Nate Rott

And he started with the type of desert frog that lived near his hometown, Las Vegas.

And Anthony says it worked for that population of frogs.

But the further he got into the frog world.

It became clear to him what they really need, he says, is like some kind of permanent solution that makes the species more resilient into the future.

And he thinks one of those solutions could be something called synthetic biology, which in this case basically means genetic modification.

Anthony wants to use genetic tools, new technologies to essentially splice that chytrid resistant DNA into frogs that do not have it.

Yes, that's kind of like the pie in the sky aim.

But here's where I think this whole thing gets super interesting.

Because, as you might imagine, Emily, the idea of genetically modifying things and then putting them out in the natural world worries a lot of people.

Okay, so probably the best answer I heard when I asked this question to many people was from Guy Reeves, a scientist who's now working with a German nonprofit.

It's just like it's kind of this catch-all term, right, for a suite of technologies like genetic modification, genetic engineering that basically allow scientists to modify or engineer living cells.

Yeah, basically.

So like think of the kinds of work that scientists do to genetically modify foods, like, you know, making crops more resistant to pesticides or like hardier to endure drought, that kind of stuff.

Totally.

Yeah.

Same exact thing.

So the problem the guy has with this kind of like know it when you see it broad definition is that it's just supporters.

It's jazz.

It's just jazz hands.

The problem is that it's like so broad that supporters of this technology often talk about synthetic biology as if, you know, genetically engineering insulin in laboratories for people, which is like a proven good use of it.

is the same thing as genetically engineering coral so it's more resistant to warming waters and then making those changes heritable so they can pass them on from generation to generation and then releasing that into the wild.

They've never been used.

So it's like we don't know if it's going to work.

And beyond that, we don't know if there might be any unintended consequences.

Like what if the genetic changes hurt the animal in some way or the broader ecosystem they live in?

Like completely on accident, but it's possible.

Yes, controversial because it gets at an almost like philosophical question, Emily, about what our role should be in the natural world.

Yeah, and I mean, in Guy's view, if that happens, right, he thinks it could be irreversible.

Like, how would you capture a bunch of flies that have been released into the wild that are genetically mutated?

So he really worries that scientists could accidentally misuse these new technologies and accidentally create more problems that they're then trying to fix.

So he kind of sums up the whole debate that we're having in this way.

That's definitely true.

We are not in a we are not in an age of agreements.

But, you know, like why I started looking at this big question now is because like one of the largest conservation groups in the world.

Right.

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature just weighed in on this debate that we're having right now at a big meeting this month.

OK, so the IUCN's World Conservation Congress only happens every four years and not to get too wonky and bureaucratic.

But the IUCN, for like anyone who doesn't know what it is, it basically uses the best available science to set conservation standards for the world to use.

So Sue Lieberman, the vice president of international policy at the Wildlife Conservation Society, was at this meeting in Abu Dhabi last week.

And she says it's important to know that the IUCN does not have any regulatory authorities, like it can't force governments to do anything.

And I'm a pretty poor excuse for a philosopher.

And last week they voted on two proposals that directly addressed synthetic biology.

One which called for a moratorium on releasing any genetically modified species into the wild.

And to be clear, it'd be like a temporary ban.

But, you know, I think the easiest way to explain this technology that we're going to be talking about is to start with an effort that's going on to save something we all know and love.

So advocates for it, like European biologist Ricarda Steinbrecher, more or less described it as kind of like pumping the brakes on these new technologies until we better understand them.

Because she says, you know, nature, as we all know, is in a super vulnerable place right now.

And there are so many examples where well-intentioned human interventions have gone wrong.

There are so many times that people introduced an animal purposely or accidentally and sometimes well-intentioned, and it upset the existing ecosystem.

And Riccardo says when it comes to synthetic biology, there's a lot of hype around it.

Yeah, so the other proposal basically says, OK, like if conservationists are going to explore using these technologies, here's how we should do it.

But Sue Lieberman says even that was controversial at the recent meeting.

Frogs.

That scientists like Anthony Waddell, who we heard from earlier, are already doing this research.

Scientists are looking right now at how to genetically modify coral to be more resistant to hotter temperatures in the water.

How to alter trees like the American chestnut to be more resistant to disease.

So from her point of view, the horse is out of the barn.

