In Florida we call our Bigfoot by their proper Florida name, Skunk Apes. “Skunk” refers to the purported strong horrible odor that surrounds them. And “Ape” is a reference to their primate-like qualities. 

My appreciation of conservation biology leads me to profound skepticism, but I do hold out hope that an Ivory-billed Woodpecker or two still haunts the deepest, most remote swamps and lowlands left in Florida. Perhaps they occasionally gaze down at a Skunk Ape from their secretive perches or cavity trees.

What does it mean when all the mystery of a place is gone? How does that shape our concept of wilderness? Is the darkened swamp more valuable to us because we think something mysterious might still be out there, just beyond what we understand? 

The Gulf Coast of Florida, while highly developed in many places, still has some long stretches of remote refuges and preserves filled with longleaf pines, oak hammocks, cypress stands, seagrass meadows, coastal marshes, swamps, spring fed rivers and blackwater and alluvial river basins.

Chassahowitzka Wildlife Management Area and National Wildlife Refuge, Lower Suwannee National Wildlife Refuge, Big Bend Wildlife Management Area, the southern portions of Apalachicola State Forest and Tate’s Hell State Forest all seem like good Skunk Ape territory. Remote and wild still.

Rumor holds that Goethe State Forest is a hot bed of sightings of Skunk Apes. Articles have appeared in local newspapers over the years. Is the truth indeed out there? 

When I started my research for this essay I immediately was drawn to something intriguing and somewhat heartwarming. Those who are seeking the Skunk Ape in Goethe frequently take and leave gift baskets for them. In today’s current environment, this small act of kindness seems almost quaint and surely heartfelt.

But what exactly does one put in said basket? Further research led me to several examples of beef jerky, crackers, and loose tobacco being offered as gifts between Homo sapiens and Gigantopithecus Ameripithecus Floridanus (ok, truth be told there is not one accepted scientific name for Skunk Apes as technically they are not recognized by western science, BUT this is the best name I could hobble together after a few meanders through Google and A.I.).

One early morning in March, a glorious spring day filled with a sense of exploration and adventure, I left as the sun rose and headed north to Goethe State Forest into a morning rich with possibility. 

A convenience store near Inglis, Florida offered the gift basket supplies I needed. I assumed a Skunk Ape would appreciate me opening the beef jerky and cracker packages for them. I took great pride in my purchases. I bundled them in a handmade basket my mom had woven. Perhaps sharing the crafts of our species, made by hand in an ancient art form, would strengthen the connection and my odds of communion.

It would be easy to treat this as a joke, but as I drove a deeper set of questions began to form in my mind. Could a state as populated as Florida still harbor a creature that remained a mystery to science? Indeed, had it in days long past when fewer people called the Sunshine State home?

The Seminole word for Skunk Apes was “Esti Capcki.” Numerous newspaper articles from the 1800s mention sightings. Florida’s human population in 1900 was only roughly 500,000 people making it the least populated state in the American South. Oh, how times have changed.

As the day ended and sunset approached, I headed home with my gift basket retrieved from where I had left it, leaving no trace (take only pictures, leave only footprints). I will however be back, bearing gifts and good wishes.

I will take my mystery and wonder of nature through the philosophy of deep ecology, the belief that nature has its own value separate from us and our needs. Nature has all the wonder and mystery I need, and this deserves preservation. But, a Skunk Ape could not hurt. Particularly one with an Ivory-billed Woodpecker as a neighbor.

Click here to learn more about Goethe State Forest.

An edited and abridged version of this essay originally appeared in FAU’s The Invading Sea.

Joe Murphy is a former Wildlife Policy Specialist for NWF and contributes blog posts to the NWF Gulf Program as an alumnus and supporter. He occasionally is mistaken for a Skunk Ape when out on the river or the trail. No apologies needed, but a gift basket wouldn’t hurt. You can follow Joe on Facebook (https://bit.ly/joemurphyfacebook 

What began as a collaboration pairing LG’s immersive 3D Times Square displays with NWF’s Certified Wildlife Habitat programs quickly grew into something more impactful—an effort that blended education, storytelling, community action, and active employee involvement, including LG employees planting a certified pollinator garden with NWF, building 150 birdhouses, and planting native species on LG’s campus in New Jersey.

This Endangered Species Day, we want to celebrate the students and educators who make learning about local wildlife and endangered species a priority. NWF asked K-12 teachers and students to make a pledge to learn about vulnerable and endangered species where they live. As an incentive, LG provided prizes 4K Ultra Short Throw Projector and a 32-inch Smart Monitor Swing.

Congratulations to the winners!

• Everleigh M., 3rd grader, Illinois
• Laura Z., educator from Green Hope Elementary School, North Carolina

“One endangered animal that lives in Illinois is a yellow mud turtle. It is important to me because a yellow mud turtle has a varied diet, which helps them find food in different places. That’s why I think a yellow mud turtle is very unique.”

– Everleigh M., 3^rd grader

“Teaching about wildlife, habitat, and environmental stewardship is essential because it helps students understand that people, animals, and plants are connected and that our choices affect the places we all share. When young people learn how habitat loss, pollution, and climate change harm species and ecosystems, they gain the knowledge and skills to make better decisions—like conserving resources, supporting habitat restoration, and advocating for fair policies—that protect biodiversity and ensure clean air, water, and healthy communities for future generations. Exploring these concepts also helps to build the critical thinking, empathy, and real-world problem-solving abilities that will be used in careers and civic life.”

– Laura Z., educator from Green Hope Elementary School, North Carolina

We are so inspired by so many thoughtful and varied entries highlighting vulnerable and endangered species across the country, take a look at more of our student entries on why wildlife matters.

“Golden cheeked warblers are important to me because they are the only bird species that exclusively nest in Texas. They use Ashe juniper tree bark to make nests and mostly sew it together with spider webs.”

– Aapthi A., 3^rd grader

“The little brown bat is important to me because of the amazing role it holds in the ecosystem. Without it, everything would fall apart. It eats insects (at least half their body weight!) every night, which controls the bug population near their roosts.”

– Samantha C., 5^th grader

“Sea turtles are important because they are helping the ocean be clean because they act like marine gardeners.”

