NewzIntel.com

Category: Fisheries

  • MIL-OSI USA: Snakes don’t go with their gut, they regenerate it

    Source: US Government research organizations

    Discovery of regenerative process could aid in treating human gastrointestinal diseases

    Humans aren’t capable of regrowing limbs like some salamanders or full organs like some snails and zebrafish, but we do renew some of our cells, including the absorptive lining of our intestines. In contrast to the relatively minor turnover of cells seen in human intestines, some snakes, including boas and pythons, undergo extensive regenerative transformation of their intestine upon feeding. New research supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation has found that the method these snakes use to renew their guts, while different from the process humans use for regular cell renewal, is similar to mechanisms observed in mammalian wound healing and to how human intestines respond to a particular form of gastric bypass. This discovery increases researchers’ understanding of intestinal physiology and could have applications in treating metabolic and gastrointestinal disorders like diabetes and celiac disease, and possibly even cancer.

    Humans regularly renew intestinal cells by activating stem cells found in microscopic caverns in the intestinal wall known as intestinal crypts. Boas and pythons don’t have these crypts but regenerate their intestines after feeding in one of the most extreme examples of intestinal regeneration found in the animal kingdom — from shrunken and nearly non-functioning to double the size and with a rebuilt structure capable of digesting and absorbing their meal. The new research solved key elements of the mystery of how these snakes accomplished this feat, finding that it involves the unique coordination of pathways also present in humans. It also involves many of the signaling pathways observed in humans after a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass procedure, which is used to aid in weight loss and treat type 2 diabetes.

    “By determining the mechanisms that control this fascinating phenomenon in snakes, we can now work to understand the role those mechanisms play in modulating human intestinal regenerative capacity, metabolic reprogramming and responses to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, which may direct future targeting of drugs to manipulate these responses,” said Todd Castoe, corresponding author and a professor at The University of Texas at Arlington. “This could eventually provide treatments for the millions of people living with diabetes and celiac, Crohn’s disease, colitis and other gastrointestinal diseases, and may also provide new perspectives for treatment of gastrointestinal cancers.”

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Supporting women in ocean sciences

    Source: US Government research organizations

    The U.S. National Science Foundation, in collaboration with Every Page Foundation (EPF), is excited to announce 22 women science leaders as the 2024 NSF-EPF Ocean Decade Champions. 

    Each champion is associated with a project funded by the NSF Coastlines and People (NSF CoPe) program and receives a monetary award to support leadership activities, networking opportunities, technical and communications training and cross-disciplinary and intercultural scientific endeavors. 

    NSF CoPe is endorsed by the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development, also known as the Ocean Decade, which aims to promote ocean health and ensure any development efforts are sustainable and informed by science. The initiative’s 10 Decade Challenges include a fair representation of women and other underrepresented groups in ocean science and decision-making.  

    The champions contribute to CoPe projects focused on coastline and community research that integrates natural and social processes and creates new or adapts existing technologies to bolster coastal resilience. The champions excel in their research and prioritize mentoring others and positively impacting society.  

    NSF and EPF, along with support from Panorama Global, contributed over half a million dollars to support the careers of these leading women. Each awardee received support ranging from $20,000 to $50,000.  

    The 2024 NSF-EPF Ocean Decade Champions 

    Lynette Adams 
    Black in Marine Science 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Lynnette Adams is a director of development leading initiatives that bridge science, community and advocacy while centering joy as a driving force for equity and inclusion in marine biology.  

    Wai Allen
    Arizona State University 
    NSF Award Number: 2103843 
    Wai Allen (Diné/Navajo) is a postdoctoral researcher exploring the interface between systems of Western science and Indigenous knowledge that converge to help Indigenous communities actualize their self-determination through Indigenous data sovereignty and governance in the geosciences.   

    Sharon Alston
    Norfolk State University 
    NSF Award Number: 2209139 
    Sharon Alston is an associate professor of social work, researching risk and resilience among youth in public housing and exploring the career aspirations of African American youth.  

    Rebecca Asch 
    East Carolina University 
    NSF Award Number: 2052889 
    Rebecca Asch is a fisheries oceanographer researching interactions between fish reproduction, fish early life history, plankton ecology, climate change and climate variability.  

    Natasha Batista 
    Stanford University 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284  
    Natasha Batista is a marine spatial analyst and researcher investigating blue carbon modeling, ecosystem service valuations, community-based management and co-developed nature-based solutions.  

    Mona Behl 
    University of Georgia 
    NSF Award Number: 1940082 
    Mona Behl is an associate director of Georgia Sea Grant, and her research focuses on building climate adaptation and broadening participation in geosciences and workforce readiness. 

    Marilyn Brandt 
    University of the Virgin Islands 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Marilyn Brandt is a research associate professor studying the characteristics and impacts of coral reef diseases and using insights from her work to create effective strategies for coral conservation and restoration.   

    Lisa Carne 
    Fragments of Hope 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Lisa Carne founded Fragments of Hope, a community-based organization restoring coral reef habitats in 2013 after conducting coral reef research in Belize and witnessing the area’s vulnerability to hurricanes and rising sea temperatures.  

    Jade Delevaux 
    Seascape Solutions 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Jade Maeva Delevaux is a natural resource management specialist who works with decision-makers, local communities and nongovernmental organizations across the Pacific and the Caribbean to co-develop place-based solutions. 

    Allie Durdall 
    University of the Virgin Islands 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Allie Durdall is a marine and environmental scientist dedicated to coastal systems — mangroves, seagrass beds and salt ponds — who prioritizes fostering camaraderie among women and minorities in science.  

    Anne Guerry 
    Stanford University 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Anne Guerry is a scientist who studies the relationship between people and nature. She works on coastal resilience, marine planning, natural capital assessments and ecosystem services.  

    Sucharita Gopal 
    Boston University 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Sucharita Gopal is a multidisciplinary researcher who uses spatial analysis and modeling, GIS, data mining, information visualization and artificial neural networks to address various problems in biology, environmental science, public health and business.  

    Cindy Grace-McCaskey 
    East Carolina University 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Cindy Grace-McCaskey is an applied environmental anthropologist who uses qualitative, quantitative and participatory methods to examine the multiple ways social and natural systems interact with and influence one another and what that means for equitable resource management, adaptation and governance. 

    Kristin Grimes 
    University of the Virgin Islands 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Kristin Grimes is a research assistant professor who studies human impacts on nearshore environments. She focuses on mangrove ecosystems and is interested in how community-driven science approaches can improve restoration, education and stewardship outcomes. 

    Jamie Melvin 
    Elizabeth River Project 
    NSF Award Number: 2209139 
    Jamie Melvin is an engagement coordinator who develops and implements thoughtful and equitable programming at the Elizabeth River Project’s new Ryan Resilience Lab to engage with Norfolk’s diverse communities and coordinate the Knitting Mill Creek EcoDistrict. 

    Laura Moore 
    University of North Carolina 
    NSF Award Number: 1939447 
    Laura Moore is a professor researching how low-lying coastlines respond to climate change, emphasizing understanding the interactions between human activities and natural processes.  

    Tiara Moore 
    Black in Marine Science 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Tiara Moore is a CEO dedicated to promoting diversity and involvement in science through her research on biodiversity and efforts to increase participation in science through innovative methods such as environmental DNA and community engagement.  

    Shouraseni Sen Roy
    University of Miami 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Shouraseni Sen Roy is a geographer working on the long-term spatial-temporal patterns of climate processes, trends and impacts in the “global south,” incorporating geospatial analysis techniques.  

    Diamond Tachera 
    Rising Voices Center for Indigenous and Earth Sciences, NSF National Center for Atmospheric Research
    NSF Award Number: 2103843 
    Diamond Tachera is a kanaka ‘ōiwi (Native Hawaiian) and co-director whose research is driven by the Indigenous knowledge of her kūpuna (ancestors); she uses modern hydrogeochemical techniques to investigate the relationships between ʻāina (land), wai (water) and kānaka (people).  

    Nikki Taylor-Knowles 
    University of Miami 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Nikki Traylor-Knowles is a cell biologist whose research is dedicated to unraveling the evolution of immunity, wound healing and regeneration. She seeks to apply her research to conservation efforts.  

    Maya Trotz 
    University of South Florida 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Maya Trotz is a professor whose research covers water quality, water source protection and water provision for sustainable communities. She works with partners in the United States and the Caribbean on ridge-to-reef nature-based solutions. 

    Jingya Wang 
    University of Delaware 
    NSF Award Number: 2209190 
    Jingya Wang is a postdoctoral researcher focused on studying decision-making under deep uncertainties and strategies for adapting to climate change. She specializes in making risk-informed decisions to adapt systems to evolving conditions.   

    Rebecca Zarger 
    University of South Florida 
    NSF Award Number: 2209284 
    Rebecca Zarger is an environmental anthropologist working at the intersection of environmental knowledge and social justice to address coastal futures, climate change and youth informal science education.  

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Speech of Commissioner Summer K. Mersinger to Keynote at the S&P Global Commodity Insights Nodal Trader Conference

    Source: US Commodity Futures Trading Commission

    Good morning, and thank you for the warm welcome.  A special thank you to Nodal for inviting me to join your annual Trader Conference again this year.  It is truly an honor to address all of you this morning.  I am more than two years into my role as a commissioner at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and I still feel humbled by the opportunity to stand on a stage with a microphone to address accomplished professionals like all of you.  My children, on the other hand, are surprised that anyone would want to hear me talk about anything, and they are even more shocked that I would need a microphone to be heard as they are convinced that the only volume I ever use when speaking is shouting.

    The topic for my speech on today’s agenda is:  New Perspectives on Energy Trading and Power Markets, and I plan to focus on the road ahead for these markets.  But before discussing the road ahead, I will start with a story from my childhood about when I learned to drive.  I say this is a story from my childhood because in South Dakota, children as young as fourteen years old are allowed to obtain a driver’s license.  As much as I miss my home state, when I look at my fourteen-year-old son and think about him driving, I see the wisdom in Virginia’s approach.

    At the ripe old age of twelve, my dad decided it was time for me to learn how to drive.  As a tall child, I could reach the gas and brake pedals, which was apparently the minimum criteria for beginning driving lessons on the farm.  To be honest, I was scared to death of driving.  But my parents said I should learn because if there was ever an emergency, and I was the only one home, I may need to drive for help.  That logic just made me scared of driving and being left alone on the farm.

    My experience as a parent teaching two teenagers to drive involved multiple practice sessions in empty parking lots before slowly graduating to quiet side roads before paying another adult to do the really scary stuff, such as driving on highways and making left turns across oncoming traffic.  I suspect that sounds familiar to many in this room as well. 

    But that suburban approach is not how I learned to drive.  My lesson – notice I said lesson, not lessons—was a little more hands-off.  On the day I learned to drive, my dad had me jump in the passenger seat of his 1977 blue Chevy pick-up truck to take a ride with him.  Oddly, my older brother jumped in another farm truck and followed close behind.

    After driving a few miles away from our house, my dad drove the truck into the middle of a freshly plowed field.  Dad threw the truck into park, jumped out, and told me to slide over to the driver’s seat.  He then shut the door, leaned into the window, and told me to drive around the field until I was comfortable enough to drive myself home.  At that point, I realized why my brother had followed us in another vehicle—it was my dad’s getaway car.

    Honestly, I panicked.  I screamed, pleaded, and begged.  But my dad was confident in his approach.  And he left me with this advice:  always keep your eyes on the road.  But don’t just look at the road immediately in front of the vehicle; be sure to watch the road ahead so you know where you are going—and so that you do not smash into a deer.

    I’m sharing this story with you today for two reasons.  First, to offer some entertainment.

    Second, I found the advice my dad gave me that day relevant to the topic for my speech today.  Specifically, I want to share with you some thoughts and observations on energy markets, the road ahead for these markets, and potential down-the-road effects on the derivatives markets that are regulated by the CFTC.

    Being a derivatives regulator can feel a little like being that driver who is looking down the road to see what is ahead.  Our markets are forward looking, offering a view into points off in the distance so drivers are prepared for the path ahead.  But, just like a careful driver needs to see what is right in front of the vehicle as much as what is on the road ahead, careful regulation requires us to also keep our eyes on current market conditions, in addition to ensuring the reliability and safety of the futures markets, which reflect the road ahead.  The CFTC is always surveilling markets, spotting trends, and monitoring for risk that could impact the futures markets.

    Now, here is where this speech will diverge from my story of learning to drive.  While I was left to teach myself how to drive and had no one willing to share their expertise with me, our work at the CFTC in following markets occurs with the benefit of a variety of internal resources (such as the Market Intelligence Branch of the Division of Market Oversight and the Office of the Chief Economist) as well as external resources (such as our advisory committees).

    At the CFTC, we have five advisory committees, each of which is sponsored by a commissioner.  These committees are comprised of subject matter experts representing a variety of viewpoints, such as private sector stakeholders, non-profit groups, academia, and other governmental entities.  As many of you know, especially those who are members, I sponsor the Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee.

    Growing up on a farm in South Dakota, I always understood that the price of energy had a major impact on whether it was a good year or a bad year for the farm.  Even at a young age, I could tell you the exact cost-per-gallon of diesel because either my dad was grumbling about it as he left for the field, or it was the topic of discussion at the local café in town where the older farmers convened for their morning coffee.

    The price of diesel determined the cost of running planters, tractors, combines, and trucks.  The cost of fertilizers and pesticides are also directly linked to fossil fuel input prices, and spreading those fertilizers and pesticides required hiring a spray pilot whose services were priced based on the cost of the aviation fuel.

    Even after our crops were harvested, energy costs were critical.  Energy prices influenced the cost of storage at the grain elevators and transportation; barges and ships run on bunker fuel and trains need diesel.  Everything in the farm economy depends on the price of energy.  You might have perfect temperatures, exactly the right amount of rain at exactly the right time, and high yields but still see your net profit shrink due to high energy prices.

    As the only Commissioner with a background in production agriculture, sponsoring the Commission’s Agriculture Advisory Committee may have seemed like the obvious choice.  But I saw the EEMAC as an opportunity to focus on sectors critical to the agricultural economy and to study those energy markets to understand their impact on the markets we regulate.  The goal is for the energy futures complex to serve end-users who need to hedge those costs and to mitigate the frequent price volatility experienced by the underlying cash markets.

    As the EEMAC has held meetings and participated in discussions around energy markets, we have heard over and over that the United States has critical gaps in its energy and power infrastructure.  As those gaps widen, so do risks to the stability of these markets that become more sensitive and less resilient to forces beyond US control.  Instability and volatility in spot energy markets and prices have a direct impact on the derivative products we regulate.

    Energy infrastructure’s impact on energy prices is something that cannot be ignored, and this reality has become even more apparent in the last decade.  Of course, it makes sense that energy transmission and delivery directly impact the cost to the end consumer.  However, truly understanding how energy infrastructure market fundamentals influence energy spot and derivatives prices requires hearing directly from hardworking domestic energy producers and seeing the infrastructure up close.

    With that in mind, the EEMAC has held a series of meetings on the road, and members of the advisory committee have joined me in getting outside of Washington to see our energy production and infrastructure and to talk directly with the experts who manage these facilities.