And the fear I heard from people who opposed this moratorium, people like Sue, was that it would make it harder for researchers to fund research in this area.

Here's Ryan Phelan, the co-founder and executive director of the nonprofit Revive and Restore, which provides funding for synthetic biology conservation efforts.

Yeah.

So in Ryan's opinion, and I heard this from pretty much everybody who supports the use of synthetic biology, is that when you consider like how fast the climate is changing right now and how poorly we've done to this point globally at stopping issues like deforestation.

They voted no on the moratorium by like a hair.

And yes, on a framework to integrate synthetic biology into conservation with like all of the safeguards that we mentioned.

This is Anthony Waddell, a researcher at Macquarie University in Australia.

Well, they're not going to just like instantly release a bunch of stuff into the wild.

Like that's still going to take a lot of time.

But in terms of the debate, I think this is still very much up for discussion.

Like everyone I talk to thinks this will show up again at the next big IUCN meeting.

And everyone I talk to thinks that's a good thing.

Because one of the concerns I heard here is that there's the potential that this could fundamentally change our relationship with nature.

Like, if a butterfly is genetically modified, would we still care for it the same way we would for one that's just fluttering around now?

Like, would you?

It's just chytrid is too good.

Right.

It's a tough question.

Anthony Waddle, the frog scientist we started with, hears that argument.

But his response is that we've already fundamentally changed nature.

Chytrid fungus, which is like this horrendous and deadly skin disease affecting amphibians that, you know, the antibiotics they have often can't fix.

Yeah, thank you so much for letting me talk about something that I am endlessly geeked about.

And this disease is now found on every continent except Antarctica.

Anthony has been focused on protecting frog populations from chytrid pretty much his entire scientific career.

And he started with the type of desert frog that lived near his hometown, Las Vegas.

And Anthony says it worked for that population of frogs.

But the further he got into the frog world.

It became clear to him what they really need, he says, is like some kind of permanent solution that makes the species more resilient into the future.

And he thinks one of those solutions could be something called synthetic biology, which in this case basically means genetic modification.

Anthony wants to use genetic tools, new technologies to essentially splice that chytrid resistant DNA into frogs that do not have it.

Yes, that's kind of like the pie in the sky aim.

But here's where I think this whole thing gets super interesting.

Because, as you might imagine, Emily, the idea of genetically modifying things and then putting them out in the natural world worries a lot of people.

Okay, so probably the best answer I heard when I asked this question to many people was from Guy Reeves, a scientist who's now working with a German nonprofit.

It's just like it's kind of this catch-all term, right, for a suite of technologies like genetic modification, genetic engineering that basically allow scientists to modify or engineer living cells.

Yeah, basically.

So like think of the kinds of work that scientists do to genetically modify foods, like, you know, making crops more resistant to pesticides or like hardier to endure drought, that kind of stuff.

Totally.

Yeah.

Same exact thing.

So the problem the guy has with this kind of like know it when you see it broad definition is that it's just supporters.

It's jazz.

It's just jazz hands.

The problem is that it's like so broad that supporters of this technology often talk about synthetic biology as if, you know, genetically engineering insulin in laboratories for people, which is like a proven good use of it.

is the same thing as genetically engineering coral so it's more resistant to warming waters and then making those changes heritable so they can pass them on from generation to generation and then releasing that into the wild.

They've never been used.

So it's like we don't know if it's going to work.

And beyond that, we don't know if there might be any unintended consequences.

Like what if the genetic changes hurt the animal in some way or the broader ecosystem they live in?

Like completely on accident, but it's possible.

Yes, controversial because it gets at an almost like philosophical question, Emily, about what our role should be in the natural world.

Yeah, and I mean, in Guy's view, if that happens, right, he thinks it could be irreversible.

Like, how would you capture a bunch of flies that have been released into the wild that are genetically mutated?

So he really worries that scientists could accidentally misuse these new technologies and accidentally create more problems that they're then trying to fix.

So he kind of sums up the whole debate that we're having in this way.

That's definitely true.

We are not in a we are not in an age of agreements.

But, you know, like why I started looking at this big question now is because like one of the largest conservation groups in the world.

Right.

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature just weighed in on this debate that we're having right now at a big meeting this month.

OK, so the IUCN's World Conservation Congress only happens every four years and not to get too wonky and bureaucratic.