– José C., 6^th grader

“The Florida panther is important to me because it represents the wild beauty and uniqueness of Florida’s natural habitats. What makes the Florida panther unique is its ability to survive in swamps and forests, its powerful build, and its role as a top predator that helps keep ecosystems balanced. Saving the panther means protecting the land it needs to live, which also helps many other species.”

– Carlos S., 7^th grader

“I think that they [rusty patch bumblebees] are very unique and it is really cool how they move and look.”

– Hallie B., 8^th grader

Learn more about Endangered Species Day and download NWF’s endangered species coloring book!

Test your knowledge of vulnerable and endangered species highlighted in the LG series:

• Did you know the red wolf is the most endangered wolf in the world? Watch the red wolf on LG’s 3D Times Square billboard in NYC.
• Can you identify a monarch butterfly? Watch the monarch butterfly on LG’s 3DTimes Square billboard in NYC.
• What little owl lives in a cactus? Watch the Cactus Ferruginous pygmy-owl on LG’s 3D Times Square billboard in NYC.
• What animal is called the mermaids of the sea? Watch the West Indian manatee on LG’s 3D Times Square billboard in NYC.

Kids’ Corner:

• Celebrate Endangered Species (May 15)
• Plant a Tree for Wildlife
• Watch a Bat Ballet
• 5 ways You Can Help Endangered Species

Interested in more resources on wildlife?

Check out NWF’s Wildlife and Nature Education webpage to learn more about native wildlife and access tools and activities to engage kids and families.

For more information about LG’s STEM education and Endangered Species series, visit their website.

Over the years, however, these lands have been degraded by drought, development, wildfire, and invasive species. The Public Lands Rule was designed to conserve and restore these lands so they could support multiple uses and thrive for future generations.

This week, the BLM announced it would fully repeal the 2024 Public Lands Rule, and return to the regulations that guided BLM land management prior to 2024. Below is a side-by-side comparison of what the 2024 Public Lands Rule outlined and what the 2026 rescission does.

What this means for wildlife, public lands, and the people that rely on both will be decided in the coming months and years. The National Wildlife Federation will continue to work diligently to ensure this, and future administrations understand the importance of conservation on public lands to our wildlife, water, air, and the people that depend on all three. 

Core Management Philosophy

• 2024 Rule: Aimed to prioritize the health and resilience of ecosystems across all BLM-managed lands. It established a policy to protect intact landscapes, restore degraded habitats, and make management decisions based on science and data to support the BLM’s multiple-use mission.
• 2026 Rescission: Rejects the 2024 approach, arguing that it inappropriately elevated conservation as a discrete “use” of public lands, which the BLM now states is contrary to FLPMA’s intent. The 2026 Rule is a deregulatory action intended to “restore balance” by prioritizing uses like grazing, mining, and energy development.

Areas of Critical Environmental Concern 

• 2024 Rule: Revised ACEC regulations to prioritize the designation and protection of these areas. It introduced a “presumption in favor of designation” and allowed for “temporary management” to protect nominated areas before a final planning decision was made.
• 2026 Rescission: Eliminates the 2024 updates and restores the 1983 framework. The BLM argues the 2024 provisions were “regulatory overreach” that could lead to overly broad designations. BLM claims the restored 1983 regulations ensure designations are site-specific and integrated into land use planning without interim management of nominated areas.

Restoration and Mitigation Leasing

• 2024 Rule: Codified a new tool allowing third parties to obtain leases for the express purpose of restoration or mitigation. These leases were intended to provide a framework for proactive conservation and climate resilience.
• 2026 Rescission: Wholly eliminates restoration and mitigation leasing. The BLM determined these leases were unnecessary, lacked clarity, and exceeded the agency’s statutory authority. The rescission rule claims such leases threatened to crowd out productive land uses and that existing tools are sufficient for conservation.

Land Health Standards 

• 2024 Rule: Expanded the application of Land Health Standards to all BLM-managed public lands and uses, not just grazing. It also introduced rigid timelines and procedural requirements for land health evaluations.
• 2026 Rescission: Rescinds the broad application of Land Health Standards, returning them to the grazing-specific framework that existed prior to 2024. The BLM argues the 2024 requirements were “counterproductive burdens” that hamstrung the bureau with fixed deadlines. BLM notes that it is considering whether to refine Land Health Standard development and application in separate rulemaking and will consider comments raised in this rulemaking as part of that effort.

Monitoring and Data

• 2024 Rule: Provided an overarching framework for standardized data collection, annual reporting, and public access to land health data to promote transparency.
• 2026 Rescission: Removes these regulatory requirements, asserting that the BLM can maintain its monitoring functions through the Assessment, Inventory, and Monitoring program without the “administrative burdens” of the 2024 Rule.

Economic and Policy Priorities

• 2024 Rule: Focused on long-term sustainability and ecosystem services, arguing that healthy landscapes support outdoor recreation and local economies.
• 2026 Rescission: Prioritizes national energy policy and the removal of “regulatory burdens” that impede planning and permitting. It aligns with executive orders focused on “Unleashing American Energy” and “Achieving Prosperity through Deregulation”.

Tribal Engagement in Public land Management

• 2024 Rule: Included explicit provisions related to engagement with Tribes and provided a regulatory definition for the term “Indigenous Knowledge” to be used in decision-making.
• 2026 Rescission: Removes the 2024 provisions regarding tribal engagement and the definition of Indigenous Knowledge. The BLM states this removal is necessary because the processes these provisions were attached to are also being rescinded. BLM also asserts that rescinding the 2024 Rule does not imply a change in commitment to consult with Tribes. Instead, it says the agency will rely on other existing laws and policies that require consultation for site-specific planning and implementation decisions. BLM also says that Tribes maintain the ability to request consultation on future planning decisions regardless of this recission. NWF remains committed to ensuring that BLM engages in meaningful consultation with Tribes, and considers Indigenous Knowledge in its decision-making.  

Find a Public Garden that is a Certified Wildlife Habitat

There is a long history of the National Wildlife Federation recognizing public gardens for their wildlife friendly actions. Even as far back as 2003, the U.S. Botanic Garden was named the 100,000^th Certified Wildlife Habitat.