    In our first meeting, we visited Oklahoma and focused on more traditional energy markets such as crude oil and natural gas.[1]  We visited Cushing, Oklahoma, where the WTI Crude Oil contract settles to see the pipelines and storage facilities as well as to talk with those in charge of storing, blending, and moving the oil to locations throughout the US.  During the EEMAC meeting, a witness from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission described an anomaly in the price of natural gas in New England.[2]  Despite having one of the largest concentrations of natural gas in the Marcellus Shale just over two hundred miles away, a lack of pipeline capacity makes it impossible to fully supply New England with gas from the Marcellus Shale.[3]  This situation means that New England relies on liquified natural gas (“LNG”) supplies from tanker ships.  As a result, the price New England end users pay is based on the Henry Hub price for exported LNG, rather than the domestic production price.  This circumstance creates an unusual situation where the spot price that a natural gas-fired power plant in Massachusetts pays for its fuel is more dependent on Europe’s desire for natural gas and a global market thousands of miles away than on the price and availability of natural gas produced two states away in Pennsylvania.

    To examine power markets and electrification, we held meetings in Roy, Utah; Nashville, Tennessee; and Golden, Colorado.[4]  In the course of those meetings, we had the opportunity to tour a large Ford EV production facility in Spring Hill, Tennessee, the Bingham Canyon Copper Mine in Utah, and a startup company looking to reuse mine tailings to produce critical metals and minerals in Golden, Colorado.

    Here in the United States, we have some of the largest deposits of the metals necessary for power generation, transmission, and use, but large gaps in our infrastructure and policies render these advantages almost meaningless.  In Golden, Colorado, we learned that despite a startup company’s cutting-edge technology that can turn mine waste into critical metals and minerals, China’s dominance in rare earth markets means that they can manipulate prices at will and squeeze out competition and force any US production into bankruptcy.

    Southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah, we toured the Bingham Canyon Copper Mine.  The Bingham County Mine is the largest man-made excavation in the world.[5]  It’s also the world’s deepest open pit mine, and it has produced more copper than any other mine in the world.[6]  As you can probably guess, the US has abundant supplies of copper; however, because of a lack of domestic smelting capacity, much of the copper mined in the US must be shipped overseas, often to China, to be processed and refined.  In fact, since 2000, China has been responsible for 75% of the global smelter capacity growth.[7]

    Finally, in Spring Hill, Tennessee, we learned that car companies are increasingly concerned  about logistical challenges reducing their  ability to provide cost-competitive electric vehicles.  This is not an idle concern.  Just four weeks ago, Rivian disclosed that it will be forced to reduce production and decrease its sales target in 2024 by almost 20% because of difficulties sourcing a component used in its electric motor.[8]  And last week, to secure a steady supply of lithium, GM announced an almost $1 billion investment in the Thacker Pass mine in Nevada.[9]

    For years, the problem for domestic energy policy was how to mine, drill, and import enough raw materials to satisfy America’s growing energy demand.[10]  Even after the oil glut of the 1980s and lower energy prices, we were still concerned with our reliance on foreign energy.[11]  The continuous mantra of Presidents starting with Richard Nixon was the concept of “Energy Independence” as a policy goal.[12]  Now, not because of government mandates, plans, or policies, but thanks to technological innovation, hard work, and the deployment of private capital, that goal has largely been achieved.  We have the raw materials in the ground that we need to power American energy independence; however, we need our infrastructure to catch-up with our domestic supply.

    Returning to my driving lesson, when I look at the road ahead, I see the United States coming to a crossroads.  One road leads to more resilient infrastructure, lower prices, and energy abundance.  The other road leads to energy scarcity, higher prices, and a loss of energy independence.  The direction we take as a country will have a major impact on the energy markets and the futures markets we regulate at the CFTC.  Unfortunately, gaps in energy infrastructure lead to instability and volatility in energy markets, which have a direct impact on the derivatives markets.  If derivatives markets fail to offer adequate price discovery and risk mitigation, they will no longer serve producers and end users as appropriate tools to hedge their exposure.  That is a road we cannot afford to go down.

    As a regulator, the CFTC is not the driver of this car, but we definitely have an interest in taking the road that leads to liquid, stable, and vibrant derivatives markets that serve as a tool for hedging against risk. We can do that by ensuring that new derivative products come to market efficiently without the fear of litigation or unreasonable staff positions, and by cultivating new market structures that minimize conflicts and instill market confidence.  Our enforcement efforts should be focused on ‘bad actors’ and not on trying to shortcut deliberative policymaking.  The CFTC should prefer “responsible regulation” over “regulation by enforcement.”  To arrive at our desired destination, we all need to keep our eyes on the road, to see what is right in front of us while simultaneously paying attention to the road ahead.

    Thank you for taking this road trip with me today.  I look forward to answering your questions.

    [1] CFTC Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee meeting in Stillwater, Oklahoma, September 20, 2022.

    [4] CFTC Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, February 28, 2023.  CFTC Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee meeting in Roy, Utah, June 27, 2023.  CFTC Energy and Environmental Markets Advisory Committee meeting in Golden, Colorado, February 13, 2024.

    [5] Kristine L. Pankow, Jeffrey R. Moore, J. Mark Hale, Keith D. Koper, Tex Kubacki, Katherine M. Whidden, and Michael K. McCarter.  “Massive landslide at Utah copper mine generates wealth of geophysical data.” Geological Society of America, vol. 24, no. 1, January 2014.

    [7] Securing Copper Supply: No China, No Energy Transition, WoodsMcKenzie, August 2024, Nick Pickens, Robin Griffin, Eleni Joanides, and Zhifei Liu.

    [8] Ed Ludlow and Kiel Porter. “Rivian Misstep Triggered Parts Shortage Hobbling Its EV Output.” Bloomberg, October 7, 2024.

    [9] Camilla Hodgson.  “General Motors increases investment in lithium mine to nearly $1bn.” Financial Times, October 6, 2024.

    [10] US Energy Information Administration, “U.S. energy facts explained, Imports & Exports.”  Last updated July 15, 2024, with data from the Monthly Energy Review.

    [12] Charles Homans, “Energy Independence: A Short History.”  Foreign Policy, January 3, 2012.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: NASA Funds Open-Source Software Underpinning Scientific Innovation

    Source: NASA

    NASA has awarded $15.6 million in grant funding to 15 projects supporting the maintenance of open-source tools, frameworks, and libraries used by the NASA science community, for the benefit of all.
    The agency’s Open-Source Tools, Frameworks, and Libraries awards provide support for the sustainable development of tools freely available to everyone and critical for the goals of the agency’s Science Mission Directorate.
    “We received almost twice the number of proposals this year than we had in the previous call,” said Steve Crawford, program executive, Open Science implementation, Office of the Chief Science Data Officer, NASA Headquarters in Washington. “The NASA science community’s excitement for this program demonstrates the need for sustained support and maintenance of open-source software. These projects are integral to our missions, critical to our data infrastructure, underpin machine learning and data science tools, and are used by our researchers, every day, to advance science that protects our planet and broadens our understanding of the universe.”
    This award program is one of several cross-divisional opportunities at NASA focused on advancing open science practices. The grants are funded by NASA’s Office of the Chief Science Data Officer through the agency’s Research Opportunities for Space and Earth Science. The solicitation sought proposals through two types of awards:

    Foundational awards: cooperative agreements for up to five years for open-source tools, frameworks, and libraries that have a significant impact on two or more divisions of the Science Mission Directorate.
    Sustainment awards: grants or cooperative agreements of up to three years for open-source tools, frameworks, and libraries that have significant impact in one or more divisions of the Science Mission Directorate.

    2024 awardees are:
    Foundation awards:

    NASA’s Ames Research Center, Silicon Valley, California

    Principal investigator: Ross Beyer

    “Expanding and Maintaining the Ames Stereo Pipeline”

    Caltech, Pasadena, California

    Principal investigator: Brigitta Sipocz

    “Enhancement of Infrastructure and Sustained Maintenance of Astroquery”

    Cornell University, Scarsdale, New York

    Principal investigator: Ramin Zabih

    “Modernize and Expand arXiv’s Essential Infrastructure”

    NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, Greenbelt, Maryland

    Principal investigator: D. Cooley

    “Enabling SMD Science Using the General Mission Analysis Tool”

    NumFOCUS, Austin, Texas

    Principal investigator: Thomas Caswell

    “Sustainment of Matplotlib and Cartopy”

    NumFOCUS

    Principal investigator: Erik Tollerud

    “Investing in the Astropy Project to Enable Research and Education in Astronomy”

    Sustainment awards:

    NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Southern California

    Principal investigator: Cedric David

    “Sustain NASA’s River Software for the Satellite Data Deluge,” three-year award

    Pennsylvania State University, University Park

    Principal investigator: David Radice

    “AthenaK: A Performance Portable Simulation Infrastructure for Computational Astrophysics,” three-year award

    United States Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia

    Principal investigator: Trent Hare

    “Planetary Updates for QGIS,” one-year award

    NASA JPL

    Principal investigator: Michael Starch

    “How To F Prime: Empowering Science Missions Through Documentation and Examples,” three-year award

    NASA Goddard

    Principal investigator: Albert Shih

    “Enhancing Consistency and Discoverability Across the SunPy Ecosystem,” three-year award

    Triad National Security, LLC, Los Alamos, New Mexico

    Principal investigator: Julia Kelliher

    “Enhancing Analysis Capabilities of Biological Data With the NASA EDGE Bioinformatics Platform,” four-year award

    iSciences LLC, Burlington, Vermont

    Principal investigator: Daniel Baston

    “Sustaining the Geospatial Data Abstraction Library,” three-year award

    University of Maryland, College Park,

    Principal investigator: C Max Stevens

    “Sustaining the Community Firn Model,” three-year award

    Quansight, LLC, Austin, Texas

    Principal investigator: Dharhas Pothina

    “Ensuring a Fast and Secure Core for Scientific Python – Security, Accessibility and Performance of NumPy, SciPy and scikit-learn; Going Beyond NumPy With Accelerator Support,” three-year award

    For information about open science at NASA, visit:
    https://science.nasa.gov/open-science
    -end-
    Alise FisherHeadquarters, Washington202-617-4977alise.m.fisher@nasa.gov

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Global: ‘Our nuclear childhood’: the sisters who witnessed H-bomb tests over their Pacific island, and are still coming to terms with the fallout

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Christopher Hill, Associate Professor (Research and Development), Faculty of Business and Creative Industries, University of South Wales

    Nuclear detonations were the backdrop to Teeua and Teraabo’s childhood. By the time the sisters were eight and four, the Pacific island on which they grew up, Kiritimati, had hosted 30 atomic and thermonuclear explosions – six during Operation Grapple, a British series between 1957 and 1958, and 24 during Operation Dominic, led by the US in 1962.

    The UK’s secretary of state for the colonies, Alan Lennox-Boyd, had claimed the Grapple series would put Britain “far ahead of the Americans, and probably the Russians too, in super-bomb development”. Grapple, the country’s largest tri-service operation since D-Day, also involved troops from Fiji and New Zealand. It sought to secure the awesome power of the hydrogen bomb: a thermonuclear device far more destructive than the atomic bomb.

    Britain’s seat at the top table of “super-bomb development” was emphatically announced in April 1958 with Grapple Y: an “H-bomb” 200 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima in 1945. This remains Britain’s largest nuclear detonation – one of more than 100 conducted by the UK, US and Soviet Union in 1958 alone.

    More than six decades later, the health effects on former servicemen based on Kiritimati, as well as at test locations in South and Western Australia, remain unresolved. Greater Manchester’s mayor, Andy Burnham, has called the treatment of UK nuclear test veterans “the longest-standing and, arguably, the worst” of all the British public scandals in recent history.



    Read more:
    Nobel peace prize awarded to Japanese atomic bomb survivors’ group for its efforts to free the world of nuclear weapons

    Unlike the Post Office, infected blood and Grenfell Tower inquiries in 2024, there has been no UK inquiry into British nuclear weapon tests in Australia and the Pacific. Yet veterans and their descendants maintain these tests caused hereditary ill-health effects and premature deaths among participants. The British government has been accused of hiding records of these health impacts for decades behind claims of national security.

    Over the past year, the life stories of British nuclear test veterans have been collected by researchers, including myself, for an oral history project in partnership with the British Library. Whether from a vantage point of air, land or sea, the veterans all recall witnessing nuclear explosions with startling clarity, as if the moment was seared on to their memories. According to Doug Herne, a ship’s cook with the Royal Navy:

    When the flash hit you, you could see the X-rays of your hands through your closed eyes. Then the heat hit you, and it was as if someone my size had caught fire and walked through me. To say it was frightening is an understatement. I think it shocked us into silence.

    British servicemen describe their nuclear test experiences. Video: Wester van Gaal/Motherboard.

    But what of the experiences of local people on Kiritimati? I have recently interviewed two sisters who are among the few surviving islanders who witnessed the nuclear tests. This is their story.

    ‘A mushroom cloud igniting the sky’

    At the start of Operation Grapple in May 1957, around 250 islanders lived on Kiritimati – the world’s largest coral reef atoll, slap bang in the centre of the Pacific Ocean, around 1,250 miles (2,000km) due south of Hawaii. The island’s name is derived from the English word “Christmas”, the atoll having been “discovered” by the British explorer James Cook on Christmas Eve 1777.

    In May 2023, I visited Kiritimati for a research project on “British nuclear imperialism”, which investigated how post-war Britain used its dwindling imperial assets and resources as a springboard for nuclear development. I sought to interview islanders who had remained on the atoll since the tests, including Teeua Tekonau, then aged 68. In 2024, I visited her younger sister, Teraabo Pollard, who lives more than 8,000 miles away in the contrasting surroundings of Burnley, north-west England.

    Far from descriptions of fear and terror, both Teeua and Teraabo looked back on the tests with striking enthusiasm. Teraabo recalled witnessing them from the local maneaba (open-air meeting place) or tennis court as a “pleasurable” experience full of “excitement”.

    She described having her ears plugged with cotton wool before being covered with a blanket. As if by magic, the blanket was then lifted to reveal a mushroom cloud igniting the night sky – a sight accompanied by sweetened bread handed out by American soldiers. So vivid was the light that Teraabo, then aged four, described “being excited about it being daytime again”.

    An Operation Grapple thermonuclear test near Kiritimati, 1957-58. Video: Imperial War Museums.

    In view of the violence of the tests, I was struck that Teeua and Teraabo volunteered these positive memories. Their enthusiasm seemed in marked contrast to growing concerns about the radioactive fallout – including those voiced by surviving test veterans and their descendants. As children, the tests seem to have offered the sisters a spectacle of fantasy and escapism – glazed with the saccharine of American treats and Disney films on British evacuation ships.

    Yet they have also lived through the premature deaths of family members and, in Teraabo’s case, a malignant tumour dating from the time of the tests. And there have been similar stories from other families who lived in the shadow of these very risky, loosely controlled experiments. Teraabo told me about a friend who had peeked out from her blanket as a young girl – and who suffered from eye and health problems ever since.

    ‘Only a very slight health hazard’

    Kiritimati forms part of the impossibly large Republic of Kiribati – a nation of 33 islands spread over 3.5 million square kilometres; the only one to have territory in all four hemispheres and, until 1995, on either side of the international date line. Before independence from Britain in 1979, Kiribati belonged to the Gilbert and Ellice Island Colony, which in effect made Kiritimati a “nuclear colony” for the purpose of British and American testing.

