau village, outside Hanoi, Vietnam. (Photo by Thanh Hue/Getty Images)Campaigners have accused the chair of making political calculations to reach an agreement at any cost. “He has clearly identified that the only way to achieve an agreement by consensus is to do away with the more complex elements of the treaty like those that deal with sustainable production and consumption of plastics,” the EIA’s Dixon said.
Cordano said he continues to be guided by countries as “they develop their own exchanges and continue working towards possible landing zones”.
Push for more ambitionGovernments will debate the new text at another meeting of chief negotiators in Bangkok, Thailand, at the end of September, and a new version of the document is expected after that meeting.
The French diplomatic source said the current text should not be viewed as “an end-product”, but as a starting point that “can and should be improved”.
France, together with the EU and members of the High Ambition Coalition (HAC), will continue pushing for stronger provisions, including measures to address plastic production, the source said.
China’s coal power rebounds as record clean energy goes to waste
The HAC group includes over 70 countries, primarily from across Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific.
Micronesian negotiator Clare said countries on the frontline of the plastics crisis may decide to reject a really weak treaty that puts the burden on them to clean up somebody else’s waste, while producers can keep churning out plastics unrestrained.
“If the treaty does not include essential elements of the solution, even an initial, apparent diplomatic success – an agreement – can come to be seen over time as an environmental failure,” Clare warned.
The post “We’ve gone backwards” – new plastics treaty text dims hopes for production curbs appeared first on Climate Home News.
Amid Drought, Hundreds of French Rivers Are Drying Up
An ongoing drought in Europe has sapped French rivers. Officials say that 43 percent of small waterways in France have been partially or completely dried up.
Conserving Culture in Endangered Species
How does a young wolf learn how to be a wolf?
Genetics certainly plays a role, but so do the knowledge and techniques passed on by the previous generation of wolves, who teach their young how to hunt, what areas to avoid, and how and when to howl (and what each variation in those howls means).
And much like human dialects and accents, wolf howls vary depending on where a wolf grows up. Research published a few years ago found that wolves around the world have at least 21 different types of regional howls.
In other words, wolves — and many other species — have unique regional cultures, just like people.
Should preserving those nonhuman cultures be a more important element of wildlife conservation?
A new short communication in the journal Oryx argues just that — and suggests how to make it happen.
Written by David Jennings, Heather Harl, and Andrew Carter of Defenders of Wildlife’s Center for Conservation Innovation, the paper does a deep dive into how behavior is reflected in decision-making for the Endangered Species Act and other conservation laws in the United States.
Behavior, they write, is one factor in a list of five that can be used to designate a distinct population segment of a vertebrate species as a discrete and significant group worthy of conservation (rather than or in addition to protecting a species as a whole). It can’t be the only factor, but in theory it could be a major one. (Other factors include physical, genetic, or ecological differences and international boundaries.)
Distinct population segments don’t receive Endangered Species Act protection very often — Atlantic salmon in the Gulf of Maine are a noteworthy example — and the authors didn’t find many examples where behavior played a deciding role to date. “[N]on-human animal culture was considered in distinct population segment listing determinations only twice,” they write, “both of which were for discreteness findings; once for the orca Orcinus orca in 2005, and once for the false killer whale Pseudorca crassidens in 2012.”
They found more evidence of nonhuman culture being used in the recovery plans required to be written for each species protected under the Endangered Species Act — but again, those were all restricted to whales.
The authors argue that it may be time to change that and start using nonhuman culture more often as a component of the best-available science required by the Endangered Species Act, because preserving culture may make animals more likely to survive. “Recognizing and conserving these cultures is important because socially transmitted behaviors can contribute to fitness, as well as indicate the extent to which groups may be able to adapt to changing environmental conditions,” they write.
On the other hand, they say using culture to establish a distinct population segment should “be used sparingly and not solely to divide a species and delist a specific population.”
Either way, it wouldn’t be easy. And as a strategy, it’s not immediately ready for widespread adoption because there aren’t many guidelines for using animal culture in this way — and because culture evolves rapidly. “Implementing the ESA for a distinct population segment based on distinctive cultures would potentially be challenging, given, for example, that cultures can be dynamic, and that conserving them may not always be as straightforward as simply protecting habitat,” they write.
Still, they provide several recommendations on how to start rolling it out, including integrating nonhuman culture into broader concepts of biodiversity protection in the Endangered Species Act and other laws and policies.
That seems unlikely to happen quickly given the Trump administration’s ambivalence, apathy, and antipathy toward wildlife conservation and the Endangered Species Act. But the paper serves as an important reminder that culture is worth preserving — whether it’s in our cities, our neighborhoods, or in the wild.