Today, roughly 200 public gardens nationwide are recognized as Certified Wildlife Habitats. You can visit one in your region to get inspiration for your own wildlife garden. See how these gardens use native species, water features, and landscaping to support wildlife and make their space enjoyable for people too.

Find a Certified Wildlife Habitat public garden near you.

Garden Highlight: The Botanical Garden of the Ozarks, AK

“The Botanical Garden of the Ozarks is proud to be a Certified Wildlife Habitat, with a strong focus on native plants and pollinator education. Our dedicated Ozark native plant garden showcases species that support local ecosystems and provides a model for visitors looking to incorporate natives at home.

We also partner with organizations such as White River Nursery and the Northwest Arkansas Master Naturalists to offer educational programming and seasonal native plant sales.

Pollinator conservation is a core part of our work. In partnership with the Northwest Arkansas Beekeepers Association, we maintain an on-site apiary and provide educational opportunities focused on the importance of bees and other pollinators.”

– Ashley Wardlow, Executive Director at The Botanical Garden of the Ozarks

Garden Highlight: Cape Fear Botanical Garden, NC

“Cape Fear Botanical Garden (Fayetteville, North Carolina) supports a variety of native plants and pollinator species throughout key areas of the Garden, including the Butterfly Stroll, Pond Lawn, and Wellons Arbor.

These connected spaces create an expanded habitat where pollinators can feed, nest, and rest, contributing to a healthier local ecosystem. 

These plantings also support a wider range of wildlife, including birds, beneficial insects, and other native species that rely on these habitats for food and shelter.

Beyond these cultivated areas, the Garden’s wooded trails provide important habitat for larger mammals that often go unseen within the city.

While visitors may occasionally spot white-tailed deer, the Garden supports a broader range of species, reinforcing its role as a meaningful urban refuge for wildlife.

By designing and preserving these varied spaces, we not only support wildlife activity but also make it visible and accessible to our guests. Visitors are able to observe these interactions in real time, deepening their understanding of the essential role native plants and habitats play in sustaining both pollinators and the broader ecosystem.”

– Beth Hess, Marketing Consultant at Cape Fear Botanical Garden

Garden Highlight: Smithsonian Gardens

The Smithsonian Gardens was the 81st public garden to get recognized as a Certified Wildlife Habitat® back in 2020.

“Each Smithsonian Garden adeptly weaves the theme of specific museums to the natural history and elements of the habitat gardens on their grounds.  Recent reports of the loss of 3 billion birds across North America since 1970 make exhibits like the National Museum of Natural History’s Urban Bird Habitat essential.

The exhibit highlights the diversity of spaces where birds live and raise their young through large-scale realistic nests. The African American Museum’s Live Oak grove tells the story of the shelter and gathering place these trees provided in the African American journey to freedom and community building.

The story then connects the sheltering theme to how oak trees provide multitudes of insects, birds, and other wildlife with a place of cover. For example, an oak tree is a host for over 500 insect species.”

– Mary Phillips, National Wildlife Federation

Learn more about this garden here!

Go Public Gardens!

Go Public Gardens is a year-round initiative led by The American Public Gardens Association to encourage the public to visit, value, and volunteer at public gardens.

With so many public gardens that are Certified Wildlife Habitats, we hope you take the time to visit one near you.

Sea turtles dig the dark

These ancient ocean wanderers, who have existed for over 100-150 millions years, are currently enduring a population loss. While their numbers once reached the  millions, they have dwindled to just a fraction of what they used to be.

Sea turtles face a multitude of threats from humans, with artificial lighting being one of the most serious, affecting both hatchlings and nesting turtles. There has been a 10% increase of light pollution in the world’s night sky each year since 2011, and there are an estimated 100,000 hatchlings disoriented in Florida alone each year due to artificial lighting.

Before Florida was developed, nesting sea turtles had no trouble finding a quiet, dark beach on which to nest, but modernization brings new threats: tourists, businesses and coastal residents living and sunbathing on their sandy beaches.

Beaches are now lined with condominiums, houses, hotels and restaurants, creating a  heavily light-polluted wall of coastal development. Historically, the ocean horizon was naturally brighter than the dark dunes, meaning sea turtle hatchlings could easily find the sea.

Today, however, intense artificial lighting from coastal developments often prevents females from nesting and lures their hatchlings toward urban glare, into parking lots, pools and roads. Disoriented hatchlings that don’t reach the water quickly have lower chances of survival and may experience dehydration, starvation and predation.

Conservation Efforts

Reducing the amount of artificial light visible from nesting beaches is the first step towards protecting sea turtles. Coastal communities around the world have passed ordinances that require residents turn off beachfront lights, as well as cover or change bulbs for beachfront lights during turtle nesting season. 

The amended Barrier Island Lighting Ordinance for Escambia County was passed in July 2023 and mandates that all exterior lighting on Perdido Key and Pensacola Beach use wildlife-friendly fixtures to protect nesting sea turtles and hatchlings. Compliance is required by January 1, 2028. Lights must be low-wattage, shielded, and long-wavelength (<580nm).

Annual lighting surveys are conducted on the barrier islands to document lighting conditions and protect wildlife, particularly sea turtles. These surveys help identify non-compliant lighting and provide property owners with information on their lighting practices.

The data collected is used to create a searchable map that allows users to view recent survey results and property information, ensuring compliance with the Barrier Island Lighting Ordinance.

You can find local wildlife lighting regulations by searching municipality ordinances in Municode. Try searching for key terms like “sea turtle lighting,” “wildlife-friendly lighting” or “coastal lighting.” You can also narrow your results by looking for technical standards such as “shielding,” “long wavelength” or “amber/red LED”.

How can you help?