    In 1955, Teeua and Teraabo’s parents, Taraem and Tekonau Tetoa, left their home island of Tabiteuea, a small atoll belonging to the Gilbert group of islands in the western Pacific. They boarded a British merchant vessel bound for Christmas Island nearly 2,000 miles away. Setting sail with new-born Teeua in their arms, the family looked forward to a future cutting copra on Kiritimati’s British coconut plantation.

    The scale of this journey, with four young children, was immense. Just how the hundred or so Gilbertese passengers “managed to live [during the voyage] was better not asked”, according to one royal engineer who described a similar voyage a few years later. “There were piles of coconuts everywhere – perhaps they were for both food and drink.”


    The Insights section is committed to high-quality longform journalism. Our editors work with academics from many different backgrounds who are tackling a wide range of societal and scientific challenges.

    Within two years of their arrival, the family faced more upheaval as mother Taraem and her children were packed aboard another ship ahead of the first three sets of British nuclear tests in the Pacific. Known as Grapple 1, 2 and 3, they were to be detonated over Malden Island, an atoll some 240 miles to the south of Kiritimati – but still too close for the comfort of local residents.

    According to Teeua, the evacuation was prompted by disillusioned labourers brought to Kiritimati without their families, who went on strike after learning how much the British troops were being paid. But the islanders’ perspectives do not feature much in the colonial records, which give precedence to British disputes about logistical costs and safety calculations.

    The Grapple task force resolved that the safe limit set by the International Commission on Radiological Protection should be reduced, to limit the cost of evacuations. A meeting in November 1956 noted that “only a very slight health hazard to people would arise from this reduction – and that only to primitive peoples”.

    Shocking as this remark sounds, it is typical of the disregard that nuclear planners appear to have had, both for Indigenous communities and the mostly working-class soldiers. These lives did not seem to matter much in the context of Britain’s quest for nuclear supremacy. William Penney, Britain’s chief nuclear scientist, had bemoaned how critics during tests in Australia were “intent on thwarting the whole future of the British Empire for the sake of a few Aboriginals”.

    Tekonau, Teeua’s father, was one of the 30 or so I-Kiribati people to stay behind on Kiritimati during the Malden tests in May and June 1957. As one of the only labourers to speak English, he had gained the trust of the district commissioner, Percy Roberts, who invited Tekonau to accompany him during inspections of villagers’ houses in Port London, then the island’s only village. On one occasion, Teeua said, the islanders did not recognise her father as he had been given a “flat top” haircut like the Fijian soldiers. “This means he had a nice relationship with the soldiers,” she told me. “Thank God for giving me such a good and clever dad.”

    Since the initial tests did not produce a thermonuclear explosion, the task force embarked on further trials between November 1957 and September 1958, known as Grapple X, Y and Z. In view of expense and time, these were conducted on Kiritimati rather than Malden Island – and this time, the residents were not evacuated to other islands. Rather, families were brought aboard ships in the island’s harbour and shown films below deck.

    After these tests, the islanders returned to find the large X and Y detonations had cracked the walls of their homes and smashed their doors and furniture. One islander found their pet frigate bird, like so many of the wild birds on Kiritimati, had been blinded by the flash of Grapple Y. No compensation was ever paid to the islanders, although the Ministry of Supply did reimburse the colony for deterioration of “plantation assets”, including £4 for every damaged coconut tree (equivalent to £120 today).

    A month before Grapple Y, Teraabo was born. Her earliest and most vivid childhood memories are of the US-led Operation Dominic four years later, by which time evacuation procedures had been abandoned altogether.

    This series of tests was sanctioned by Britain in exchange for a nuclear-powered submarine and access to the Nevada Proving Grounds in the US – regarded as pivotal to the future of British weapons technology ahead of the signing of the Test Ban Treaty in October 1963, which would prohibit atmospheric testing.

    Dominic’s 24 detonations on Kiritimati – which usually took place after sunset around 6pm, between April and November 1962 – were “awesome”, according to Teraabo. Recalling the suspense as the “tannoy announced the countdown”, she described “coming out of cover [and] witnessing the bomb [as] an amazing experience … When the bomb set off, the brilliance of the light was tremendous.”

    Each explosion’s slow expiration would re-illuminate the Pacific sky. One, Starfish Prime, became known as a “rainbow bomb” because of the multi-coloured aurora it produced over the Pacific, having been launched into space where it exploded.

    So spectacular were these descriptions that I almost felt I had to suspend disbelief as I listened. At one point in my interview with Teraabo, she leaned in to reassure me that she had no interest in exaggerating these events: “I’m a very proud person,” she whispered, “I would never lie.”

    ‘In our blood’

    More than six decades on from the Grapple tests, I was sitting in Teeua’s kitchen in the village of Tabwakea (meaning “turtle”), near the northern tip of Kiritimati. I had driven here in a Subaru Forester, clapped-out from the many potholes on the island’s main road, itself built by royal engineers over 60 years ago.

    Teeua Tekonau in her kitchen during the author’s visit to Kiritimati in 2023.
    Christopher R. Hill., CC BY

    Teeua’s home, nestled down a sand track, had a wooden veranda at the front where she would teach children to read and write under shelter from the hot equatorial sun. Handcrafted mats lined the sand and coral floor, fanning out from the veranda to the kitchen at the back.

    The house felt full of the sounds of the local community, from the chatter of neighbours to the laughter of children outdoors. No one could feel lonely here, despite the vastness of the ocean that surrounds Kiritimati.

    As Teeua cooked rice and prepared coffee, we discussed the main reason for my visit: to understand the impacts of the nuclear tests on the islanders, their descendents, and the sensitive ecosystem in which they live. Teeua is chair of Kiritimati’s Association of Atomic Cancer Patients, and one of only three survivors of the tests still living on Kiritimati. She pulled up a seat and looked at me:

    Many, many died of cancer … And many women had babies that died within three months … I remember the coconut trees … when you drank [from the coconuts], you [were] poisoned.

    Both Teeua’s parents and four of her eight siblings had died of cancer or unexplained conditions, she said. Her younger brother, Takieta, died of leukaemia at the age of two in November 1963 – less than a year after Operation Dominic ended. Her sister Teraabo, who discovered a tumour in her stomach shortly after the trials, was only able to have her stomach treated once she moved to the UK in 1981, by which time the tumour had turned malignant.

    Teeua’s testimony pointed to the gendered impacts of the nuclear tests. She referred to the prevalence of menstrual problems and stillbirths, evidence of which can be inferred from the testimony of another nuclear survivor, Sui Kiritome, a fellow I-Kiribati who had arrived on Kiritimati in 1957 with her teacher husband. Sui has described how their second child, Rakieti, had “blood coming out of all the cavities of her body” at birth.

    A rare military hospital record from 1958 – stored in the UK’s National Archives at Kew in London – also refers to the treatment of a civilian woman for ante-partum haemorrhage and stillbirth, though it is unclear whether this was a local woman or one of the soldier’s wives on the passenger ship HMT Dunera, which visited briefly to “boost morale” after Grapple X.

    Members of the Kiritimati Association of Atomic Cancer Patients.
    Courtesy: Teeua Taukaro., CC BY-ND

    Having re-established the Association of Atomic Cancer Patients in 2009, Teeua has continued much of the work that Ken McGinley, first chair of the British Nuclear Tests Veterans Association, did after its establishment in 1983. She has documented the names of all I-Kiribati people present during the tests, along with their spouses, children and other relatives. And she has listed the cancers and illnesses from which they have suffered.

    In the absence of medical records at the island hospital, these handwritten notes are the closest thing on the atoll to epidemiological data about the tests. But according to Teeua, concerns about the health effects of the tests date back much longer, to 1965 when a labourer named Bwebwe spoke out about poisonous clouds. “Everyone thought he was crazy,” Teeua recalled.

    But Bwebwe’s speculations were lent credibility by Sui Kiritome’s testimony, and by the facial scars she bore that were visible for all to see. In an interview with her daughter, Sui explained how she was only 24 when she started to lose her hair, and “burns developed on my face, scalp and parts of my shoulder”.

    In a similar manner to claims made by British nuclear test veterans, Sui attributed her health problems to being rained on during Grapple Y – which may have been detonated closer to the atoll’s surface than the task force was prepared to admit.

    When I asked Teeua why her campaigning association was only reformed in 2009, she explained it had been prompted by a visit from British nuclear test veterans who “told us that everyone [involved in the tests] has cancer – blood cancer”. They had been told this in the past but, she said, “we did not believe it. But after years … after our children [also] died of cancer, then we remembered what they told us.”

    After some visiting researchers explained to Teeua and the community that the effects of the tests were “not good”, she concluded that “our kids died of cancer because of the tests … That’s why we start to combine together … the nuclear survivors, to talk about what they did to our kids”.

    I found Teeua’s testimony deeply troubling: not only because of the suffering she and other families have been through, but in the way that veterans had returned to Kiritimati as civilians, raising concerns among locals that may have lain dormant or been forgotten. The suggestion that radiation was “in her blood” must have been deeply disturbing for Teeua and her community.

    But I reminded myself that the veterans who came looking for answers in 2009 were also victims. They made the long journey seeking clues about their health problems, or a silver bullet to prove their government’s deception over the nuclear fallout.

    As young men, they were unwittingly burdened with a lifetime of uncertainty – compounded by endless legal disputes with the Ministry of Defence or inconclusive health studies that jarred with their personal medical histories. And, like the islanders, some of these servicemen died young after experiencing agonising illnesses.

    The scramble for the Pacific

    My research on British nuclear imperialism also sheds light on how imperial and settler colonial perceptions of “nature” shaped how these nuclear tests were planned and operationalised.

    British sites were selected on the basis of in-depth environmental research. When searching the site for Britain’s first atomic bomb (the Montebello Islands off the west coast of Australia), surveyors discovered 20 new species of insect, six new plants, and a species of legless lizard.

    Monitoring of radioactive fallout from nuclear tests fed into the rise of ecosystem ecologies as an academic discipline. In the words of one environmental specialist on the US tests, it seemed that “destruction was the enabling condition for understanding life as interconnected”.

    Since H-bombs would exceed the explosive yield deemed acceptable by Australia, Winston Churchill’s government in the mid-1950s had been forced to look for a new test site beyond Western and South Australia. British planners drew on a wealth of imperial knowledge and networks – but their proposal to use the Kermadec Islands, an archipelago 600 miles north-east of Auckland, was rejected by New Zealand on environmental grounds.

    So, when Teeua and her family landed on Kiritimati in 1955, their journey was part of “the scramble for the Pacific”: a race between Britain and the US to lay claim to the sovereignty of Pacific atolls in light of their strategic significance for air and naval power.

    The British government archives include some notable environmental “what ifs?” Had the US refused the UK’s selection of Kiritimati because of its own sovereignty claim, then it would have been probable, as Lennox-Boyd, Britain’s colonial secretary, admitted, that “the Antarctic region south of Australia might have to be used” for its rapidly expanding nuclear programme.

    Instead, this extraordinary period in global history recently took me to a Victorian mansion in the Lancashire town of Burnley, where I interviewed Teeua’s younger sister, Teraabo, about her memories of the Kiritimati tests.

    ‘No longer angry’

    Teraabo’s home felt like the antithesis of Teeua’s island abode 8,300 miles away: ordered instead of haphazard, private instead of communal, spacious instead of crowded. And our interview had a more detached, philosophical tone.

    Teraabo Pollard with her father’s nuclear test veteran medal.
    Christopher R. Hill., CC BY-ND

    Like her sister, Teraabo has worked to raise awareness about the legacy of the nuclear tests, including with the Christmas Island Appeal, an offshoot of the British Nuclear Test Veterans Association that sought to publicise the extent of the waste left on Kiritimati from the nuclear test period.

    The appeal succeeded in persuading Tony Blair’s UK government to tackle the remaining waste in Kiritimati – most of which was non-radiological, according to a 1998 environmental assessment. The island was “cleaned up” and remediated between 2004 and 2008, at a cost of around £5 million to the Ministry of Defence. Much of the waste was flown or shipped back to the UK, where 388 tonnes of low-grade radioactive material were deposited in a former salt mine at Port Clarence, near Middlesbrough.

    Yet Teraabo’s views have evolved. She told me she is “no longer angry” about the tests, a stark contrast to her position 20 years ago, when she told British journalist Alan Rimmer how islanders had “led a simple life with disease virtually unknown. But after the tests, everything changed. I now realise the whole island was poisoned.”

    Whereas the Teraabo of 2003 blamed “the British government for all this misery”, she has since become more reflective. In the context of the cold war and the nuclear arms race, she even told me she could understand the British rationale for selecting Kiritimati as a test site. This seemed a remarkable statement from a survivor who had lost so much.

    Over the course of the interview, it became clear Teraabo had grown tired of being angry – and that she had felt “trapped” by the tragic figure she was meant to represent in the campaigns of veterans and disarmers. Each time Teraabo rehearsed the doom-laden script of radiation exposure, she admitted she was also suppressing the joy of her childhood memories.

    A turning point for Teraabo seems to have come in 2007, when she last visited Kiritimati and met her sister Teeua. By this time, the atoll’s population was 4,000 – quite a leap from the 300 residents she grew up with. “It is no longer the island I remember,” she said.

    The Kiritimati of Teraabo’s memory was neat and well-structured. The one she described encountering in 2007 was chaotic and unkempt. She had come to the realisation that the Kiritimati she had been campaigning for – the pristine, untouched atoll of her parents – had long since moved on, so she should move on with it. The sorrow caused by the test operations would not define her.

    Radioactive colonialism

    Not long after I left Kiritimati in June 2023, the global nuclear disarmament organisation Ican began researching the atoll ahead of a major global summit to discuss the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Descendants of Kiritimati’s nuclear test survivors were asked a series of questions, with those who provided the “right” answers being selected for a sponsored trip to UN headquarters in New York.

    The chosen representatives included Teeua’s daughter, Taraem. I wondered if the survivors of Kiritimati are doomed to forever rehearse the stories of their nuclear past – a burden that Teeua and Teraabo have had to carry ever since they stood in awe of atomic and thermonuclear detonations more than 60 years ago.

    They have had to deal with “radioactive colonialism” all their adult lives – the outside world demanding to see the imprint of radioactivity on their health and memories. But the sisters’ fondness for British order, despite all they have been through, prevails.

    Their positive memories of Britain may in part reflect the elevated role of their father, Tekonau Tetoa – a posthumous recipient of the test veteran medal – within the British colonial system. During my visit, I happened upon an old photo of Tekonau, looking immaculate as he hangs off the side of a plantation truck in a crisp white shirt. Knowing Teeua did not possess a photo of her parents, I took a scan and raced to her house down the road.

    “Do you recognise this man?” I asked, holding up my phone.

    She flickered with recognition. “Is that my father?”

    I nodded, and she shed a tear of joy.

    Tekonau Tetoa, father of Teeua and Teraabo, hangs off the door of a coconut plantation truck in Kiritimati.
    Courtesy: John Bryden., CC BY-ND

    Memories of Teeua and Teraabo’s father are preserved in the island landscape of their youth: pristine, regimented by the ostensible tidiness of colonial and military order.