But the IUCN, for like anyone who doesn't know what it is, it basically uses the best available science to set conservation standards for the world to use.

So Sue Lieberman, the vice president of international policy at the Wildlife Conservation Society, was at this meeting in Abu Dhabi last week.

And she says it's important to know that the IUCN does not have any regulatory authorities, like it can't force governments to do anything.

And I'm a pretty poor excuse for a philosopher.

And last week they voted on two proposals that directly addressed synthetic biology.

One which called for a moratorium on releasing any genetically modified species into the wild.

And to be clear, it'd be like a temporary ban.

But, you know, I think the easiest way to explain this technology that we're going to be talking about is to start with an effort that's going on to save something we all know and love.

So advocates for it, like European biologist Ricarda Steinbrecher, more or less described it as kind of like pumping the brakes on these new technologies until we better understand them.

Because she says, you know, nature, as we all know, is in a super vulnerable place right now.

And there are so many examples where well-intentioned human interventions have gone wrong.

There are so many times that people introduced an animal purposely or accidentally and sometimes well-intentioned, and it upset the existing ecosystem.

And Riccardo says when it comes to synthetic biology, there's a lot of hype around it.

Yeah, so the other proposal basically says, OK, like if conservationists are going to explore using these technologies, here's how we should do it.

But Sue Lieberman says even that was controversial at the recent meeting.

Frogs.

That scientists like Anthony Waddell, who we heard from earlier, are already doing this research.

Scientists are looking right now at how to genetically modify coral to be more resistant to hotter temperatures in the water.

How to alter trees like the American chestnut to be more resistant to disease.

So from her point of view, the horse is out of the barn.

And the fear I heard from people who opposed this moratorium, people like Sue, was that it would make it harder for researchers to fund research in this area.

Here's Ryan Phelan, the co-founder and executive director of the nonprofit Revive and Restore, which provides funding for synthetic biology conservation efforts.

Yeah.

So in Ryan's opinion, and I heard this from pretty much everybody who supports the use of synthetic biology, is that when you consider like how fast the climate is changing right now and how poorly we've done to this point globally at stopping issues like deforestation.

They voted no on the moratorium by like a hair.

And yes, on a framework to integrate synthetic biology into conservation with like all of the safeguards that we mentioned.

This is Anthony Waddell, a researcher at Macquarie University in Australia.

Well, they're not going to just like instantly release a bunch of stuff into the wild.

Like that's still going to take a lot of time.

But in terms of the debate, I think this is still very much up for discussion.

Like everyone I talk to thinks this will show up again at the next big IUCN meeting.

And everyone I talk to thinks that's a good thing.

Because one of the concerns I heard here is that there's the potential that this could fundamentally change our relationship with nature.

Like, if a butterfly is genetically modified, would we still care for it the same way we would for one that's just fluttering around now?

Like, would you?

It's just chytrid is too good.

Right.

It's a tough question.

Anthony Waddle, the frog scientist we started with, hears that argument.

But his response is that we've already fundamentally changed nature.

Chytrid fungus, which is like this horrendous and deadly skin disease affecting amphibians that, you know, the antibiotics they have often can't fix.

Yeah, thank you so much for letting me talk about something that I am endlessly geeked about.

And this disease is now found on every continent except Antarctica.

Anthony has been focused on protecting frog populations from chytrid pretty much his entire scientific career.

One of my dog's like favorite parks is right next to these big eucalyptus trees that the monarchs overwinter in. And it's very cute. You know, he's like prancing around in the dewy grass in the morning light. But it's also like terrifying, right? Because I'm like, dude, do not catch one of those monarch butterflies. And thankfully he is not.

One of my dog's like favorite parks is right next to these big eucalyptus trees that the monarchs overwinter in. And it's very cute. You know, he's like prancing around in the dewy grass in the morning light. But it's also like terrifying, right? Because I'm like, dude, do not catch one of those monarch butterflies. And thankfully he is not.

One of my dog's like favorite parks is right next to these big eucalyptus trees that the monarchs overwinter in. And it's very cute. You know, he's like prancing around in the dewy grass in the morning light. But it's also like terrifying, right? Because I'm like, dude, do not catch one of those monarch butterflies. And thankfully he is not.