The expansion of Florida’s coastal communities requires a collective effort to preserve our unique biodiversity and natural environments. Here are some quick tips:

• Illuminate responsibly, following the requirements in your local lighting ordinance for sea turtle protection. 
• When visiting the beach at night, leave portable lights (flashlights, cell phones) at home. 
• Remove purely decorative lights from your property and turn off exterior lights when they are not in use. 
• Try to reposition or replace fixtures or bulbs so that the light is no longer visible or is directed downward onto your property and away from the beach. 
• Prevent interior light from escaping by closing window coverings, using window film and moving light fixtures away from the windows.
• When visiting the beach, use designated walkways and walkovers. Do not walk on or through the dunes, which can damage them and kill plants. Blooming dunes stabilize nesting beaches, cool the sand to balance hatchling gender ratios, and help to block artificial light that disorients hatchlings. 
• If you have a beachfront property, consider planting native species to help restore these natural barriers. This action helps to provide essential nesting habitat and a critical light shield for sea turtles.

In Florida, recommended native dune plants include Sea Oats, Panic Grass, Railroad Vine, Beach Sunflower, Beach Carpet, Saw Palmetto, Sea Grapes, Sea Purslane, and Blanket Flower. These hardy plants thrive in harsh coastal conditions, easily withstanding salt spray, strong winds, and poor soil quality.

Common signs that hatchlings are in trouble include disorientation and fatigue. Nesting sea turtles typically face different issues, such as abandoned nesting attempts (false crawls), injuries, or becoming stranded.

Because all sea turtles are federally protected, never handle them yourself; always call authorized professionals to assist with sick, injured, or stranded turtles (1-888-404-FWCC).

By changing how we use lights and following local rules, we can keep the coast safe for these ancient travelers. Whether you’re dimming your own beachfront lights or advocating for darker skies in your community, your actions directly protect the next generation of hatchlings. Every bulb shielded and every light turned off helps restore the natural environment, because sea turtles dig the dark.

But what exactly is good chocolate? It’s the kind you can enjoy without any trace of guilt. Good chocolate is produced without harming forests, it pays dignified wages to the farmers who grow it, and it ensures no child is exploited in the process. To help you tell the difference between good chocolate and not-so-good chocolate, NWF partners every year with Slavery Free to bring you a list of brands worth your trust — and your taste!

Good Chocolate Keeps Mother Earth’s Forests Standing

Good chocolate is traceable to its origins and it doesn’t drive deforestation. As consumer demand and market regulations, including pending legislation in Europe, raise the bar for ethical and deforestation-free chocolate, a growing number of companies in the cocoa sector have made significant progress in adopting and implementing traceability and monitoring processes across their supply chains. But progress is uneven, and despite the leadership by some companies, major players in the cocoa sector must back their commitments with action.

Traceability is no simple task. A complex network of indirect suppliers, including local traders, middlemen known as coxeurs, and informal cocoa cooperatives, makes tracking cocoa beans extremely difficult. In Côte d’Ivoire, the world’s largest cocoa producer, a 2022 Trase analysis showed that 65% of the country’s cocoa exports were indirectly sourced. The large number of actors involved in the supply chain makes tracing cacao beans to their origins even harder, and nearly impossible to know with certainty whether they were grown without harming forests. It is challenging, but it can be done!

Of the 49 companies that responded to the Chocolate Scorecard survey, only 8 provided verifiable information that their cacao was produced without deforestation. The eight companies are Bennetto, Chocolatemakers, HALBA, Malmö, Original Beans, Ritter Sport, Tony’s Chocolonely, and Whittaker’s. These eight prove it can be done. The others will need to catch up.

The 7th Edition Chocolate Scorecard is here, check it out!

If you’ve been hungry to know which chocolate brands deserve a spot in your shopping cart, we have some exciting news. This year, in addition to the classic Good Egg, Bad Egg, and Gender Award for retailers and companies, Slavery Free has introduced two new categories: the Retail Stayers Award, recognizing consistent participation and transparency by retailers across successive editions, and the Farmer Health Award, highlighting the progress and commitment made by companies to support farmers’ health.

Drumroll, please…here are the 2026 Chocolate Scorecard winners:

Good Egg Large Company

The Swiss company HALBA is the first large company in Scorecard history to score green in every category — paying farmers a living-income premium, mapping every farm in its supply chain, and running agroforestry projects across multiple countries.

Good Egg Small Company
Original Beans, returning to the podium for the second year in a row, and Swiss retailer Coop, two brands proving that doing good and tasting great are not mutually exclusive

(NEW) Farmer Health Award
The Hershey Company becomes the first-ever Farmer Health Award winner, recognized for its health-insurance program for farmers in Ghana.

Gender Award

Tony’s Chocolonely takes home the Gender Award for its work tackling gender inequality in their cocoa supply chain, since women farmers in cocoa often earn less than male farmers.

(NEW) Retail Stayers Award

This new Award honors eight retailers who have submitted to scrutiny and engaged with uncomfortable findings year after year since the Scorecard began. They don’t always score well. But that’s precisely the point.

Ahold Delhaize, Aldi Nord, ALDI SOUTH Group, Carrefour, Coop, MIGROS, Systeme U and Woolworths.

Bad Eggs
Mondelēz International, the second-largest chocolate company in the world that own brands like Dairy Milk, Creme Egg, Toblerone and Milka declined to participate in the Chocolate Scorecard. They refused to answer questions about child labor, deforestation, and whether the farmers growing their cocoa earn enough to live on.

Starbucks earns the Bad Egg this year for its continued refusal to engage with the Scorecard. The company declined to answer any questions about the ethics and sustainability of its cocoa supply chain, a troubling lack of transparency from one of the world’s most recognizable brands.

More companies are answering the hard questions

Slavery Free and a coalition of more than 30 NGOs, academic institutions, and civil-society partners have spent seven years holding companies and brands in the chocolate market accountable — pushing them to be transparent about the chocolate they put on our shelves. When the Chocolate Scorecard launched, only a small group of companies and retailers were willing to publicly answer hard questions about child labor, farmer income, deforestation, and pesticide use. This year, 80 companies and retailers were invited to participate and 49 accepted, a 61% overall rate. Large and medium companies showed strong engagement at 79%. 

But the bigger story is this: the answers are getting better. Eight of the 49 participating companies scored well across every category, and they’re no longer just small craft chocolate makers. Medium and large companies are proving that scale and good practice can go hand in hand.