    But such order masked contamination: an unknown quantity that would only become evident years later in ill-health and environmental damage. It was not only the nuclear tests: from 1957 to 1964, the atoll was sprayed four times a week with DDT, a carcinogenic insecticide, as part of attempts to reduce insect-borne disease. In the words of one of the pilots: “I had many a wave from the rather fat Gilbo ladies sitting on their loos as I passed overhead, and gave them some spray for good measure!” British tidiness concealed a special brand of poison.

    Today, the prospect of a meaningful response from the UK to the concerns raised by the islanders and servicemen alike seems slim. In October 2023, the UK and France followed North Korea and Russia in vetoing a Kiribati and Kazakhstan-proposed UN resolution on victim assistance and environmental remediation for people and places harmed by nuclear weapons use and testing.

    Over in Kiritimati, meanwhile, Teeua still tends to a small plot where Prince Philip planted a commemorative tree in April 1959, shortly after the British-led nuclear tests had ended. It is rumoured he did not drink from the atoll’s water while he was there.


    For you: more from our Insights series:

    To hear about new Insights articles, join the hundreds of thousands of people who value The Conversation’s evidence-based news. Subscribe to our newsletter.

    Christopher Hill receives funding from the Office for Veterans’ Affairs, UK Cabinet Office. The research for this article was also supported by funding from the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC), UKRI. The author wishes to thank the following for their support with this article: Fiona Bowler, Ian Brailsford, Joshua Bushen, John Bryden, Jon Hogg, Brian Jones, Rens van Munster, Wesley Perriman, Maere Tekanene, Michael Walsh, Rotee Walsh and Derek Woolf. Sincere thanks to Teeua Tekonau and Teraabo Pollard for sharing their family stories.

    – ref. ‘Our nuclear childhood’: the sisters who witnessed H-bomb tests over their Pacific island, and are still coming to terms with the fallout – https://theconversation.com/our-nuclear-childhood-the-sisters-who-witnessed-h-bomb-tests-over-their-pacific-island-and-are-still-coming-to-terms-with-the-fallout-239780

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Ernst, Hinson Work to Ensure Rural Access to Safe Contraception

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator Joni Ernst (R-IA)
    WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) and Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa) are requesting information on the availability of birth control options to ensure Iowa families, especially in rural areas, have access to safe and effective contraception.
    After data from 2017 revealed just 24 percent of all Community Health Centers (CHCs) in the country provide a comprehensive list of contraception options for patients to review on-site, the lawmakers specifically inquired about options available through Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), which serve rural areas. 
    “Families deserve access to safe and effective birth control when they visit their health care provider, regardless of where they live. To ensure rural areas are not overlooked, I’m working to identify the barriers that leave communities with fewer contraception options. We can build upon this fact-finding mission to address the real gaps in services that Iowa families are facing,”said Senator Joni Ernst.
    “Ensuring women, regardless of zip code, have access to safe birth control options is vital for women’s health and family planning. Unfortunately, women in rural and underserved areas often have fewer contraception options. I’m working with Senator Ernst to expand access to safe birth control options for adult women who rely on Community Health Centers for care,”said Congresswoman Ashley Hinson.
    “Increased access to family planning services has proven to reduce the rate of unintended pregnancies, reduce the spread of sexually transmitted diseases, and reduce rates of infertility and maternal mortality. The limited information that is available also indicates that women in rural communities are facing a significant lack of access. With millions of women in the United States living in areas with limited contraceptive access, it’s imperative we understand the deficiencies and why they exist,” the lawmakers wrote.
    In the letter to the U.S. Government Accountability Office, the lawmakers requested:
    An itemized inventory of available contraception,
    Annual family planning counseling appointment requests and rates of return,
    Expenditures of federal funds to reimburse facilities for contraception methods,
    Financial resources and contraceptive options offered, and
    Any additional barriers, including geographic, to those who wish to provide a wider range of contraceptive methods to patients.
    Background:
    Since 2017, Ernst has been working to provide access to safe and effective over-the-counter birth control. This year, her Allowing Greater Access to Safe and Effective Contraception Act has gained support.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Senator Baldwin Leads Senate Resolution Designating October 23 National Marine Sanctuary Day

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) introduced a Senate Resolution designating October 23, 2024 as “National Marine Sanctuary Day.” The resolution highlights the role of national marine sanctuaries in increasing access to nature, protecting biodiversity, and boosting economic activity for coastal communities.

    “Wisconsin Shipwreck Coast National Marine Sanctuary is an engine for tourism and world-class research along Lake Michigan, stimulating our local economies and pioneering breakthroughs for our Great Lakes,” said Senator Baldwin. “I’m proud to have fought for and delivered a national marine sanctuary for Wisconsin, and will continue to fight to protect our nation’s natural resources and ensure generations to come can enjoy our coastlines.”

    Senator Baldwin has fought to support national marine sanctuaries, successfully leading the charge to bring a National Marine Sanctuary to Wisconsin in 2021. In October 2013, Senator Baldwin urged the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to re-open the public nomination process for marine sanctuaries for the first time in 20 years. After the Administration announced in June 2014 that Americans would be given the opportunity to nominate nationally significant marine and Great Lakes areas as national marine sanctuaries, Wisconsin’s Lake Michigan proposal was submitted and Senator Baldwin called on NOAA to support their efforts. The Wisconsin Shipwreck Coast National Marine Sanctuary was officially designated in 2021.

    As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, Senator Baldwin has continued to advocate for Wisconsin’s Great Lakes by supporting robust funding for the National Marine Sanctuaries Program and by requesting federal funding for the Wisconsin Shipwreck Coast National Marine Sanctuary Foundation.

    The resolution is co-sponsored by Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Ben Cardin (D-MD), Martin Heinrich (D-NM), Mazie Hirono (D-HI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Alex Padilla (D-CA), Brian Schatz (D-HI), Chris Van Hollen (D-MD), Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Peter Welch (D-VT), Cory Booker (D-NJ), and Gary Peters (D-MI).

    The resolution is supported by Alabama Coastal Foundation, Azul, California Academy of Sciences, Carolina Ocean Alliance, Creation Justice Ministries, EarthEcho International, The Florida Aquarium, Friends of the Mariana Trench, Global Rewilding Alliance, Greater Farallones Association, GreenLatinos, Guy Harvey Foundation, Healthy Ocean Coalition, Inland Ocean Coalition, Minorities in Shark Sciences, Monterey Bay Aquarium, National Aquarium, National Ocean Protection Coalition, National Wildlife Federation, Next 100 Coalition, Ocean Defense Initiative, Point Defiance Zoo & Aquarium + Northwest Trek Wildlife Park, Shark Stewards, Shedd Aquarium, South Carolina Aquarium, Surfrider Foundation, Sustainable Ocean Alliance, The Ocean Project, WILDCOAST, Wildlife Conservation Society, and World Ocean Day.

    “National marine sanctuaries are special places in America’s waters where people show up as part of the solution to steward our blue planet,” said Joel R. Johnson, President and CEO of the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation. “From the Great Lakes to the Gulf of Mexico, the Chesapeake Bay to Pacific Islands, national marine sanctuaries connect us with wildlife and our shared history making us feel like we are part of something much greater than ourselves. Our continued support for these treasured waters is more essential than ever and makes a positive impact for present and future generations.”

    “The conservation of our special ocean and Great Lakes places is vital for the species that depend on them, the communities that rely on them, and the future generations that dream about them,” said Ayana Melvan, Director of Conservation Action of the Aquarium Conservation Partnership.

    “The ACP and its members strive to celebrate the science and stories of our National Marine Sanctuary System at every opportunity. We’re proud to stand behind the Senator’s resolution to recognize the 600,000 sq. miles and growing of marine and Great Lake waters that truly make America beautiful,” said Kim McIntyre, Executive Director of the Aquarium Conservation Partnership.

    A full version of this resolution is available here and below.

    Designating October 23, 2024, as “National Marine Sanctuary Day”.

    Whereas, on October 23, 1972, the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.) became law and ushered in a new era of ocean conservation;

    Whereas the National Marine Sanctuary System is a nationwide network that conserves spectacular oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes;

    Whereas communities across the United States can nominate their most treasured marine and Great Lakes waters for consideration as national marine sanctuaries;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries protect biodiversity, safeguard extraordinary seascapes, historic shipwrecks, and sacred cultural places, and provide abundant recreational opportunities;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries seek opportunities to partner with indigenous governments and communities to achieve shared conservation goals and to support the care-taking of ecological resources and cultural sites of indigenous peoples;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries protect vital habitats for countless species of fish and wildlife, including many species that are listed as threatened or endangered;

    Whereas the conservation of marine ecosystems is vital for healthy oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes, for addressing climate change, and for sustaining productive coastal economies;

    Whereas the National Marine Sanctuary Foundation and its partners work to protect and nurture the growth of the National Marine Sanctuary System;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries increase access to nature for all, support coastal communities, and generate billions of dollars annually in local communities by providing jobs in the United States, supporting commercial, Tribal, and recreational fisheries, bolstering tourism and recreation, engaging businesses in stewardship, and driving the growth of the blue economy;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries connect people and communities through science, education, United States history, recreation, and stewardship and inspire community-based solutions that help individuals understand and protect the spectacular underwater habitats, wildlife, archaeological resources, and cultural seascapes of the United States;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries are living laboratories that enable cooperative science and research that improves resource management and advances innovative public-private partnerships;

    Whereas national marine sanctuaries can help make oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes more resilient by protecting ecosystems that sequester carbon, by safeguarding coastal communities from flooding and storms, and by protecting biodiversity;

    Whereas the United States is a historic maritime Nation, and oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes are central to the way of life of the people of the United States;

    Whereas engaging communities as stewards of these protected waters makes national marine sanctuaries unique and provides a comprehensive, ecosystem-based, highly participatory approach to managing and conserving marine and Great Lakes environments for current and future generations; and

    Whereas October 23, 2024, is recognized as “National Marine Sanctuary Day” to increase awareness about the importance of the National Marine Sanctuary System and healthy oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes and to celebrate the many recreational opportunities available for the enjoyment of this network of protected waters: Now, therefore, be it

    Resolved, That the Senate—

    (1) designates October 23, 2024, as “National Marine Sanctuary Day”;

    (2) encourages the people of the United States and the world to responsibly visit, experience, recreate in, and support the treasured national marine sanctuaries of the United States;

    (3) acknowledges the importance of national marine sanctuaries in supporting community resilience, protecting biodiversity, and increasing access to nature;

    (4) recognizes the importance of national marine sanctuaries for their recreational opportunities and contributions to local and national economies across the United States;

    (5) celebrates the ability of the National Marine Sanctuary System to protect nationally significant places in oceans, coasts, and Great Lakes;

    (6) calls on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to partner with communities and to complete designations of new national marine sanctuaries; and

    (7) encourages Federal agencies to balance priorities and work together to support the priorities of the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act of 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1401 et seq.).

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Hold DOJ Accountable for Failure to Prosecute Noncitizen Voter Registration

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Ron Johnson

    It should be obvious to everyone — even Democrats — that we should prevent illegal immigrants from voting. Unfortunately, most Democrats in Congress do not agree. I was happy to cosponsor the SAVE Act in the Senate. This legislation aimed to secure our elections by requiring proof of citizenship to vote. It passed in the House, but not the Senate.

    On October 2, I joined Republican colleagues in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland exposing the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) failure to prevent noncitizens from registering to vote in America’s federal elections and its refusal to prosecute those who have done so. 

    We need more information about the incidence of noncitizens registering to vote, and steps that the DOJ is taking to deal with the issue and secure U.S. elections.

    In recent weeks, I have written two op-eds highlighting my concerns with election integrity. I urge you to read both.

    The Daily Caller: FBI Ignoring Real Threats To Election Integrity

    The Federalist: Democrat-Controlled States Refuse To Clean Voter Rolls And Fix Election Problems

    Under the Biden-Harris administration, more than 500,000 unaccompanied migrant children have crossed the southwest border without a parent or guardian to provide care.

    Last month, I joined a letter to President Biden and Vice President Harris calling out abuses in their Unaccompanied Migrant Children Program, namely the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)’s cover-up of the crisis. HHS has failed to comply with two out of three Department of Homeland Security subpoenas and other information requests issued amid its investigation into more than 100 suspicious sponsors.

    The Biden-Harris administration limited background checks for sponsors of unaccompanied children, cut back on familial DNA testing at the border, and decreased information sharing with law enforcement.

    Cartel trafficking activity surged an estimated 2,500% from the Trump administration to the middle of the Biden-Harris term in 2022.  

    I joined another letter demanding Biden and Harris collect DNA samples from every immigrant the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) encounters, per the DNA Fingerprint Act of 2005. DHS missed three separate opportunities to gather DNA from the illegal immigrant who murdered Rachel Morin, a Maryland mother of five.

    MILTON: The Milton Area Chamber of Commerce hosted a town hall at the Milton House Museum. Before the event, I took a fascinating tour of Wisconsin’s only certified Underground Railroad site which is designated a National Historic Landmark.

    REESEVILLE:  Caine Warehousing hosted a town hall at their Dodge County campus. It was an honor to meet the three generations of Caines who run this successful family business. 

    WATERTOWN:  American Disposal and Lueck Recycling, another family run business, hosted a town hall at their facility. People are very concerned about open borders, the economy, and parental rights. 

    WATERTOWN: I always look forward to my visits to Maranatha Baptist University. I held a meeting with campus leadership and then answered questions from students, staff, and community members.  

    WHITEWATER: I enjoyed meeting with students at the University of Wisconsin Whitewater. When asked by a campus reporter about my main message for young people, I responded “jealously guard your freedom.” 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: FBI Ignoring Real Threats To Election Integrity

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Ron Johnson

    Originally appeared in The Daily Caller

    I entered the Senate SCIF (sensitive compartmented information facility) Sept. 25 to attend an “All Members Classified Briefing on Foreign Threats to U.S. Elections.” I was a little late and arrived during the presentation of Avril Haines, the Director of National Intelligence. Her presentation was followed by FBI Director Christopher Wray and CISA Director Jen Easterly. As Republican Utah Sen. Mike Lee, quoting Yogi Berra, later described the briefing, “It was deja vu all over again.” 

    With straight faces, these directors of federal intelligence and law enforcement were once again warning the U.S. Senate that foreign actors were trying to influence our election. Well, duh! Unfortunately, most of my Senate colleagues seemed to be lapping it up and taking the briefing seriously. After a few minutes of listening to Director Haines, I could only shake my head in disgust. 

    I fully acknowledge that foreign threats are real and serious, but we are well aware they exist and have been persistent for decades. Except for maybe a few specific details, I heard nothing new, and certainly nothing that should be considered or kept classified. And I heard absolutely nothing about the most egregious examples of election interference in our lifetime, or the most significant threats to the integrity of the 2024 election. 

    I was the last senator given the opportunity to ask a question. By this time, there were only four senators left in the briefing. I began my questioning by pointing out that the most egregious act of election interference in our lifetime was the letter solicited by current Secretary of State Antony Blinken, engineered by former Deputy CIA Director Mike Morrell and fast tracked by then-CIA Director Gina Haspel. That letter was written Oct. 19, 2020, less than a month before the November election.  