Yeah, absolutely. And that's because, as you well know, Emily, monarch populations here on the West Coast and pretty much like everywhere in North America have plummeted over the last few decades. And that's because of three big reasons. Habitat loss, the loss of overwintering sites and milkweed habitat, milkweed being the plant that they depend on. The second one is pesticide use.

Yeah, absolutely. And that's because, as you well know, Emily, monarch populations here on the West Coast and pretty much like everywhere in North America have plummeted over the last few decades. And that's because of three big reasons. Habitat loss, the loss of overwintering sites and milkweed habitat, milkweed being the plant that they depend on. The second one is pesticide use.

Yeah, absolutely. And that's because, as you well know, Emily, monarch populations here on the West Coast and pretty much like everywhere in North America have plummeted over the last few decades. And that's because of three big reasons. Habitat loss, the loss of overwintering sites and milkweed habitat, milkweed being the plant that they depend on. The second one is pesticide use.

And the third is climate change, warming up the places that monarchs depend on for winter. So in 2022, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which is like, you know, the world's clearinghouse for the species at risk of extinction, put monarch butterflies on their so-called red list as threatened.

And the third is climate change, warming up the places that monarchs depend on for winter. So in 2022, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which is like, you know, the world's clearinghouse for the species at risk of extinction, put monarch butterflies on their so-called red list as threatened.

And the third is climate change, warming up the places that monarchs depend on for winter. So in 2022, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, which is like, you know, the world's clearinghouse for the species at risk of extinction, put monarch butterflies on their so-called red list as threatened.

Right. Through all of these like really creative approaches. Right.

Right. Through all of these like really creative approaches. Right.

Right. Through all of these like really creative approaches. Right.

Whoa, so if monarchs can one day discover these new sites, they might have a fighting chance on a warming planet. Similar work has been done in Idaho and British Columbia.

Whoa, so if monarchs can one day discover these new sites, they might have a fighting chance on a warming planet. Similar work has been done in Idaho and British Columbia.

Whoa, so if monarchs can one day discover these new sites, they might have a fighting chance on a warming planet. Similar work has been done in Idaho and British Columbia.

There's all sorts of big conservation efforts that are currently ongoing in the U.S., but there's one big thing that you should really be thinking about with monarchs as we enter the next couple of months. Okay. The monarch butterfly, while it is listed internationally as vulnerable, it is not listed in the U.S. under the Endangered Species Act. Soon, that might change.

There's all sorts of big conservation efforts that are currently ongoing in the U.S., but there's one big thing that you should really be thinking about with monarchs as we enter the next couple of months. Okay. The monarch butterfly, while it is listed internationally as vulnerable, it is not listed in the U.S. under the Endangered Species Act. Soon, that might change.

There's all sorts of big conservation efforts that are currently ongoing in the U.S., but there's one big thing that you should really be thinking about with monarchs as we enter the next couple of months. Okay. The monarch butterfly, while it is listed internationally as vulnerable, it is not listed in the U.S. under the Endangered Species Act. Soon, that might change.

In early December, the Fish and Wildlife Service is going to make a proposed determination, which is very official language, about whether the monarch butterfly should be listed as threatened or endangered, which is complicated and interesting in like so, so, so many ways.

In early December, the Fish and Wildlife Service is going to make a proposed determination, which is very official language, about whether the monarch butterfly should be listed as threatened or endangered, which is complicated and interesting in like so, so, so many ways.

In early December, the Fish and Wildlife Service is going to make a proposed determination, which is very official language, about whether the monarch butterfly should be listed as threatened or endangered, which is complicated and interesting in like so, so, so many ways.

Pun excused. And we look at the challenge of protecting a species that's habitat could be your backyard.

Pun excused. And we look at the challenge of protecting a species that's habitat could be your backyard.

Pun excused. And we look at the challenge of protecting a species that's habitat could be your backyard.