US Retailers: No Show, No Accountability

No US retailers participated in this year’s Scorecard, and that’s a problem for American consumers who want to know whether their supermarkets are committed to ethical and sustainable chocolate. It’s time for US consumers to demand transparency that protects our climate, our forests, and the farmers who grow the cacao we all love. 

So keep informed, love your Mother Earth, and eat good chocolate. 

That is why the National Wildlife Federation’s (NWF)  Environmental Justice, Health, and Community Resilience and Revitalization Program hosted a three-part Clean Economy Coalition of Color roundtable series on data centers.

The series began with local perspectives and community impacts, where organizers and community leaders described what it means when data centers are proposed, approved, or built in underserved communities.

Our second roundtable focused on policy and public health insights, examining the health risks, regulatory gaps, and governance questions raised by large-scale data center development.

Our final roundtable turned to climate impacts and energy use, looking at how data centers are reshaping energy demand, utility planning, fossil fuel infrastructure, and household affordability.

I knew going into the series that data centers were becoming an environmental justice issue. I was still floored by what we heard. Across all three conversations, the lesson was clear: we cannot separate the artificial intelligence data center boom from environmental justice. The data center boom is an environmental justice crisis.

Below are some of the themes that emerged across our conversations with experts and what they mean for the environmental justice movement.  

1. The “cloud” may be invisible, but data centers are not

Data centers may be described by developers as clean, quiet, low impact, or essentially “invisible,” but for communities living near them, the infrastructure is anything but invisible.

As I said in my opening for this roundtable series, “[A data center] doesn’t feel invisible when a data center is in your community because the infrastructure is not virtual. It’s physical and it has to go somewhere. It pulls electricity from somebody’s grid. It pulls water from somebody’s watershed. It reshapes land use and local planning. And it can bring a swath of other infrastructure into communities…” 

These facilities can require substations, transmission lines, construction traffic, diesel backup generators, new gas infrastructure, or additional water and wastewater capacity. They are large facilities, some campuses over one million square feet (about 17 football fields), with real environmental, health, and economic consequences.

In some people’s minds, these facilities are abstract pieces of technology, but to environmental justice communities, where residents already live with accumulating environmental stressors, they are another industrial burden.

2. Health, water, energy, and climate impacts are connected and should not be understated

The second and third roundtables made clear that data center impacts cannot be evaluated one issue at a time. Panelists discussed extreme water use, wastewater burdens, construction impacts, air pollution, noise pollution, high energy demand, increased greenhouse gas emissions worsening the impacts of climate change, and cumulative impacts in communities.

For example, Dr. Amy Margolies of Tucker United described a proposed power plant in West Virginia with 30 million gallons of diesel stored on site near a watershed. A spill, she warned, could affect “every single community” downstream.

Energy use and costs were also central concerns, particularly in our final conversation. Shannon Heyck-Williams of NWF described how those costs can be shifted from data centers onto households: “Utilities often make costly upgrades to power grids so that they can handle increased energy demand… because of new data centers. [Households] often are now being asked to shoulder the costs of these upgrades that they’re not really benefiting from.”

The data center boom also raises serious concerns for climate action. Dr. John Fleming of the Center for Biological Diversity warned that data center growth could increase reliance on fossil fuels just as the country needs to move away from them. He noted that data centers currently account for about 4.5 percent of U.S. energy demand, but that share could rise to 12 percent by 2030.

“We’re in a scenario now where, for a couple of decades at least, we have seen a decline in power sector emissions,” Dr. Fleming said. “And now we have this threat of them increasing because of this build out of data centers and this focus on AI.”

He also emphasized that the impacts of climate change are not evenly distributed: “As you increase these climate effects, extreme heat, drought, extreme precipitation, we’re going to inevitably have to adapt to those changes. And often marginalized communities are the least equipped to adapt to those kinds of things.”

This is why panelists urged decision-makers to look beyond the footprint of any single facility. A permit may evaluate one source, one facility, or one pollutant, but residents live with the combined reality of air pollution, water stress, noise, truck traffic, heat, high utility bills, and preexisting health burdens.

3. Too often, communities are brought in after decisions are already made

Across all our roundtable conversations, community representatives and advocates described learning about projects through energy planning conversations, permit notices, rumors, or after companies had already started operating.

In the first roundtable, Marquita Bradshaw of Sowing Justice described trying to understand what a data center was after the Tennessee Valley Authority expressed concerned about powering them. Marquita discussed that, as she dug in on the issue further, data center operation and development was already moving across Tennessee without communities being informed:  “…unbeknownst to me was the data centers were already operating in Tennessee, and they had circumvented all the processes, [and] they had already started to build the relationships to power the data centers and so that’s what drew me to the issues.”

In the second roundtable, Dr. Amy Margolies of Tucker United described how a proposal for a 1,600-megawatt gas power plant with diesel backup, intended to power a hyperscale data center complex, surfaced after someone noticed a permit notice in the local paper. “Nobody knew what it was,” she said, including the county commission.

This pattern raises a familiar question in environmental justice: whose knowledge counts before decisions are made? Too often, environmental justice communities are not brought into the planning and design phases of projects that will directly affect the places they call home.

The people making those decisions often do not live there. They may not know the cumulative air pollution burden residents already face, the history of disinvestment, or the strain on local water systems.

They may only see land, water, energy infrastructure, and a permitting path that looks cheap or politically convenient. For residents, those same decisions can mean another layer of risk added to an already overburdened community.

4. The promised benefits often do not match the burdens

Data centers are often framed in context of economic development, companies that will bring new jobs to communities. But experts across our roundtable discussions consistently questioned: do data centers actually bring jobs to communities, and who actually benefits?

In the first roundtable, Dr. Khalil Shahyd from the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) challenged the idea that hyperscale data centers automatically create economic prosperity for communities.

He noted, “When we look at the experience of places like data center alley in Northern Virginia, we look at Ohio, we look at Memphis, we look at so many of these different places, the economic development just doesn’t really materialize. Often times, [data center companies] are cooking the books like quite literally [by] adding multipliers to the implant model to make it seem like they’re creating all these indirect and, quote unquote, induced jobs.”