    A bipartisan group of former U.S. intelligence officials signed the letter, which stated, without evidence, that the Hunter Biden laptop “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.” Keep in mind, the FBI had seized Hunter’s laptop almost a year earlier and knew full well it was authentic. In the small world and circles of U.S. intelligence and law enforcement, it is inconceivable that those intelligence officials were unaware or unable to ascertain that fact.  

    That letter itself was a “U.S. intelligence information operation.” And it worked exceedingly well. Because of that letter, the Hunter Biden laptop story was effectively suppressed as Russian disinformation, and Joe Biden became president. Subsequent polls show that had the public known about the laptop, Joe Biden would have lost the election. Election interference doesn’t get more egregious or effective than that.

    After making that point, I asked who within the Office of the Director of National Intelligence directed the unsolicited August 2020 FBI briefing given separately to Republican Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley and me. That briefing, about us being targets of Russian disinformation, also provided no new information and was later leaked to the Washington Post to smear me, thereby interfering in my 2022 reelection. Four years after the briefing, and our relentless efforts to find out who directed it, we still have not been told. I didn’t get the answer Wednesday either.  

    Next, I asked Director Wray what the FBI was doing to investigate smurfing. This clear violation of campaign finance law was first revealed in March 2023 by investigative journalist, James O’Keefe. Using ActBlue, the Democrats’ donation platform, thousands of low-dollar donations are attributed to individuals allegedly without their knowledge — in one instance 5,776 donations totaling $754,124. Director Wray seemed clueless on the issue, and had no idea if the FBI was doing anything to investigate it. 

    At that point, the Democrat senator who chaired the briefing, concluded it. I wasn’t able to ask about my greatest concern regarding the 2024 election — illegal immigrants registering and voting in it. Don’t be under the illusion that just because noncitizens are ineligible to vote, Democrats aren’t willing to overlook that legal technicality to win an election. We already have plenty of evidence that illegal immigrants are registering, sometimes without their knowledge. Ohio just purged 499 illegal immigrants from its voter rolls following a multi-phase audit. Boston officials disclosed that 70 illegal aliens contacted county election officials asking to be  removed from voter registration lists. Virginia recently cancelled 6,303 noncitizen voter registrations. Oregon “mistakenly registered nearly 1,260 possible noncitizens to vote,” its DMV admits.  

    President Biden threw open the borders and directed federal departments to register voters. Does anyone believe that registration effort will be non-partisan, or that some percentage of the millions of illegal immigrants won’t vote in November? Based on last Wednesday’s briefing, I’m confident federal law enforcement won’t have any interest in investigating those crimes either.

    Ron Johnson is a Republican senator from Wisconsin.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Larsen and Kuster Introduce Bill to Enhance Federal Response to Close Substance Use Care Gap and Save Lives

    Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Rick Larsen (2nd Congressional District Washington)

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, Reps. Rick Larsen (WA-02) and Annie Kuster (NH-02) introduced the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act to expand access to lifesaving, community-based harm reduction initiatives and services and enhance the federal response to the opioid and fentanyl epidemic.

    “The opioid crisis is devastating Northwest Washington. This bill helps close the gap between members of our community who want treatment for substance use disorder and those who actually receive it,” said Larsen. “Congress must stay focused on breaking down barriers to effective community-based solutions that meet people where they are, prevent overdoses and save lives.” 

    “At a time when overdose deaths are finally falling in New Hampshire and across the country, it’s essential we keep our foot on the gas pedal and use every tool at our disposal to help save lives,” said Kuster. “I’m pleased to help introduce legislation that bolsters access to community-based harm reduction services, overdose reversal medications, and medication-assisted treatments so that we connect more communities with the treatment and recovery services they need to heal and recover.”

    What Does the Bill Do?

    The Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act would provide community-based organizations with more resources to administer life-saving harm reduction programs and services to people struggling with substance use. The bill would provide grant funding to support low-barrier health care options like naloxone (an overdose reversal medication), fentanyl test strips and low-threshold buprenorphine initiation to treat addiction. It would also provide funding to organizations to establish procedures and mechanisms for connecting individuals with evidence-based treatment and recovery support services.

    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) identifies harm reduction as a key pillar of its Overdose Prevention Strategy, and the White House National Drug Control Strategy argues harm reduction is vital for providing resources to people at the highest risk of overdose or poor health outcomes. Despite the demand and effectiveness of harm reduction services, they remain substantially underfunded at the state and federal level.

    For a fact sheet on the bill, click here.

    What Stakeholders Are Saying About the Bill

    Representatives from stakeholder organizations emphasized the importance of the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act to combat the opioid epidemic.

    National

    National Association of EMS Physicians President José Cabañas‎, MD, MPH, FAEMS:

    “EMS clinicians and medical directors are on the front lines of the opioid crisis in our country, caring for our most vulnerable patients and responding to the urgent needs of our communities. There is an ongoing need for federal support to enhance harm reduction programs and to ensure early access to addiction treatment for those suffering from substance use disorders. This bill is a vital step forward in addressing these issues, and NAEMSP fully advocates for federal support as we work together to combat this crisis.”

    National Rural Health Association Chief Executive Officer Alan Morgan:

    “The National Rural Health Association (NRHA) endorses the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act, which reauthorizes and expands SAMHSA’s Harm Reduction Grant Program to support harm reduction services and opioid treatment programs. Access to proven treatments, including medications for opioid use disorder (OUD), is required to reduce opioid-related fatalities. However, rural communities face significant barriers to treatment, with 72% lacking a buprenorphine provider and over 90% without an opioid treatment program. NRHA supports Representatives Larsen and Kuster’s steps to improving outcomes for rural Americans living with OUD.”

    National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Chief Advocacy Officer Hannah Wesolowski:

    “As we work towards overcoming the opioid epidemic in our country, we must ensure communities have all the resources they need to support people who are impacted. NAMI thanks Reps. Larsen and Kuster for introducing the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act to help ensure communities have vital lifesaving harm reduction resources. NAMI is proud to support the Closing the Opioid Treatment Gap Act to turn the tide on our nation’s opioid crisis.”

    American Nurses Association President Jennifer Mensik Kennedy, PhD, MBA, RN, NEA-BC, FAAN:

    “Nurses care for patients impacted by substance use disorders every day and see firsthand how essential harm reduction programs are—not only saving lives but creating pathways to treatment and recovery for those not yet ready to stop using. The American Nurses Association (ANA) stands in support of the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act. This legislation supports and expands access to critical programs and services—ensuring nurses specializing in substance use disorder treatment can bridge the treatment gap and connect individuals battling substance use disorders to needed care, especially for those in rural and underserved communities. ANA commends Representatives Larsen and Kuster for introducing this important bill and urges Congress to pass it swiftly.”

    American College of Physicians President Isaac O. Opole, MBChB, PHD, MACP:

    “The American College of Physicians supports evidence-based harm reduction strategies. These measures have been shown to prevent overdose, reduce transmission of infectious diseases, encourage safe use protocols, and save lives. As physicians, we see patients every day experiencing significant health issues due to substance use disorder. Expanded federal funding for harm reduction strategies, as proposed in the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act, could greatly help to improve the health and safety of those patients.”

    Association of American Medical Colleges Chief Public Policy Officer Danielle Turnipseed, JD, MHSA, MPP:

    “Evidence-based harm reduction strategies, such as overdose prevention programs, play an important role in preventing deaths, reducing spread of infectious diseases, and connecting people to treatment. While no single intervention on its own will fully resolve the challenges that individuals with substance use disorders face in accessing treatment, Rep. Rick Larsen and Rep. Annie Kuster’s bill would take an important step forward to continue and enhance SAMHSA’s support for harm reduction work across the country.”

    This legislation is also supported by the American Society of Addiction Medicine, National Council for Mental Wellbeing and the Overdose Prevention Initiative at Global Health Advocacy Incubator (GHAI).

    Local

    Snohomish County Executive Dave Somers:

    “Washington is fortunate to have Representative Larsen working at the federal level to combat the opioid epidemic and ensure federal resources are being delivered where they are most needed. I support the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act because it is a powerful tool to help fund key components of Snohomish County’s life-saving efforts, including Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT), overdose reversal medication, and addiction prevention.”

    Whatcom County Health and Community Services Health Officer Dr. Amy Harley:

    “Access to federal grant funding for harm reduction services is essential for our community’s health. In Whatcom County the opioid overdose death rate is 5 times higher than 5 years ago. Programs that provide harm reduction services are a critical part of our comprehensive response to the overdose crisis. In our county, these programs provide overdose prevention education and opioid overdose reversal medications, as well as health screenings, supplies, and referrals – we help individuals avoid life-altering infections and get connected to care. Through Whatcom County’s Safety and Support program, we’ve distributed thousands of doses of life-saving opioid overdose reversal medications in the past year. These services are vital engagement points on the path to recovery, fostering community and increasing hope and resilience. Restoring funding opportunities through the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act will ensure the stability of these vital programs, and is especially important given current resource limitations at the local level and the severity of the crisis.”

    San Juan County Council and the San Juan County Board of Health:

    “The San Juan County Council and the San Juan County Board of Health are grateful to Representative Larsen for introducing the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act. Like every other County in America, we feel the effects of the opioid crisis in the damage it does to our communities and in the loss of precious lives, including those of our children. We support Harm Reduction as a scientifically sound public health strategy and a vital tool in helping people struggling with Substance Use Disorder stay alive to start on the road to recovery.”

    The Board of Island County Commissioners:

    “The Board of Island County Commissioners endorses Representative Larsen’s legislation, Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act, which will benefit our citizens affected by the opioid epidemic by expanding their access to harm reduction programs and services. We ask Congress to pass this legislation.”

    Sound Pathways Executive Director Shannon Goforth:

    “At Sound Pathways, we believe that harm reduction is crucial for connecting individuals with the services they need, empowering them to make informed, autonomous choices regarding drug use, mental health and recovery. Increasing grant access to support these services would bolster our capacity to improve the care we currently offer.”

    Washington State Medical Association President John Bramhall, MD, PhD:

    “The Washington State Medical Association (WSMA), representing physicians practicing in every specialty and corner of the state, applauds Congressman Rick Larsen’s introduction of the Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act. The WSMA supports policies that facilitate and improve access to evidence-based harm reduction efforts. This measure will save lives by directly engaging with people who use drugs to prevent overdoses and infectious disease transmission while establishing connections for ongoing care and treatment.”

    Washington State Hospital Association CEO Cassie Sauer:

    “The Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act is a critical step towards ensuring that people struggling with substance use have access to the care and support they need. Harm reduction is a proven strategy to prevent overdoses and life-threatening infections. This bill will help patients across Washington access evidence-based treatment and recovery support services. The Washington State Hospital Association applauds Congressman Larsen’s leadership on this issue.”

    Washington State Association of Counties Interim Executive Director Derek Young:

    “Counties are on the front line in the opioid epidemic. Our members know that strong federal partners are essential to closing the treatment gap and saving lives. We’re grateful for Representative Larsen championing these efforts.”

    University of Washington’s Harm Reduction Research and Treatment (HaRRT) Center Co-Directors Susan Collins, PhD, and Seema Clifasefi, PhD, LICSW:

    “The Closing the Substance Use Care Gap Act will ensure the availability of federal funding for evidence-based and life-saving harm-reduction services and treatment programs. It is critical that this reauthorization will support community-led and grassroots harm-reduction agencies and organizations, who work on the frontlines of the overdose epidemic. Funds will bolster services provided by state, Tribal, local and territorial governments to reduce substance-related harm and improve health and well-being for their citizens, families and communities. By investing in these essential harm-reduction services and more inclusive treatment approaches, this bill will better meet the needs of individuals and lift them up in their recovery journeys.”

    The legislation is also supported by the Washington State Association of Local Public Health Officials (WSALPHO).

    Larsen Focused on Combating Opioid and Fentanyl Crisis

    Larsen continues to focus on supporting local efforts to combat the opioid crisis and save lives. Earlier this year, he introduced a districtwide opioid report that outlines a four-pillar framework to combat the crisis. Larsen has introduced three additional bills aimed at combating the crisis:

    ·       In July, Larsen introduced the Workforce Opportunities for Communities in Recovery Act to create employment opportunities for people in recovery and support communities impacted by widespread opioid use.

    ·       In August, Larsen introduced the bipartisan Protection for Reservation Occupants against Trafficking and Evasive Communications Today (PROTECT) Act to give Tribal courts and law enforcement more tools and resources to combat the opioid epidemic.

    ·       In September, Larsen introduced the End Fentanyl Trafficking with Local Task Forces Act to establish a dedicated federal funding stream to help multi-jurisdictional drug task forces combat opioid trafficking in Washington state and across the country.

    ###

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Call for community members to participate in coal ash advisory committee

    Source: New South Wales Premiere

    Published: 24 October 2024

    Released by: Minister for the Central Coast

    Lake Macquarie and Lake Munmorah communities are encouraged to take part in a new advisory committee set up to help inform the NSW Government’s remediation of sites containing coal ash repositories.

    The government is establishing the committee to support its response to the ‘NSW Parliamentary Inquiry into costs for remediation of sites containing coal ash repositories’ available here.

    In response to the Inquiry’s recommendations, NSW Health has commissioned a review of environmental data to determine whether people living close to power stations and coal ash dams are exposed to potentially harmful chemicals through air, water, soil or local fish and seafood.

    The committee will allow open discussions between NSW Health and representatives of the local community, stakeholder groups and local councils on the potential health impacts of coal ash.

    NSW Health is seeking applications from community members and those from local civic, professional, and environmental groups to apply to join the committee.

    Committee members will contribute to committee discussions, attend around four meetings a year, and help communicate information about the coal ash study to the broader community

    Those interested can obtain a nomination form by contacting independent Chair of the Community Advisory Committee: David Ross, at David.Ross@phoenixstrategic.com.au. Nominations close on 6 December 2024.

    Minister for the Central Coast David Harris said:

    “This new committee will allow us to gain a deeper understanding of the impacts of coal ash deposits on communities in Lake Macquarie and Lake Munmorah.

    “I encourage interested residents in those areas to take this opportunity to donate their time and expertise to find a way forward to clean up these sites for the lasting benefit of their communities.”

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI Security: Justice Department Announces Four Cases Brought by Election Threats Task Force

    Source: Office of United States Attorneys

    WASHINGTON — The Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force (ETTF) announced developments this week in four cases involving interstate transmissions of threats to election personnel and other victims.

    Teak Brockbank, 45, of Cortez, Colorado, pleaded guilty today to threatening a Colorado election official, and admitted to making other threats to an Arizona election official, a Colorado state judge, and federal law enforcement agents between September 2021 and July 2024.

    Brian Jerry Ogstad, 60, of Cullman, Alabama, was sentenced on Monday to 30 months in prison for sending messages threatening violence to election workers with Maricopa County Elections in Phoenix on Aug. 2-4, 2022, during and immediately following the Arizona primary elections.

    Richard Glenn Kantwill, 61, of Tampa, Florida, was charged on Monday for allegedly sending a threat on Feb. 9 to an election official in addition to already pending charges for threats made to three other victims based on their political commentary in 2019 and 2020.