Here’s some additional recent research about nonhuman culture:
Patricia Izar, Erica van de Waal, Martha M. Robbins; Integrating culture into primate conservation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 1 May 2025; 380 (1925): 20240135. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2024.0135
Greggor, Alison L., ‘Animal Culture in Biodiversity Conservation’, in Jamshid J. Tehrani, Rachel L. Kendal, and Jeremy Kendal (eds), Applications, in Jamshid J. Tehrani, Jeremy Kendal, and Rachel L. Kendal (eds), Oxford Handbook of Cultural Evolution, Oxford Library of Psychology (2025; online edn, Oxford Academic, 23 Feb. 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198869252.013.74
Whiten, Andrew, et al. “Collective Knowledge and the Dynamics of Culture in Chimpanzees.” Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, vol. 377, no. 1843, 2022, pp. 1–9. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27096992
Nöbel, S., Jacquet, A., Isabel, G., Pocheville, A., Seabright, P. and Danchin, E. (2023), Conformity in mate choice, the overlooked social component of animal and human culture. Biol Rev, 98: 132-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12899
Fredriksen, A. (2025). Re-sounding spring: listening to planetary crisis and survival in recombinant birdsong. Cultural Geographies, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474025138686
Pilar Roncero, Olivia de Mendonça-Furtado, Patrícia Izar, Human-induced rapid environmental change: A case study showing negative impact on animal culture, Journal for Nature Conservation, Volume 74, 2023, 126424, ISSN 1617-1381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126424
Fitzpatrick, S., Andrews, K. Animal cultures matter for conservation, but also to animals. Learn Behav 54, 163–179 (2026). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-025-00700-4
Republish this article for free! Read our reprint policy. Previously in The Revelator:Species Spotlight: The Straw-Headed Bulbul Sings About Extinction
The post Conserving Culture in Endangered Species appeared first on The Revelator.
Scientists define a new category of heat wave: ‘Snow eaters’
Matthew LaPlante doesn’t have to go to a lab to see his research in action. On some mornings, he can just look out his own window in the mountains high above Salt Lake City. After a warm night when the temperature stays above freezing, he’ll wake up and see that the snow level has dropped by inches, revealing more of the aspens he taps for syrup.
“It feels like a monster came and just in the middle of the night, took a bite out of a snowpack,” said LaPlante, a journalist and climate scientist at Utah State University.
So it’s fitting that scientists have started calling these kinds of heat waves, marked by unusually high temperatures in the spring and early summer, “snow eaters.”
LaPlante was part of a recent study, published in the journal Science Advances, that attempted, for the first time, to identify what conditions exactly make for a “snow eater.” Compared to normal warm spells or heat waves, the researchers determined that these events happen when temperatures stay above freezing through both day and night for multiple days, typically three to five. These events can roughly double the rate at which snow melts, causing flooding and making it challenging to manage water resources.
“Snow eaters” appear to be occurring earlier in the year and becoming more widespread in the Western United States as the climate warms. Since the 1850s, the study found, the area affected by snow eaters has increased by an average of about 40,000 square miles per century, and the first snow eater of the season has been arriving about one month earlier per century.
The term “snow eater” has a murky history. By at least the 1880s, people in the West were talking about “snow-eating” chinooks, warm mountain winds that make snow disappear quickly. More recently, the phrase “snow-eater heat wave” first made headlines in March, when an early heat wave enveloped much of the West, quickly wiping away snowpack in the Colorado Rockies and California’s Sierra Nevada. The scientists hope the catchy, evocative term can help draw more attention to this type of heat wave, since there’s still a lot to learn. The study only looked at the Western U.S., but snow eater heat waves almost assuredly occur elsewhere, LaPlante said.
Solar radiation is a major, but sometimes overlooked, driver of snowmelt, said Noah Molotch, a professor of geography at the University of Colorado Boulder who was not involved in the new study. When it interacts with heat waves, those impacts are amplified. As snow crystals warm up, they lose some of their structure and light-reflecting abilities, causing snowpacks to absorb more sunlight and melt faster. “It’s a little bit of a — no pun intended — a snowball effect,” he said.
Much of the Western U.S. saw record-low snowpack this spring. What was really unusual about it, Molotch said, was how widespread it was. Colorado received less precipitation than normal this winter, while California got lots of precipitation, but in the form of rain instead of snow. But across the region, “the one thing in common was above-average air temperatures,” Molotch said.
These conditions have likely helped fuel exceptionally severe wildfires in the West, from Utah to Spokane, Washington, where hundreds of homes burned earlier this month. “Drought stress for mountain forests around the Western U.S. is heavily dictated by the snow that accumulates each winter and then melts through the spring and summer,” Molotch said. “There is a direct connection there in terms of the water availability and drought stress that can provide one of the important ingredients for increases in wildfire intensity and frequency.”
If scientists are able to better predict what will happen to snowpack, it could help water managers plan for what’s coming. Early or rapid snowmelt poses problems for managing water resources in the West, where snowpack serves as a key source of fresh water in the drier summer months. “Water that would otherwise be stored as snow comes out early, and then we have to deal with it as a hazard instead of a resource at our reservoirs and along the rivers and streams,” said Ben Hatchett, a co-author on the study and a scientist at Colorado State University’s Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere.
Snow-eater heat waves also may pose risks to skiers, hikers, and anyone else on or near mountains. They could be linked to hazards such as avalanches, glacial collapses, and permafrost melt, Hatchett said, though scientists are still investigating those connections. He lives in the Sierra Nevada, and he’s noticed one tangible change over his lifetime: The soundscape has changed.
“At night, it used to be quiet,” he said. “And now it’s not quiet, because everything’s melting all the time.”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Scientists define a new category of heat wave: ‘Snow eaters’ on Aug 12, 2026.
Pages
The Fine Print I:
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.
Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.
The Fine Print II:
Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.
It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.
This site is not the official webpage of the Industrial Workers of the World.