He went on to explain that the jobs created are not jobs that provide a living wage: “…When they say that we will create additional jobs through a data center, they mean that, you know, we’re going to create 20 to 25 middle-class jobs. And these middle-class jobs are then going to finance a bunch of low-wage service workers to serve these middle-class people who are coming in to work at this data center. So, the jobs that [data center companies] are creating are not quality jobs. They’re not livelihood jobs. You know, they’re not living wage jobs that are being created. And that is not economic development.”

Panelists described that data centers  are often promoted as progress while offering few permanent jobs, receive public subsidies, increase utility pressure, and shift infrastructure costs onto residents.

For communities that have already seen decades of promises from polluting industries, calling a project “innovative,” “modern,” or “promising” is not enough. The real question is whether it actually builds community wealth, improves public well-being, and distributes other community benefits.

Communities are already pushing back

The data center boom is often presented as inevitable. I can’t count how many times I’ve heard, “Well it’s happening, so might as well jump onboard.” Across the roundtables, speakers rejected that framing, describing communities documenting harm, contesting permits, building coalitions, and insisting that these data centers are not insulated from democratic accountability.

In the third roundtable, Dr. Brandy Brown, founder of Sadberry Singer, pointed to moratoriums in Michigan as one tool communities are using to slow projects down and demand better standards. She also argued that environmental regulation needs to catch up with modern monitoring tools. “There is a need to modernize how we measure,” she said.

And in the first roundtable, Marquita Bradshaw reminded us that organizing still matters. When people call a project a done deal, she said that’s not necessarily true, “it can be undone.” She added, “…who would have thought organizations with less than, you know, sometimes $100,000 a year would be on the front lines fighting data centers and winning, right?”

These fights are not only happening in the communities represented in our roundtables. In Georgia, public concern has pushed data centers into the state legislature. In Texas, Brazoria County officials unanimously rejected tax abatements for a proposed $3 billion AI data center after residents and local officials raised concerns.

And in Virginia, public support for new data centers has weakened sharply as residents raise concerns about utility costs, infrastructure strain, and local control. Data Center Water, a research firm, reported in 2025 that $64 billion of data center project were blocked or delayed because of local opposition.

That shift matters. Communities are not simply being swept along by this AI data center boom. They are naming the costs, challenging the process, questioning the subsidies, documenting the harms, and refusing to accept that the infrastructure behind AI must be built on the same old patterns of pollution, secrecy, and sacrifice.

The AI data center boom is moving fast, but communities are moving too. The lesson from this series is not only that communities are at risk. It is that communities understand what is at stake. They are organizing, pushing back, and in places across the country, beginning to win.

Sign up to NWF’s Environmental Justice, Health, and Community Resilience and Revitalization’s mailing list and follow us on Instagram to learn about future CECC roundtables.

“This is not overriding the smell of the pollution you got here,” she said boldly. Laughter erupted, but her message about the stomach-churning stench was ignored.

After nearly a year of this, the neighbors grew weary and stopped accepting invitations from DTE Energy to discuss the plant’s pollution with them. This group, who later formed Allegheny County Clean Air Now (ACCAN), came together out of a realization that the toxic fumes settling over their homes were also responsible for their poor health.

“It was a very short period after moving there that I started smelling the odor. It reminded me of when I was a kid and we would get coal delivered.”

Downwind

At 84 years old, Barb is as spunky and sharp as ever. She describes herself as the black sheep of the family—her advocacy viewed as counterproductive to her family’s best bet at a decent, steady paycheck. “Until we create systems where people can make a good living safely, nothing changes,” Barb explains.

Barb moved herself, her son, and her father to Emsworth, Pennsylvania in 2007. “It was a very short period after moving there that I started smelling the odor. It reminded me of when I was a kid and we would get coal delivered,” she said. She joined a Ben Avon community meeting and soon realized what she was smelling was the Shenango Coke Works—a coal-processing plant.

Residents living in the Ohio River valley swapped stories of unexplained chronic illness. Children missed school more often due to asthma. For Barb, the turning point was deeply personal when her father, once a vibrant man who danced several nights a week well into his 90s, developed dementia shortly after their move across from Neville Island. She also developed edema with no apparent cause.

Barb’s is one of many stories of sudden illness. Another ACCAN organizer, Thaddeus Popovich, had recently moved to Ben Avon from upstate New York. Living just half a mile across the river from the Shenango Coke Works, he was struck immediately by the acrid smell in the air and soon noticed soot collecting on his kitchen counters. Soon after, he developed severe allergies to mold and other environmental triggers. In 2012, he underwent bypass surgery, and a year later, he experienced atrial fibrillation while sleeping with the windows open. With his life at serious risk, he eventually relocated ten miles north—far enough, he hoped, to breathe a little easier.

There are countless more documented experiences from Allegheny County residents who are Living Downwind.

A History of Building America

The Pittsburgh region is known for its contribution to coal-fired steelmaking that helped fuel America’s second industrial revolution in the 20th century. Though the industry powerhouse brought jobs and instilled pride, it also brought smog and an uptick of illness.

In 1948, yellow smog descended on the town of Donora, Pennsylvania, turning day into night. Known as the worst air pollution disaster in U.S. history, a combination of toxic emissions from the zinc and steel plants along with coal smoke killed 20 people within days and hospitalized hundreds more. The tragedy sparked widespread concern about environmental and public health, highlighted the need for industrial regulation, and ignited a nationwide discussion on the impacts of pollution.

It’s worth noting that pollution from steelmaking has lessened over the years—thanks to regulations and to efficiencies that lower emissions and save companies money. For example, 70 percent of U.S. made steel was produced using electric furnaces in 2021 as opposed to blast furnaces fueled by natural gas or coal. Industry must continue to invest in upgrading facilities with modern technologies that lessen both the environmental and health impacts on fenceline communities.  

The issue continues to lie in illegal emissions from facilities as well as facilities that refuse to upgrade processes or add pollution scrubbers. We even have the technology to capture carbon dioxide—after filtering out accompanying pollutants–right at the source. Think of it like a filter on top of a smokestack, capturing emissions before they enter the atmosphere. This does double duty – addressing planet-altering emissions as well as pollution that impacts the health of fencelines communities.