    John Pollard, 62, of Philadelphia, was charged on Monday for allegedly threatening on Sept. 6 to kill a representative of a Pennsylvania state political party who was recruiting official poll watchers.

    “As we approach Election Day, the Justice Department’s warning remains clear: anyone who illegally threatens an election worker, official, or volunteer will face the consequences,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “Over the past three and a half years, the Justice Department has been aggressively investigating and prosecuting those who threaten the public servants who administer our elections, and we will continue to do so in the weeks ahead. For our democracy to function, Americans who serve the public must be able to do their jobs without fearing for their lives.”

    “Threats to election workers are threats to our democratic process,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. “No one should face violence or threats of violence simply for doing their job. The actions announced today make clear that we will not tolerate those who use or threaten violence in an effort to undermine our democratic institutions. To carry out their essential work, election officials must be free from improper influence, physical threats, and others forms of intimidation.”

    “Our elections are made by possible by the hard work and patriotism of election workers in communities across the country who are also our neighbors, relatives and friends, and they deserve to do this important work without being subjected to threats,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray. “The fact that election workers need to be worried about their security is incomprehensible and unacceptable. While these four cases are examples of the kinds of threats election workers are unfortunately facing, these cases also represent the FBI’s dedication in holding accountable those who undermine our democracy with this conduct. The FBI and our partners on the ETTF will work tirelessly to charge and arrest those callous enough to make these threats and make sure they are held accountable. Free, fair, and safe elections are critical to our country and our democratic ideals.”

    “These defendants made serious threats of violence against members of the election community. Threats like these strike at the very heart of our democracy,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The cases announced today underscore the Criminal Division’s commitment to defending our democracy, safeguarding our elections, and protecting all election workers. Through the ETTF, the Department will vigorously investigate and prosecute all criminal threats against members of the election community.”

    The four cases were all brought by the ETTF. Created by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and launched by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco in June 2021, the task force has led the Department’s efforts to address threats of violence against election workers, and to ensure that all election workers — whether elected, appointed, or volunteer — are able to do their jobs free from threats and intimidation. The task force engages with the election community and state and local law enforcement to assess allegations and reports of threats against election workers, and has investigated and prosecuted these matters where appropriate, in partnership with FBI Field Offices and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices throughout the country. Three years after its formation, the task force is continuing this work and supporting U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and FBI Field Offices nationwide as they join the task force in its critical work.

    Under the leadership of the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General, the task force is led by the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section (PIN) and includes several other entities within the Justice Department, including the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, Civil Rights Division, National Security Division, and FBI, as well as key interagency partners, such as the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Postal Inspection Service. For more information regarding the Justice Department’s efforts to combat threats against election workers, read the Deputy Attorney General’s memo.

    United States v. Brockbank (District of Colorado)

    According to court documents, Brockbank admitted to using three social media accounts to post messages threatening Colorado and Arizona election officials between September 2021 and July 2024.

    On Sept. 22, 2021, Brockbank posted the following message on social media:

    “[Election Official-1] . . . needs to- No has to Hang she has to Hang by the neck till she is Dead Dead Dead. There will be accountability for these peoples actions in Communist Colorado and it won’t be judges and it won’t be weakmided cops that bring it!!! It will be Me it will be You it Will be every day people that understand that there life does not matter anymore with the future our country has laid out before it.”

    As part of his plea, Brockbank also admitted to posting a message on Aug. 4, 2022 referring to election officials in Arizona and Colorado, stating: “Once those people start getting put to death then the rest will melt like snowflakes and turn on each other. . . . This is the only way. So those of us that have the stomach for what has to be done should prepare our minds for what we all [a]re going to do!!!!!! It is time.”

    In addition, Brockbank admitted to posting a message threatening a Colorado state judge on Oct. 2, 2021: “I could pick up my rifle and I could go put a bullet in this Mans head and send him to explain himself to our Creator right now. I would be Justified!!! Not only justified but obligated by those in my family who fought and died for the freedom in this country. . . . What can I do other than kill this man my self?”

    Brockbank further admitted to threatening federal law enforcement on July 13, 2024, posting: ““I believe every single FBI agent deserves to go explain themselves to our creator right away!!!! I am more than willing to send any/All of you there.”

    Finally, Brockbank admitted to illegally possessing multiple firearms and ammunition.

    “The security and sanctity of the American election system is core to the foundation of our Democracy,” said Acting United States Attorney Matt Kirsch for the District of Colorado. “We will prosecute people who threaten elections, election officials, or election workers to the fullest extent of the law.”

    Brockbank pleaded guilty today to interstate transmission of a threat. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Feb. 3, 2025, and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI Denver Field Office is investigating the case.

    Acting Deputy Director Jonathan E. Jacobson of PIN’s Election Crimes Branch and Assistant U.S. Attorney Cyrus Y. Chung for the District of Colorado are prosecuting the case.

    United States v. Ogstad (District of Arizona)

    According to court documents, on or about Aug. 2, 2022, Arizona held primary elections for federal and state officeholders, including a gubernatorial primary election that received nationwide media coverage. From the day of the election through on or about Aug. 4, 2022, Ogstad sent multiple threatening direct messages to a social media account maintained by Maricopa County Elections. For instance, on or about Aug. 3, 2022, Ogstad stated: (1) “You did it! Now you are f*****.. Dead. You will all be executed for your crimes”; (2) F*** you! You are caught! They have it all. You f****** are dead”; (3) “You are lying, cheating m****** f******* . . . you better not come in my church, my business or send your kids to my school. You are f****** stupid if you think your lives are safe”; and (4) “You f******  are so dead.” On or about Aug. 4, 2022, Ogstad also stated, “[Y]ou people are so ducking stupid. Everyone knows you are lots, cheats, frauds and in doing so in relation to elections have committed treason. You will all be executed. Bang f******!” ” In the course of his messages to the recipient, Ogstad transmitted an image of the character “Woody,” from the Toy Story film franchise, lying face down with an unidentified projectile in its back.

    “In this election season we honor and respect those public servants who enable Americans to exercise their constitutional right to vote,” said U.S. Attorney Gary Restaino for the District of Arizona. “And we seek to protect all election workers from intimidation and harassment. Threats of violence, whether conveyed by words or deeds or pictures, will be met in this District with robust prosecution.”

    Ogstad was sentenced on Monday to 30 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release and a $1,000 fine, after pleading guilty on July 25 to one count of interstate transmission of a threat.

    The FBI Phoenix Field Office investigated the case, with substantial assistance from the FBI Birmingham Field Office.

    Trial Attorney Tanya Senanayake of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mary Sue Feldmeier for the District of Arizona prosecuted the case.

    United States v. Kantwill (Middle District of Florida)

    According to court documents, from September 2019 to July 2020, Kantwill, a dentist, sent over 100 threats to various public figures via Facebook and Instagram messages, email, and text. As charged in the superseding information filed on Monday, those threats included a threat sent via email to an author, a threat sent via text to a religious leader, and a threat sent via Instagram to a television personality. From April 2022 to April 2024, Kantwill also sent at least seven additional threats to four public figures via Facebook, including a threat to an election official in another state on Feb. 9, when Kantwill wrote: “You are a degenerate c***. and you are now the target of our own investigation. Take note because liberal t***s like you get raped in alleys, by really big black guys that serve our cause. So, you t*** are going to get raped by at least 5 n*****s, and do nothing. You are the number 1 target, you degenerate t***.”

    “If you threaten someone with violence, we will take you at your word,” said U.S. Attorney Roger Handberg for the Middle District of Florida. “Law enforcement officers and members of my office will work together to hold accountable and federally prosecute individuals who threaten to injure or kill others.”

    Kantwill is charged with four counts of interstate transmission of a threat. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI is investigating the case.

    Trial Attorney Aaron L. Jennen of PIN and Assistant U.S. Attorney Abigail K. King for the Middle District of Florida are prosecuting the case, with assistance from Assistant U.S. Attorney Cyrus Y. Chung for the District of Colorado.

    An information is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    United States v. Pollard (Western District of Pennsylvania)

    According to the indictment, on Sept. 6, Pollard sent threatening text messages to Victim 1, a resident of the Western District of Pennsylvania. Victim 1 had previously posted online, in Victim 1’s capacity as an employee of a state political party, that Victim 1 was recruiting volunteers to “help[] observe at the polls on Election Day” and included Victim 1’s phone number. Pollard allegedly texted Victim 1 that he was “interested in being a poll watcher” and included Victim 1’s first name. Pollard then allegedly texted three threats to Victim 1: (1) “I will KILL YOU IF YOU DON’T ANSWER ME!”; (2) “Your days are numbered, B****!”; and (3) “GONNA F***ING FIND YOU AND SKIN YOU ALIVE AND USE YOUR SKIN FOR F***ING TOILET PAPER, YOU F***ING KKK**T!”

    “Threats of violence have no place in our society,” said U.S. Attorney Eric G. Olshan for the Western District of Pennsylvania. “This is no less true when those threats of violence are directed at individuals associated with our electoral process — in this case, someone seeking to organize poll watchers. This conduct will not be tolerated in our district, and we will continue to work with our partners at the FBI to prosecute these offenses with the full weight of the law.”

    Pollard was arrested on Monday and appeared in federal court in Philadelphia. He is charged with one count of interstate transmission of a threat. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI Pittsburgh Field Office is investigating the case.

    Trial Attorney Jacob R. Steiner of PIN and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicole A. Stockey for the Western District of Pennsylvania are prosecuting the case, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

    An indictment is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    *****

    To report suspected threats or violent acts, contact your local FBI office and request to speak with the Election Crimes Coordinator. Contact information for every FBI field office may be found here: www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/. You may also contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI (225-5324) or file an online complaint at www.tips.fbi.gov. Complaints submitted will be reviewed by the task force and referred for investigation or response accordingly. If someone is in imminent danger or risk of harm, contact 911 or your local police immediately.

    MIL Security OSI –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Kennedy urges Blinken to secure Indo-Pacific naval base from Chinese threat after U.K. reaches Chagos Archipelago sovereignty deal

    US Senate News:

    Source: United States Senator John Kennedy (Louisiana)
    View Kennedy’s remarks here. 
    MADISONVILLE, La. – Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) today released this statement and sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken raising national security concerns over China’s growing influence in the Indo-Pacific region, and specifically the threat to the Chagos Archipelago, where a key U.S. Navy support facility currently operates on the island of Diego Garcia. 
    Earlier this month, the United Kingdom reached a deal to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius while allowing the U.S. Navy’s Diego Garcia facility to operate for the next 99 years. 
    “As you know, the Chagos Archipelago, specifically Diego Garcia, is of particular strategic significance to U.S. national security and our ability to maintain stability and project power in the region. The decision to give up the islands is dangerous and irresponsible, especially in the face of China’s increasing aggression,” Kennedy wrote. 
    “The presence of the U.S. military on Diego Garcia is a vital component of our defense posture in the Indo-Pacific. With the transfer of control to Mauritius, I am concerned about our ability to maintain the integrity of our operations in the region. Chinese ambitions, particularly their strategic interest in expanding influence over critical maritime chokepoints and naval installations, present a clear and present threat to regional stability. We are all but guaranteed to see an increase in nefarious Chinese behavior around Diego Garcia following what has become a familiar playbook—Chinese fishing boats conducting surveillance, and debt trap diplomacy to ensure Chinese control of critical infrastructure,” he continued.
    “Given the evolving geopolitical landscape, America must act proactively to secure this region from external influences that could jeopardize a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Kennedy concluded.
    Kennedy’s full statement is available here. 
    The full letter is available here. 

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Northrim BanCorp Earns $8.8 Million, or $1.57 Per Diluted Share, in Third Quarter 2024

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    ANCHORAGE, Alaska, Oct. 23, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Northrim BanCorp, Inc. (NASDAQ:NRIM) (“Northrim” or the “Company”) today reported net income of $8.8 million, or $1.57 per diluted share, in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $9.0 million, or $1.62 per diluted share, in the second quarter of 2024, and $8.4 million, or $1.48 per diluted share, in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in third quarter 2024 profitability as compared to the third quarter a year ago was primarily the result of an increase in mortgage banking income and higher net interest income, which was only partially offset by higher other operating expenses and a higher provision for credit losses.

    Dividends per share in the third quarter of 2024 increased to $0.62 per share as compared to $0.61 per share in the second quarter of 2024 and $0.60 per share in the third quarter of 2023.

    “We had strong deposit-funded loan growth in the third quarter,” said Mike Huston, Northrim’s President and Chief Executive Officer. “Deposits and loans both increased 7% from the end of the second quarter. Our deposit market share increased by 4% in the past year and by 42% in the past five years as our investments in people, expanded branch network, and differentiated service continue to attract new customers and strengthen existing relationships.”

    Third Quarter 2024 Highlights:

    • Net interest income in the third quarter of 2024 increased 7% to $28.8 million compared to $27.1 million in the second quarter of 2024 and increased 9% compared to $26.4 million in the third quarter of 2023.
    • Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”)* was 4.35% for the third quarter of 2024, up 5-basis points from the second quarter of 2024 and up 14-basis points from the third quarter a year ago.
    • Return on average assets (“ROAA”) was 1.22% and return on average equity (“ROAE”) was 13.69% for the third quarter of 2024.
    • Portfolio loans were $2.01 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago, primarily due to new customer relationships, expanding market share, and to retaining certain mortgages originated by Residential Mortgage, a subsidiary of Northrim Bank (the “Bank”), in the loan portfolio.
    • Total deposits were $2.63 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter, and up 8% from $2.43 billion a year ago. Non-interest bearing demand deposits increased 8% from the preceding quarter and decreased slightly year-over-year to $763.6 million at September 30, 2024 and represent 29% of total deposits.
    • The average cost of interest-bearing deposits was 2.24% at September 30, 2024, up from 2.21% at June 30, 2024 and 1.75% at September 30, 2023.
    • Mortgage loan originations increased to $248.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, up from $181.5 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $153.4 million in the third quarter a year ago. Mortgage loans funded for sale were $210.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $152.3 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $131.9 million in the third quarter of 2023.
    Financial Highlights   Three Months Ended 
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024 December 31,
    2023    		 September 30,
    2023
    Total assets $2,963,392   $2,821,668 $2,759,560   $2,807,497   $2,790,189  
    Total portfolio loans $2,007,565   $1,875,907 $1,811,135   $1,789,497   $1,720,091  
    Total deposits $2,625,567   $2,463,806 $2,434,083   $2,485,055   $2,427,930  
    Total shareholders’ equity $260,050   $247,200 $239,327   $234,718   $225,259  
    Net income $8,825   $9,020 $8,199   $6,613   $8,374  
    Diluted earnings per share $1.57   $1.62 $1.48   $1.19   $1.48  
    Return on average assets   1.22 %   1.31 %   1.19 %   0.93 %   1.22 %
    Return on average shareholders’ equity   13.69 %   14.84 %   13.84 %   11.36 %   14.67 %
    NIM   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %   4.06 %   4.15 %
    NIMTE*   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %   4.12 %   4.21 %
    Efficiency ratio   66.11 %   68.78 %   68.93 %   72.21 %   66.64 %
    Total shareholders’ equity/total assets   8.78 %   8.76 %   8.67 %   8.36 %   8.07 %
    Tangible common equity/tangible assets*   8.28 %   8.24 %   8.14 %   7.84 %   7.54 %
    Book value per share $47.27   $44.93   $43.52   $42.57   $40.60  
    Tangible book value per share* $44.36   $42.03   $40.61   $39.68   $37.72  
    Dividends per share $0.62   $0.61   $0.61   $0.60   $0.60  
    Common stock outstanding   5,501,943     5,501,562     5,499,578     5,513,459     5,548,436  


    *     References to NIMTE, tangible book value per share, and tangible common equity to tangible common assets, (all of which exclude intangible assets) represent non-GAAP financial measures. Management has presented these non-GAAP measurements in this earnings release, because it believes these measures are useful to investors. See the end of this release for reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to GAAP financial measures.