It kind of depends on the time of year, right? Like, so these are migrating species. So there's times where there's tons of them here in coastal California and there's times that there's fewer. We are now entering the time of year where there are a lot of them because we're entering winter. I recently took a trip to another park, not the one where my dog chases butterflies, but

It kind of depends on the time of year, right? Like, so these are migrating species. So there's times where there's tons of them here in coastal California and there's times that there's fewer. We are now entering the time of year where there are a lot of them because we're entering winter. I recently took a trip to another park, not the one where my dog chases butterflies, but

It kind of depends on the time of year, right? Like, so these are migrating species. So there's times where there's tons of them here in coastal California and there's times that there's fewer. We are now entering the time of year where there are a lot of them because we're entering winter. I recently took a trip to another park, not the one where my dog chases butterflies, but

With a couple of biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And I got to learn, like, all sorts of cool things about monarchs. Like, did you know that milkweed, the plant their larvae eat, is toxic?

With a couple of biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And I got to learn, like, all sorts of cool things about monarchs. Like, did you know that milkweed, the plant their larvae eat, is toxic?

With a couple of biologists from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. And I got to learn, like, all sorts of cool things about monarchs. Like, did you know that milkweed, the plant their larvae eat, is toxic?

So this is Karen Sinclair, by the way. Whoa, so they're just low-grade poisoning themselves to not taste good?

So this is Karen Sinclair, by the way. Whoa, so they're just low-grade poisoning themselves to not taste good?

So this is Karen Sinclair, by the way. Whoa, so they're just low-grade poisoning themselves to not taste good?

So I had no idea about this. But the reason that I met with Karen wasn't like, you know, I didn't want to just pocket a bunch of fun pub trivia facts. I met with her because Karen trains volunteers to count monarch butterflies at overwintering sites in Ventura County every year. And it's those types of counts that are really providing the data to show that monarchs are in trouble.

So I had no idea about this. But the reason that I met with Karen wasn't like, you know, I didn't want to just pocket a bunch of fun pub trivia facts. I met with her because Karen trains volunteers to count monarch butterflies at overwintering sites in Ventura County every year. And it's those types of counts that are really providing the data to show that monarchs are in trouble.

So I had no idea about this. But the reason that I met with Karen wasn't like, you know, I didn't want to just pocket a bunch of fun pub trivia facts. I met with her because Karen trains volunteers to count monarch butterflies at overwintering sites in Ventura County every year. And it's those types of counts that are really providing the data to show that monarchs are in trouble.

So scientists think today we only see about 5% of the number of monarch butterflies that used to be on the West Coast. That's how far the Western population has dropped. The Eastern population of monarchs have dropped by about 80%.

So scientists think today we only see about 5% of the number of monarch butterflies that used to be on the West Coast. That's how far the Western population has dropped. The Eastern population of monarchs have dropped by about 80%.

So scientists think today we only see about 5% of the number of monarch butterflies that used to be on the West Coast. That's how far the Western population has dropped. The Eastern population of monarchs have dropped by about 80%.

It's a ton. So that is why there's been this huge push from wildlife groups and insect advocates to try to get the monarch butterfly listed under the Endangered Species Act. And after 10 years of pushing, the Fish and Wildlife Service is now facing a court-mandated deadline to make a decision by December 4th.

It's a ton. So that is why there's been this huge push from wildlife groups and insect advocates to try to get the monarch butterfly listed under the Endangered Species Act. And after 10 years of pushing, the Fish and Wildlife Service is now facing a court-mandated deadline to make a decision by December 4th.

It's a ton. So that is why there's been this huge push from wildlife groups and insect advocates to try to get the monarch butterfly listed under the Endangered Species Act. And after 10 years of pushing, the Fish and Wildlife Service is now facing a court-mandated deadline to make a decision by December 4th.

Emily, do we know anything about anything? True. True.

Emily, do we know anything about anything? True. True.

Emily, do we know anything about anything? True. True.

You know, I asked Emma Pelton, an endangered species biologist at the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, which is like one of the groups that's been pushing for a listing, that very question. And here was her response.

You know, I asked Emma Pelton, an endangered species biologist at the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, which is like one of the groups that's been pushing for a listing, that very question. And here was her response.

You know, I asked Emma Pelton, an endangered species biologist at the Xerces Society for Invertebrate Conservation, which is like one of the groups that's been pushing for a listing, that very question. And here was her response.

So this is where I think it gets really interesting. Emma wants and thinks the science supports the monarch butterfly being listed as threatened, not endangered.

So this is where I think it gets really interesting. Emma wants and thinks the science supports the monarch butterfly being listed as threatened, not endangered.