“Allegheny County’s entire economic history is intertwined with heavy fossil fuel use, particularly coal, natural gas, and steelmaking.”

The Burden of Pollution is not Evenly Distributed

Although local and federal regulations helped improve air quality over several decades, illegal—or unpermitted—emissions may still be released from industrial facilities. When facilities are concentrated in a region, those living closest suffer most. These communities are majority lower-income, Black, Brown, elderly, children, and other vulnerable populations. In these areas, residents can be 20 times more likely to get cancer than the average American.

After the collapse of the aging steel industry, regional leaders turned their focus from pollution policy to economic recovery. The Breathe Project was formed in 2011 to fill this gap and unite diverse stakeholders around community concerns. The organization coordinates the work of 60 regional organizations working to improve air quality. “Some may wonder why it would take 60 organizations. But it gets to the heart of the story, which is Allegheny County’s entire economic history is intertwined with heavy fossil fuel use, particularly coal, natural gas, and steelmaking,” said Matt Mehalik, Director of the Breathe Project and Allegheny County resident.

“We were willing to be on the front lines, go to public meetings and voice our complaints, but it’s easy for people to ignore the activists. The documentation that the CREATE Lab helped us develop was huge. [Our concerns] couldn’t be ignored anymore.”

From Coffee Shop Conversations to Community Power

What began as informal gatherings evolved into something much more powerful. Community groups rallied together under the Breathe Project and additional support soon followed.

Organizations like the Heinz Foundation helped financially support the work and public health professionals began documenting the connection between the air quality and residents’ illnesses. Through a collaboration with Carnegie Mellon’s CREATE Lab, residents installed “Breathe Cams” on their properties aimed directly at polluting facilities. These cameras captured hundreds of visible emission violations. “We always said the sheriff was out of town,” said Thaddeus. “We had the rules but no one to enforce them.”

To build leverage, several ACCAN members purchased a share of stock in the facility’s parent company, DTE Energy. They attended annual shareholder meetings, ensuring their testimony was officially recorded. Their requests were modest—follow the rules, stop emitting illegally, and to install pollution scrubbers. The company largely ignored them, it was easier for them to pay the small fines.

Meanwhile, residents documented air quality issues, attended regulatory meetings, and filed complaints. Eventually, their efforts reached the Environment Protection Agency’s Region 3 Director, who condemned the visual evidence of illegal emissions from Shenango Coal Works and took enforcement actions. 

“We were willing to be on the front lines, go to public meetings and voice our complaints, but it’s easy for people to ignore the activists,” said Angelo Taranto, another ACCAN organizer and Allegheny County resident. “The documentation that the CREATE Lab helped us develop was huge. [Our concerns] couldn’t be ignored anymore.”

The company faced a choice: invest in upgrading the aging facility with pollution-catching technology or shut down.

In 2016, Shenango Coke Works closed.

A Public Health Victory

The closure was not just symbolic. Sulfur pollution dropped by 90 percent and emergency room visits immediately declined by 42 percent. That trend continued for years after the closure. For a community that had spent years fighting to be heard, the results were validation.

But the fight to reduce pollution from other facilities is ongoing.

Although Barb and Thaddeus have taken a step back to care for themselves, ACCAN and other Breathe Project members remain active, monitoring facilities, advocating for stricter enforcement, and supporting neighboring regions facing similar challenges.

“We put in hours of work to show that the plant was seriously hazardous,” said Thaddeus.

“We didn’t do it alone,” Barb says. “We had a lot of help along the way.”

A group of neighbors with no formal training in environmental science proved that community-led action can drive systemic change.

We Need Continued Action

A community shouldn’t have to fight tooth and nail for years to be heard—or to stop being poisoned by pollution. Regulations on industrial pollution have helped our country over time, but today, those regulations are being rolled back, threatening to return us to an era of increased pollution while climate change accelerates.

As the Trump administration took office in 2025, the year was marked by the biggest deregulatory action in American history. This includes weakening regulations for industries that emit pollution as well as the intended expansion of fossil-fuel based energy and attacks on affordable clean energy options. 

These actions have tangible, long-term consequences. The systematic rollback of rules is increasing pollution and associated health risks, degrading wildlife habitat, and passing the financial burden to Americans.

Learn more about our fight for Protection Over Pollution.

Between 1970 and 2020, air pollution dropped by over 78 percent, even as the U.S. economy grew nearly fourfold. This progress demonstrates a critical point: environmental protection and economic growth are not mutually exclusive.

Yet today, that legacy is at risk.

The Trump Administration’s deregulatory agenda represents a shift away from sound, science-based policy, and instead prioritizes short-term industrial interests. This deregulatory pivot is impacting many facets of environmental policy—from rules we rely on to keep water clean, to ones that help protect at-risk wildlife—but it’s perhaps nowhere more apparent than in the dismantling of clean air regulations. 

How we got here: Removing Protections from Pollution

Shortly after taking office, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced plans to weaken federal pollution standards; this has included rollbacks of Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), limiting HFC regulations, narrowing methane emissions controls, and reclassifying sources of hazardous air pollutants.

Most notably, the EPA has repealed the Endangerment Finding, the scientific foundation of federal efforts to reduce harmful greenhouse gas pollution across multiple sectors. Some of these rule rollbacks have been finalized, others are still in review, many will be litigated in court, and yet more are on the horizon.

About 70 coal-fired power plants across the U.S. have also received exemptions from certain Clean Air Act requirements, part of a broader Administration effort to revive the coal industry (it’s worth noting, however, this effort does not extend to protecting most of the workers in that industry).  

In January 2026, the EPA announced a major change in regulatory methodology: it would no longer fully account for lives saved from reduced air pollution in cost-benefit analyses, instead placing greater emphasis on industry compliance costs. Congressional action is reinforcing this trajectory, with House-passed bills that would further weaken Clean Air Act enforcement by easing permitting requirements and allowing states to discount certain pollution sources.