    Alaska Economic Update
    (Note: sources for information included in this section are included on page 12.)

    The Alaska Department of Labor (“DOL”) has reported Alaska’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate in August of 2024 was 4.6% compared to the U.S. rate of 4.2%. The total number of payroll jobs in Alaska, not including uniformed military, increased 1.8% or 6,400 jobs between August of 2023 and August of 2024.

    According to the DOL, the Construction sector had the largest growth in new jobs through August compared to the prior year. The Construction sector added 2,600 positions for a year over year growth rate of 12.9% between August of 2023 and 2024. The larger Health Care sector grew by 2,000 jobs for an annual growth rate of 4.9% over the same period. The Oil & Gas sector increased by 6.5% or 500 new direct jobs. Professional and Business Services added 1,000 jobs year over year through August of 2024, up 3.4%. The Government sector grew by 700 jobs for 0.9% growth, adding 500 Federal jobs and 200 Local government positions in Alaska. The only sectors to decline between August 2023 and August 2024 were Manufacturing (primarily seafood processing) shrinking 1,300 positions and Information, down 200 jobs.

    Alaska’s Gross State Product (“GSP”) in the second quarter of 2024, was estimated to be $69.8 billion in current dollars, according to the Federal Bureau of Economic Analysis (“BEA”). Alaska’s inflation adjusted “real” GSP increased 6.5% in 2023, placing Alaska fifth best of all 50 states. However, in the second quarter of 2024 Alaska decreased at an annualized rate of 1.1%, compared to the average U.S. growth rate of 3%. Alaska’s real GSP decline in the second quarter of 2024 was primarily caused by a slowdown in the Mining, Oil & Gas; and Transportation and Warehousing sectors.

    The BEA also calculated Alaska’s seasonally adjusted personal income at $55.4 billion in the second quarter of 2024. This was an annualized improvement of 4% for Alaska, compared to the national average of 5.3%.

    The monthly average price of Alaska North Slope (“ANS”) crude oil was at an annual high of $89.05 in April of 2024 and averaged $74.06 in September of this year. The Alaska Department of Revenue (“DOR”) calculated ANS crude oil production was 479 thousand barrels per day (“bpd”) in Alaska’s fiscal year ending June 30, 2023 and declined to 461 thousand bpd in Alaska’s fiscal year 2024. Starting in fiscal year 2025 it is projected to grow to 477 thousand bpd. The DOR projects the number to grow rapidly and reach 640 thousand bpd by fiscal year 2033. This is primarily a result of new production coming on-line in and around the NPR-A region west of Prudhoe Bay.

    According to the Alaska Multiple Listing Services, the average sales price of a single family home in Anchorage rose 5.2% in 2023 to $480,207, following a 7.6% increase in 2022. This was the sixth consecutive year of price increases.   In the first nine months of 2024 the average price continues to increase 6.8% to an average sale of
    $512,815.

    The average sales price for single family homes in the Matanuska Susitna Borough rose 4% in 2023 to $397,589, after increasing 9.9% in 2022. This continues a trend of average price increases for more than a decade in the region. In the first nine months of 2024 the average sales price increased 4.6% in the Matanuska Susitna Borough to $415,709. These two markets represent where the vast majority of the Bank’s residential lending activity occurs.

    The Alaska Multiple Listing Services reported a 1.2% decrease in the number of units sold in Anchorage when comparing January to September of 2023 and 2024. There were 5.4% less homes sold in the Matanuska Susitna Borough for the same nine month time period in 2024 compared to the prior year.

    Northrim Bank sponsors the Alaskanomics blog to provide news, analysis, and commentary on Alaska’s economy. Join the conversation at Alaskanomics.com, or for more information on the Alaska economy, visit: www.northrim.com and click on the “Business Banking” link and then click “Learn.” Information from our website is not incorporated into, and does not form, a part of this earnings release.

    Review of Income Statement

    Consolidated Income Statement

    In the third quarter of 2024, Northrim generated a ROAA of 1.22% and a ROAE of 13.69%, compared to 1.31% and 14.84%, respectively, in the second quarter of 2024 and 1.22% and 14.67%, respectively, in the third quarter a year ago.

    Net Interest Income/Net Interest Margin

    Net interest income increased 7% to $28.8 million in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $27.1 million in the second quarter of 2024 and increased 9% compared to $26.4 million in the third quarter of 2023. Interest expense on deposits increased to $10.1 million in the third quarter of 2024 compared to $9.5 million in the second quarter and $7.1 million in the third quarter of 2023.

    NIMTE* was 4.35% in the third quarter of 2024 up from 4.30% in the preceding quarter and 4.21% in the third quarter a year ago. NIMTE* increased 14 basis points in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the third quarter of 2023 primarily due to a favorable change in the mix of earning-assets towards higher loan balances as a percentage of total earning-assets, higher earning-assets, and higher yields on those assets which were only partially offset by an increase in costs on interest-bearing deposits. The weighted average interest rate for new loans booked in the third quarter of 2024 was 7.24% compared to 7.90% in the second quarter of 2024 and 7.44% in the third quarter a year ago. The yield on the investment portfolio in the third quarter of 2024 decreased slightly to 2.80% from 2.82% in the second quarter of 2024 and increased from 2.43% in the third quarter of 2023. “We continue to see the benefit of new loan volume and repricing outweigh the modest increase in deposit costs in the third quarter of 2024,” said Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer. Northrim’s NIMTE* continues to remain above the peer average of 3.13% posted by the S&P U.S. Small Cap Bank Index with total market capitalization between $250 million and $1 billion as of June 30, 2024.

    Provision for Credit Losses

    Northrim recorded a provision for credit losses of $2.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, which was comprised of of a $325,000 provision for credit losses on unfunded commitments and a provision for credit losses on loans of $1.7 million. The provision for unfunded commitments was primarily due to an increase in unfunded commitments, as well as an increase in estimated loss rates due to changes in mix and management’s assessment of economic conditions. The increase to the provision for credit losses on loans was primarily a result of loan growth, as well as an increase in the provision for loans individually evaluated and an increase in estimated loss rates. This compares to a benefit to the provision for credit losses of $120,000 in the second quarter of 2024, and provision for credit losses of $1.2 million in the third quarter a year ago.

    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, increased slightly during the quarter to $5.0 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $4.8 million at June 30, 2024, and decreased from $5.1 million at September 30, 2023.

    The allowance for credit losses on loans was 394% of nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees, at the end of the third quarter of 2024, compared to 365% three months earlier and 326% a year ago.

    Other Operating Income

    In addition to home mortgage lending, Northrim has interests in other businesses that complement its core community banking activities, including purchased receivables financing and wealth management. Other operating income contributed $11.6 million, or 29% of total third quarter 2024 revenues, as compared to $9.6 million, or 26% of revenues in the second quarter of 2024, and $8.0 million, or 23% of revenues in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating income in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the preceding quarter and the third quarter of 2023 was primarily the result of an increase in mortgage banking income due to a higher volume of mortgage activity. See further discussion regarding mortgage activity during the second quarter contained under “Home Mortgage Lending” below. The fair market value of marketable equity securities increased $576,000 in the third quarter of 2024 compared to a decrease of $60,000 in the prior quarter and an increase of $12,000 in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating income in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter a year ago was due primarily to an increase in mortgage banking income as a result of higher volume of mortgage activity due to our expansion in Arizona, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest markets, as well as an increase in fair value of marketable equity securities.

    Other Operating Expenses

    Operating expenses were $26.7 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $25.2 million in the second quarter of 2024, and $22.9 million in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in other operating expenses in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the second quarter of 2024 was primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, including $653,000 in mortgage commissions expense due to higher mortgage volume and a $979,000 increase in profit share expense, which was partially offset by a $836,000 decrease in medical claims expense. The increase in other operating expenses in the third quarter of 2024 compared to a year ago was primarily due to an increase in salaries and other personnel expense, as well as an increase in OREO expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the third quarter of 2023 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property sold in December 2022.

    Income Tax Provision

    In the third quarter of 2024, Northrim recorded $2.8 million in state and federal income tax expense for an effective tax rate of 24.2%, compared to $2.5 million, or 21.9% in the second quarter of 2024 and $1.9 million, or 18.4% in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in the tax rate in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter of 2023 is primarily the result of a decrease in tax credits and tax exempt interest income as a percentage of pre-tax income in 2024 as compared to 2023.

    Community Banking

    In the most recent deposit market share data from the FDIC, Northrim’s deposit market share in Alaska increased to 15.66% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2024 compared to 15.04% of Alaska’s total deposits as of June 30, 2023. This represents 62 basis points of growth in market share percentage for Northrim during that period while, according to the FDIC, the total deposits in Alaska were up 2.3% during the same period. Northrim opened a branch in Kodiak in the first quarter of 2023, a loan production office in Homer in the second quarter of 2023, a permanent branch in Nome in the third quarter of 2023, and a branch in Homer in the first quarter of 2024. See below for further discussion regarding the Company’s deposit movement for the quarter.

    Northrim is committed to meeting the needs of the diverse communities in which it operates. As a testament to that support, the Bank has branches in four regions of Alaska identified by the Federal Reserve as ‘distressed or underserved non-metropolitan middle-income geographies’.

    Net interest income in the Community Banking segment totaled $25.9 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $24.3 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $24.1 million in the third quarter of 2023. Net interest income increased 7% in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 mostly due to higher interest income on loans. This increase was only partially offset by higher interest expense on deposits and borrowings and lower interest income on portfolio investments.

    Other operating expenses in the Community Banking segment totaled $19.1 million in the third quarter of 2024, up $588,000 or 3% from $18.5 million in the second quarter of 2024, and up $2.1 million or 13% from $16.9 million in the third quarter a year ago. The increase in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the prior quarter was mostly due to an increases in salaries and other personnel expense, marketing expense, and professional fees. The increase in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the third quarter a year ago was primarily due to an increase in OREO expense due to a gain on sale recorded in the third quarter of 2023 for proceeds received related to a government guarantee on an OREO property sold in December 2022, as well as increases in salaries and other personnel expense and marketing expense.

    The following tables provide highlights of the Community Banking segment of Northrim:

      Three Months Ended
      September   March 31, December September
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) 30, 2024 June 30, 2024   2024   31, 2023   30, 2023
    Net interest income $25,901 $24,278 $24,215 $24,456 $24,050
    (Benefit) provision for credit losses 1,492 (184)   197   885   1,190
    Other operating income 4,540 3,693   3,813   4,048   3,597
    Other operating expense 19,085 18,497   17,552   18,516   16,946
    Income before provision for income taxes 9,864 9,658   10,279   9,103   9,511
    Provision for income taxes 2,316 2,004   2,242   1,941   1,709
    Net income $7,548 $7,654 $8,037 $7,162 $7,802
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted 5,583,055 5,558,580   5,554,930   5,578,491   5,624,906
    Diluted earnings per share $1.34 $1.37 $1.45 $1.29 $1.39
      Year-to-date
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) September
    30, 2024    		 September
    30, 2023
    Net interest income $ 74,394 $ 71,502
    Provision for credit losses   1,505   2,957
    Other operating income   12,046   9,564
    Other operating expense   55,134   52,168
    Income before provision for income taxes   29,801   25,941
    Provision for income taxes   6,562   5,216
    Net income Community Banking segment $ 23,239 $ 20,725
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,574,135   5,688,687
    Diluted earnings per share $ 4.16 $ 3.64

    Home Mortgage Lending

    During the third quarter of 2024, mortgage loans funded for sale increased to $210.0 million, compared to $152.3 million in the second quarter of 2024, and $131.9 million in the third quarter of 2023.

    During the third quarter of 2024, the Bank purchased Residential Mortgage-originated loans of $38.1 million of which roughly two-thirds were jumbos and one-third were mortgages for second homes, with a weighted average interest rate of 6.59%, up from $29.2 million and 6.82% in the second quarter of 2024, and up from $21.6 million and 6.60% in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in mortgage loans funded for investment has increased net interest income in the Home Mortgage Lending segment. Net interest income contributed $2.9 million to total revenue in the third quarter of 2024, up from $2.8 million in the prior quarter, and up from $2.3 million in the third quarter a year ago.

    The Arizona, Colorado, and the Pacific Northwest mortgage expansion markets were responsible for 20% of Residential Mortgage’s $248 million total production in the third quarter of 2024, 22% of $182 million total production in the second quarter of 2024, and 8% of $153 million total production in the third quarter of 2023.

    The net change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights decreased mortgage banking income by $968,000 during the third quarter of 2024 compared to a decrease of $81,000 for the second quarter of 2024 and a decrease of $310,000 for the third quarter of 2023. Mortgage servicing revenue increased to $2.6 million in the third quarter of 2024 from $2.2 million in the prior quarter and from $2.4 million in the third quarter of 2023 due to an increase in production of Alaska Housing Finance Corporation (AHFC) mortgages, which contribute to servicing revenues at origination. In the third quarter of 2024, the Company’s servicing portfolio increased $64.8 million, which included $87.3 million in new mortgage loans, net of amortization and payoffs of $22.5 million as compared to a net increase of $41.8 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $58.2 million in the third quarter of 2023.

    As of September 30, 2024, Northrim serviced 4,187 loans in its $1.17 billion home-mortgage-servicing portfolio, a 6% increase compared to the $1.10 billion serviced as of the end of the second quarter of 2024, and a 19% increase from the $982.1 million serviced a year ago.

    The following tables provide highlights of the Home Mortgage Lending segment of Northrim:

      Three Months Ended  
        September       March 31,     December     September  
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)   30, 2024   June 30, 2024   2024     31, 2023     30, 2023  
    Mortgage commitments $77,591   $88,006   $56,208   $22,926   $50,128  
    Mortgage loans funded for sale $209,960   $152,339   $84,324   $79,742   $131,863  
    Mortgage loans funded for investment   38,087     29,175     17,403     27,114     21,585  
    Total mortgage loans funded $248,047   $181,514   $101,727   $106,856   $153,448  
    Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings   6 %   6 %   4 %   4 %   5 %
    Mortgage loans serviced for others $1,166,585   $1,101,800   $1,060,007   $1,044,516   $982,098  
    Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold $5,079   $3,188   $1,980   $1,462   $2,491  
    Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net   60     391     386     (296 )   (289 )
    Total production revenue   5,139     3,579     2,366     1,166     2,202  
    Mortgage servicing revenue   2,583     2,164     1,561     2,180     2,396  
    Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:                              
    Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions1   (566 )   239     289     (707 )   —  
    Other2   (402 )   (320 )   (314 )   (301 )   (310 )
    Total mortgage servicing revenue, net   1,615     2,083     1,536     1,172     2,086  
    Other mortgage banking revenue   293     222     129     99     117  
    Total mortgage banking income $7,047   $5,884   $4,031   $2,437   $4,405  
               
    Net interest income $2,941   $2,775   $2,232   $2,276   $2,300  
    Provision (benefit) for credit losses   571     64     (48 )   —     —  
    Mortgage banking income   7,047     5,884     4,031     2,437     4,405  
    Other operating expense   7,643     6,697     6,086     5,477     5,951  
    Income (loss) before provision for income taxes   1,774     1,898     225     (764 )   754  
    Provision (benefit) for income taxes   497     532     63     (215 )   182  
    Net income (loss) $1,277   $1,366   $162     ($549 ) $572  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,583,055     5,558,580     5,554,930     5,578,491     5,624,906  
    Diluted earnings per share $0.23   $0.25   $0.03     ($0.10 ) $0.09  

    1Principally reflects changes in discount rates and prepayment speed assumptions, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates.
    2Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.