So this is where I think it gets really interesting. Emma wants and thinks the science supports the monarch butterfly being listed as threatened, not endangered.

And that distinction between threatened and endangered is really important. Because a species that gets listed as endangered in the U.S. gets all of the protections of the Endangered Species Act. It gets everything it has to offer. Like, you cannot kill monarch butterflies. You cannot mess with them.

And that distinction between threatened and endangered is really important. Because a species that gets listed as endangered in the U.S. gets all of the protections of the Endangered Species Act. It gets everything it has to offer. Like, you cannot kill monarch butterflies. You cannot mess with them.

And that distinction between threatened and endangered is really important. Because a species that gets listed as endangered in the U.S. gets all of the protections of the Endangered Species Act. It gets everything it has to offer. Like, you cannot kill monarch butterflies. You cannot mess with them.

So it depends. In some cases, depending on what they rule, you could. I don't want to get too far down the technical wonky path of environmental law because I don't think anyone wants to go down that path. But if a species is listed as threatened, there's more wiggle room. There can be carve-outs and protections to accommodate for the people that are going to have to interact with that animal.

So it depends. In some cases, depending on what they rule, you could. I don't want to get too far down the technical wonky path of environmental law because I don't think anyone wants to go down that path. But if a species is listed as threatened, there's more wiggle room. There can be carve-outs and protections to accommodate for the people that are going to have to interact with that animal.

So it depends. In some cases, depending on what they rule, you could. I don't want to get too far down the technical wonky path of environmental law because I don't think anyone wants to go down that path. But if a species is listed as threatened, there's more wiggle room. There can be carve-outs and protections to accommodate for the people that are going to have to interact with that animal.

They could say, like, it's not illegal to raise monarchs in captivity or for somebody to touch one. They could exempt those kinds of activities. And Emma thinks that they honestly should.

They could say, like, it's not illegal to raise monarchs in captivity or for somebody to touch one. They could exempt those kinds of activities. And Emma thinks that they honestly should.

They could say, like, it's not illegal to raise monarchs in captivity or for somebody to touch one. They could exempt those kinds of activities. And Emma thinks that they honestly should.

Totally. And presumably you'd want to give people some more flexibility around them because, you know, like we've been saying, the monarch's habitat is the better part of the North American continent. So at least for part of the year, right? Like when they're migrating through.

Totally. And presumably you'd want to give people some more flexibility around them because, you know, like we've been saying, the monarch's habitat is the better part of the North American continent. So at least for part of the year, right? Like when they're migrating through.

Totally. And presumably you'd want to give people some more flexibility around them because, you know, like we've been saying, the monarch's habitat is the better part of the North American continent. So at least for part of the year, right? Like when they're migrating through.

So I asked Emma the exact same thing.

So I asked Emma the exact same thing.

So I asked Emma the exact same thing.

And that's because there are so many variations of what they could decide. And nobody wants to see any of the conservation work that's already going on to be disrupted. So like right now, there are volunteer networks, insect enthusiasts, conservation groups, states, tribes, agencies working to help monarchs. Here's Bridget Rollins, a staff attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center.

And that's because there are so many variations of what they could decide. And nobody wants to see any of the conservation work that's already going on to be disrupted. So like right now, there are volunteer networks, insect enthusiasts, conservation groups, states, tribes, agencies working to help monarchs. Here's Bridget Rollins, a staff attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center.

And that's because there are so many variations of what they could decide. And nobody wants to see any of the conservation work that's already going on to be disrupted. So like right now, there are volunteer networks, insect enthusiasts, conservation groups, states, tribes, agencies working to help monarchs. Here's Bridget Rollins, a staff attorney at the National Agricultural Law Center.

And remember, this is a species that migrates through nearly every state in a country where most of the land is privately owned.

And remember, this is a species that migrates through nearly every state in a country where most of the land is privately owned.

And remember, this is a species that migrates through nearly every state in a country where most of the land is privately owned.

Bingo. And Bridget says farmers she's talked to are really concerned that if the monarch butterfly gets listed, it could limit their use of pesticides. Remember, that's one of the biggest drivers of the species and really all insects declines. And it could limit where they plow and plant crops.

Bingo. And Bridget says farmers she's talked to are really concerned that if the monarch butterfly gets listed, it could limit their use of pesticides. Remember, that's one of the biggest drivers of the species and really all insects declines. And it could limit where they plow and plant crops.