Meanwhile, power sector emissions rose by nearly 4 percent in 2025, driven in part by increased coal generation and growing electricity demand from energy-intensive industries like artificial intelligence and data centers. Emissions from coal-burning power plants pose a particular threat to public health. An analysis of EPA data by E&E News showed a historic spike in air pollutants—including sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides—in 2025.  

Public Health and Wildlife at Risk

Dismantling pollution limits and clean air regulations leads to increased toxic exposure for nearby communities and wildlife and disproportionately harms vulnerable populations.

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) is one of the most dangerous pollutants regulated under the Clean Air Act. Produced by burning fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and diesel, these microscopic particles can penetrate deep into the lungs and bloodstream, contributing to heart attacks, strokes, respiratory disease, and reduced life expectancy.

Mercury pollution poses another serious risk. A potent neurotoxin, it can cause neurological damage, cardiovascular harm, and developmental impacts. Mercury released into the air can be converted by bacteria into toxic methylmercury, which builds up in food webs and is primarily exposed to humans through eating fish. Wildlife such as marine mammals, loons, otters, mink, and the endangered Florida panther are also highly vulnerable. Humans who engage in subsistence fishing have the highest exposure risk.

In February 2026, the EPA repealed a Biden-era rule limiting mercury emissions from certain coal plants, allowing higher emissions from facilities burning lignite coal. The nation’s dirtiest power plant—Colstrip Stream Electric Station located in Montana—emits higher-than-average levels of mercury and the highest levels of soot in the country.

Nearby recreational and subsistence fishers on the Northern Cheyenne Reservation are at particular risk due to contaminated fish. Unlike other power plants, the plant has not installed basic pollution control technologies—and with regulation rollbacks, now has no incentive to.

Nationally, mercury emissions from power plants fell by about 82 percent between 2011 and 2017 following implementation of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards—demonstrating the effectiveness of regulation in reducing exposure.

As former Biden-era EPA air chief Joe Goffman noted, “When they say, ‘a small rollback,’ there’s a population of actual communities and actual people who are being erased by that rhetoric.”

The Economic Myth of Deregulation 

A central argument behind the Administration’s deregulatory agenda is that environmental protections hinder economic growth. The data tell a different story.

Air pollution regulations do not hurt economic growth: U.S. Gross Domestic Product has nearly quadrupled and air pollution has simultaneously declined since the passing of the Clean Air Act. 

Weakening these protections can be far more costly. An analysis by Rocky Mountain Institute shows that coal plants impose US $13–$26 billion annually in health-related costs on communities. The EPA has estimated that every $1 spent reducing particulate matter pollution yields up to $77 in health benefits.

Coal generation costs have risen significantly in recent years (28 percent between 2021-2024), while cleaner alternatives like wind and solar have become more affordable. When accounting for hidden costs like health care, environmental damage, and cleanup, coal becomes even less viable.

A Path Forward

The rollback of clean air protections is not just a policy shift but rather it is a reversal of decades of scientific progress and public health gains. And it’s happening while climate impacts—and their effects on human and wildlife health and well-being—are intensifying. More and more people are exposed to dangerous heat, flooding, and drought.

Extreme weather events are becoming more frequent and more intense; mental health and productivity are compromised. And these impacts aren’t the same for all people or places. Disadvantaged and low-income communities are already more likely live in places with more air pollution and climate impacts are compounding these disproportionate health hazards.  

The establishment of environmental safeguards are effective, economically safe, and essential for protecting both people and ecosystems. Weakening them increases long-term costs, exacerbates health disparities, and threatens wildlife biodiversity.

Fortunately, alternatives already exist. Clean energy technologies can meet growing electricity demand while reducing emissions, lowering health burdens, and supporting sustainable economic growth. 

What happens in this courtyard extends far beyond its borders. Students are taking the lead on projects that matter to both their communities and the planet. Fresh produce grown in the garden is donated to families and local food banks. A student-led partnership with local businesses and Rutgers University resulted in the installation of a rain garden, designed to absorb stormwater runoff. These same students went on to teach others how to build their own rain gardens.

And Lincoln Middle School is not alone.

Across New Jersey, schools are stepping up through the Eco-Schools U.S. program, a global sustainability initiative operating in over 100 countries and administered in the U.S. by the National Wildlife Federation. Supported in New Jersey by the PSEG Foundation and New Jersey Audubon (a NWF affiliate), the program empowers students to take meaningful environmental action in their schools and communities.

“Through our partnership with the National Wildlife Federation, we’re able to create engaging, hands-on learning opportunities for our students that are rooted in community impact, environmental responsibility and leadership development,” said Maria Spina, Senior Manager of the PSEG Foundation & Corporate Social Responsibility. “This program gives young people practical ways to engage within their own communities and inspires them to make positive change in their environment. We’re grateful to work with partners like the National Wildlife Federation as we collective help build a greener, cleaner and friendlier New Jersey that our children can thrive in.”

The impact is wide-ranging. Some schools have created free campus “thrift stores” to support students in need. Others are planting dune grass to combat coastal erosion, building pollinator gardens, launching seed libraries, and even raising fish in classroom aquaponics systems. Students are testing water quality in local streams and leading clean-up efforts that directly improve their neighborhoods.

At the heart of Eco-Schools U.S. program are more than 60 “Action Cards”—student-driven projects focused on Climate Change, Wildlife and Biodiversity, and Healthy Communities. Schools earn points for completed projects as they work toward certification levels from Bronze to the prestigious Green Flag. In 2025, ten New Jersey schools—including Lincoln Middle School—achieved Green Flag status, demonstrating exceptional commitment to sustainability.

And educators are seeing the difference. As one teacher shared, the program transforms students’ care for the planet into meaningful, student-led action—building academic skills, confidence, and community impact.

Programs like Eco-Schools U.S. show what’s possible when students are empowered to lead. They’re not just learning about sustainability, they’re practicing it, shaping it, and proving that meaningful change can start right at school and in communities.

To learn more about how schools across New Jersey are making a difference, visit the New Jersey Audubon website.

Roberta Hunter is the Education Program Manager for New Jersey Audubon (NJA) an NWF affiliate. Roberta is responsible for implementing Eco-Schools U.S. in schools across New Jersey.