Bingo. And Bridget says farmers she's talked to are really concerned that if the monarch butterfly gets listed, it could limit their use of pesticides. Remember, that's one of the biggest drivers of the species and really all insects declines. And it could limit where they plow and plant crops.

But again, you know, it's really important to remind listeners that this is just a proposed ruling, right? So regardless of whether the Fish and Wildlife Service decide to list it as threatened or endangered, or maybe they don't list it at all, there is going to be an opportunity for public comment, for reviews.

But again, you know, it's really important to remind listeners that this is just a proposed ruling, right? So regardless of whether the Fish and Wildlife Service decide to list it as threatened or endangered, or maybe they don't list it at all, there is going to be an opportunity for public comment, for reviews.

But again, you know, it's really important to remind listeners that this is just a proposed ruling, right? So regardless of whether the Fish and Wildlife Service decide to list it as threatened or endangered, or maybe they don't list it at all, there is going to be an opportunity for public comment, for reviews.

And most of this, remember, is going to take place under a new presidential administration.

And most of this, remember, is going to take place under a new presidential administration.

And most of this, remember, is going to take place under a new presidential administration.

So, yeah, I asked Bridget that when I talked to her before the election. And she said what I think everyone would say, which is that we don't really know, like we don't know what the Trump administration is going to do on so many fronts. But she did say we can look to his first term for clues.

So, yeah, I asked Bridget that when I talked to her before the election. And she said what I think everyone would say, which is that we don't really know, like we don't know what the Trump administration is going to do on so many fronts. But she did say we can look to his first term for clues.

So, yeah, I asked Bridget that when I talked to her before the election. And she said what I think everyone would say, which is that we don't really know, like we don't know what the Trump administration is going to do on so many fronts. But she did say we can look to his first term for clues.

And so what she's referring to there are these rules that the Trump administration passed making it easier, you know, for example, to remove a species from the endangered species list, to weaken protections for threatened species, to make it harder to consider climate change when making decisions, and allowing agencies to consider economic losses to an industry like farming or logging when they're trying to decide if a species deserves protection.

And so what she's referring to there are these rules that the Trump administration passed making it easier, you know, for example, to remove a species from the endangered species list, to weaken protections for threatened species, to make it harder to consider climate change when making decisions, and allowing agencies to consider economic losses to an industry like farming or logging when they're trying to decide if a species deserves protection.

And so what she's referring to there are these rules that the Trump administration passed making it easier, you know, for example, to remove a species from the endangered species list, to weaken protections for threatened species, to make it harder to consider climate change when making decisions, and allowing agencies to consider economic losses to an industry like farming or logging when they're trying to decide if a species deserves protection.

Right. But one of the things that really stood out to me while I was talking to people about this, regardless of what happens, you know, this is kind of a groundbreaking rulemaking. There's not a lot of species that get proposed for listing that exist in nearly every U.S. state. So Emma says this is kind of like a test.

Right. But one of the things that really stood out to me while I was talking to people about this, regardless of what happens, you know, this is kind of a groundbreaking rulemaking. There's not a lot of species that get proposed for listing that exist in nearly every U.S. state. So Emma says this is kind of like a test.

Right. But one of the things that really stood out to me while I was talking to people about this, regardless of what happens, you know, this is kind of a groundbreaking rulemaking. There's not a lot of species that get proposed for listing that exist in nearly every U.S. state. So Emma says this is kind of like a test.

One of the monarch scientists I talked to was a plant and insect ecologist at the University of Nevada, Reno. His name is Matt Forrester. And he says we as a society really need to figure out how to do this large-scale, large-landscape conservation.

One of the monarch scientists I talked to was a plant and insect ecologist at the University of Nevada, Reno. His name is Matt Forrester. And he says we as a society really need to figure out how to do this large-scale, large-landscape conservation.

One of the monarch scientists I talked to was a plant and insect ecologist at the University of Nevada, Reno. His name is Matt Forrester. And he says we as a society really need to figure out how to do this large-scale, large-landscape conservation.

Me too. I will be reading with great interest and earnest.

Me too. I will be reading with great interest and earnest.

Me too. I will be reading with great interest and earnest.

Emily, hello.

Emily, hello.

Emily, hello.