      Year-to-date
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) September
    30, 2024    		 September
    30, 2023
    Mortgage loans funded for sale $446,623   $296,412  
    Mortgage loans funded for investment   84,665     119,144  
    Total mortgage loans funded $531,288   $415,556  
    Mortgage loan refinances to total fundings   6 %   5 %
             
    Net realized gains on mortgage loans sold $10,247   $6,366  
    Change in fair value of mortgage loan commitments, net   837     194  
    Total production revenue   11,084     6,560  
    Mortgage servicing revenue   6,308     5,188  
    Change in fair value of mortgage servicing rights:            
    Due to changes in model inputs of assumptions1   (38 )   (215 )
    Other2   (1,036 )   (1,464 )
    Total mortgage servicing revenue, net   5,234     3,509  
    Other mortgage banking revenue   644     257  
    Total mortgage banking income $16,962   $10,326  
    Net interest income $7,948   $5,022  
    Provision for credit losses   587     —  
    Mortgage banking income   16,962     10,326  
    Other operating expense   20,426     18,020  
    Income before provision for income taxes   3,897     (2,672 )
    Provision for income taxes   1,092     (728 )
    Net (loss) income Home Mortgage Lending segment $2,805     ($1,944 )
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,574,135     5,688,687  
    Diluted (loss) earnings per share $0.51     ($0.34 )


    1    Principally reflects changes in discount rates and prepayment speed assumptions, which are primarily affected by changes in interest rates.
    2Represents changes due to collection/realization of expected cash flows over time.

    Balance Sheet Review

    Northrim’s total assets were $2.96 billion at September 30, 2024, up 5% from the preceding quarter and up 6% from a year ago. Northrim’s loan-to-deposit ratio was 76% at September 30, 2024, consistent with 76% at June 30, 2024,
    and up from 71% at September 30, 2023.

    At September 30, 2024, our liquid assets, investments, and loans maturing within one year were $1.07 billion and our funds available for borrowing under our existing lines of credit were $641.7 million. Given these sources of liquidity and our expectations for customer demands for cash and for our operating cash needs, we believe our sources of liquidity to be sufficient for the foreseeable future.

    Average interest-earning assets were $2.67 billion in the third quarter of 2024, up 4% from $2.57 billion in the second quarter of 2024 and up 6% from $2.52 billion in the third quarter a year ago. The average yield on interest- earning assets was 5.92% in the third quarter of 2024, up from 5.83% in the preceding quarter and 5.48% in the third quarter a year ago.

    Average investment securities decreased to $619.0 million in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $640.0 million in the second quarter of 2024 and $715.8 million in the third quarter a year ago. The average net tax equivalent yield on the securities portfolio was 2.80% for the third quarter of 2024, down from 2.82% in the preceding quarter

    and up from 2.43% in the year ago quarter. The average estimated duration of the investment portfolio at September 30, 2024, was approximately 2.3 years compared to approximately 2.8 years at September 30, 2023. As of September 30, 2024, $105.1 million of available for sale securities with a weighted average yield of 0.61% are scheduled to mature in the next six months, $73.0 million with a weighted average yield of 2.48% are scheduled to mature in six months to one year, and $177.8 million with a weighted average yield of 1.31% are scheduled to mature in the following year, representing a total of $355.9 million or 13% of earning assets that are scheduled to mature in the next 24 months.

    Total unrealized losses, net of tax, on available for sale securities decreased by $7.6 million in the third quarter of 2024 resulting in total unrealized loss, net of tax, of $7.6 million compared to $15.2 million at June 30, 2024, and $26.5 million a year ago. The average maturity of the available for sale securities with the majority of the unrealized loss is 1.3 years. Total unrealized losses on held to maturity securities were $2.1 million at September 30, 2024, compared to $3.0 million at June 30, 2024, and $4.5 million a year ago.

    Average interest bearing deposits in other banks increased to $28.4 million in the third quarter of 2024 from $17.4 million in the second quarter of 2024 and decreased from $42.3 million in the third quarter of 2023, as deposit balances increased and cash was used to fund the loan growth and provide liquidity.

    Portfolio loans were $2.01 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from the preceding quarter and up 17% from a year ago. Portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, were $1.76 billion at September 30, 2024, up $105.2 million or 6% from the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. This increase was diversified throughout the loan portfolio including commercial real estate nonowner-occupied and multi-family loans increasing by $33.2 million, construction loans increasing by $31.4 million, and commercial real estate owner-occupied loans increasing $29.0 million from the preceding quarter. Average portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 were $1.93 billion, which was up 5% from the preceding quarter and up 14% from a year ago. Yields on average portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 increased to 6.91% from 6.87% in the second quarter and from 6.61% in the third quarter of 2023. The increase in the yield on portfolio loans in the third quarter of 2024 compared to the second quarter of 2024 and the third quarter a year ago is primarily due to loan repricing due to the increases in interest rates and new loans booked at higher rates due to changes in the interest rate environment. The yield on new portfolio loans, excluding consumer mortgage loans, was 7.43% in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to 8.26% in the second quarter of 2024 and 7.75% in the third quarter of 2023. The drop in yields on new loan production was largely related to the large volume of new commercial real estate versus commercial loans, as noted above, as well as slightly better credit quality of the loans originated in the third quarter of 2024.

    Alaskans continue to account for substantially all of Northrim’s deposit base. Total deposits were $2.63 billion at September 30, 2024, up 7% from $2.46 billion at June 30, 2024, and up 8% from $2.43 billion a year ago. “The increase in deposits in the third quarter of 2024 were consistent with our customers’ business cycles and a result of continued acquisition of new relationships,” said Ballard. At September 30, 2024, 73% of total deposits were held in business accounts and 27% of deposit balances were held in consumer accounts. Northrim had approximately 34,000 deposit customers with an average balance of $48,000 as of September 30, 2024. Northrim had 22 customers with balances over $10 million as of September 30, 2024, which accounted for $978.4 million, or 38%, of total deposits. Demand deposits increased by 8% from the prior quarter and decreased slightly year-over-year to
    $763.6 million at September 30, 2024. Demand deposits remained consistent at 29% of total deposits at both September 30, 2024 and June 30, 2024 down from 31% of total deposits at September 30, 2023. Average interest- bearing deposits were up 4% to $1.80 billion with an average cost of 2.24% in the third quarter of 2024, compared to $1.73 billion and an average cost of 2.21% in the second quarter of 2024, and up 11% compared to $1.62 billion and an average cost of 1.75% in the third quarter of 2023. Uninsured deposits totaled $1.12 billion or 43% of total deposits as of September 30, 2024 compared to $1.1 billion or 46% of total deposits as of December 31, 2022. Since interest rates began increasing in 2022, Northrim has taken a proactive, targeted approach to increase deposit rates.

    Shareholders’ equity was $260.1 million, or $47.27 book value per share, at September 30, 2024, compared to $247.2 million, or $44.93 book value per share, at June 30, 2024 and $225.3 million, or $40.60 book value per share, a year ago. Tangible book value per share* was $44.36 at September 30, 2024, compared to $42.03 at June

    30, 2024, and $37.72 per share a year ago. The increase in shareholders’ equity in the third quarter of 2024 as compared to the second quarter of 2024 was largely the result of earnings of $8.8 million and an increase in the fair value of the available for sale securities portfolio, which increased $7.6 million, net of tax, which were only partially offset by dividends paid of $3.4 million. The Company did not repurchase any shares of common stock in the third quarter of 2024 and has 110,000 shares remaining under the current share repurchase program as of September 30, 2024. Tangible common equity to tangible assets* was 8.28% as of September 30, 2024, compared to 8.24% as of June 30, 2024 and 7.54% as of September 30, 2023. Northrim continues to maintain capital levels in excess of the requirements to be categorized as “well-capitalized” with Tier 1 Capital to Risk Adjusted Assets of 11.53% at September 30, 2024, compared to 11.68% at June 30, 2024, and 11.67% at September 30, 2023.

    Asset Quality

    Northrim believes it has a consistent lending approach throughout economic cycles, which emphasizes appropriate loan-to-value ratios, adequate debt coverage ratios, and competent management.

    Nonperforming assets (“NPAs”) net of government guarantees were $5.3 million at September 30, 2024, up from $5.1 million at June 30, 2024 and $5.2 million a year ago. Of the NPAs at September 30, 2024, $3.0 million, or 61%, are nonaccrual loans related to three commercial relationships.

    Net adversely classified loans were $6.5 million at September 30, 2024, as compared to $7.1 million at June 30, 2024, and $7.3 million a year ago. Adversely classified loans are loans that Northrim has classified as substandard, doubtful, and loss, net of government guarantees. Net loan recoveries were $96,000 in the third quarter of 2024, compared to net loan recoveries of $26,000 in the second quarter of 2024, and net loan recoveries of $96,000 in the third quarter of 2023. Additionally, Northrim had 11 loan modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty totaling $3.1 million, net of government guarantees in the third quarter of 2024.

    Northrim had $127.4 million, or 6% of portfolio loans, in the Healthcare sector, $110.4 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Tourism sector, $96.6 million, or 5% of portfolio loans, in the Accommodations sector, $83.6 million, or 4% of portfolio loans, in the Fishing sector, $70.6 million, or 3% of portfolio loans, in the Aviation (non-tourism) sector, $67.7 million, or 3% of portfolio loans, in the Retail sector, and $53.1 million, or 3% in the Restaurants and Breweries sector as of September 30, 2024.

    Northrim estimates that $82.0 million, or approximately 4% of portfolio loans, had direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, as of September 30, 2024, and $1.6 million of these loans are adversely classified. As of September 30, 2024, Northrim has an additional $29.7 million in unfunded commitments to companies with direct exposure to the oil and gas industry in Alaska, and no unfunded commitments on adversely classified loans. Northrim defines direct exposure to the oil and gas sector as loans to borrowers that provide oilfield services and other companies that have been identified as significantly reliant upon activity in Alaska related to the oil and gas industry, such as lodging, equipment rental, transportation and other logistics services specific to this industry.

    About Northrim BanCorp

    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. is the parent company of Northrim Bank, an Alaska-based community bank with 20 branches in Anchorage, Eagle River, the Matanuska Valley, the Kenai Peninsula, Juneau, Fairbanks, Nome, Kodiak, Ketchikan, and Sitka, serving 90% of Alaska’s population; and an asset-based lending division in Washington; and a wholly-owned mortgage brokerage company, Residential Mortgage Holding Company, LLC. The Bank differentiates itself with its detailed knowledge of Alaska’s economy and its “Customer First Service” philosophy. Pacific Wealth Advisors, LLC is an affiliated company of Northrim BanCorp.

    www.northrim.com

    Forward-Looking Statement

    This release may contain “forward-looking statements” as that term is defined for purposes of Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. These statements are, in effect, management’s attempt to predict future events, and thus are subject to various risks and uncertainties. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s views only as of the date hereof. All statements, other than statements of historical fact, regarding our financial position, business strategy, management’s plans and objectives for future operations are forward-looking statements. When used in this report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “expect,” and “intend” and words or phrases of similar meaning, as they relate to Northrim and its management are intended to help identify forward-looking statements. Although we believe that management’s expectations as reflected in forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot assure readers that those expectations will prove to be correct. Forward-looking statements, are subject to various risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially and adversely from our expectations as indicated in the forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties include: potential further increases in interest rates; the value of securities held in our investment portfolio; the impact of the results of government initiatives on the regulatory landscape, natural resource extraction industries, and capital markets; the impact of declines in the value of commercial and residential real estate markets, high unemployment rates, inflationary pressures and slowdowns in economic growth; changes in banking regulation or actions by bank regulators; inflation, supply-chain constraints, and potential geopolitical instability, including the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East; financial stress on borrowers (consumers and businesses) as a result of higher rates or an uncertain economic environment; the general condition of, and changes in, the Alaska economy; our ability to maintain or expand our market share or net interest margin; the sufficiency of our provision for credit losses and the accuracy of the assumptions or estimates used in preparing our financial statements, including those related to current expected credit losses accounting guidance; our ability to maintain asset quality; our ability to implement our marketing and growth strategies; our ability to identify and address cyber-security risks, including security breaches, “denial of service attacks,” “hacking,” and identity theft; disease outbreaks; and our ability to execute our business plan. Further, actual results may be affected by competition on price and other factors with other financial institutions; customer acceptance of new products and services; the regulatory environment in which we operate; and general trends in the local, regional and national banking industry and economy. In addition, there are risks inherent in the banking industry relating to collectability of loans and changes in interest rates. Many of these risks, as well as other risks that may have a material adverse impact on our operations and business, are identified in the “Risk Factors” section of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2023, and from time to time are disclosed in our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. However, you should be aware that these factors are not an exhaustive list, and you should not assume these are the only factors that may cause our actual results to differ from our expectations. These forward- looking statements are made only as of the date of this release, and Northrim does not undertake any obligation to release revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or conditions after the date of this release.

    References:

    https://www.bea.gov/

    http://almis.labor.state.ak.us/

    http://www.tax.alaska.gov/programs/oil/prevailing/ans.aspx

    http://www.tax.state.ak.us/

    www.mba.org

    https://www.alaskarealestate.com/MLSMember/RealEstateStatistics.aspx

    https://www.capitaliq.spglobal.com/web/client?auth=inherit&overridecdc=1&#markets/indexFinancials


    Income     Statement

    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data) Three Months Ended Year-t o-date
    (Unaudited) September 30, June 30, September 30, September 30, September 30,
        2024   2024     2023     2024     2023  
    Interest Income:                  
    Interest and fees on loans $34,863 $32,367   $29,097   $97,680   $79,104  
    Interest on portfolio investments   4,164   4,310     4,727     12,994     14,018  
    Interest on deposits in banks   389   232     584     1,459     2,901  
    Total interest income   39,416   36,909     34,408     112,133     96,023  
    Interest Expense:                            
    Interest expense on deposits   10,123   9,476     7,138     28,779     17,835  
    Interest expense on borrowings   451   380     920     1,012     1,664  
    Total interest expense   10,574   9,856     8,058     29,791     19,499  
    Net interest income   28,842   27,053     26,350     82,342     76,524  
    (Benefit) provision for credit losses   2,063   (120 )   1,190     2,092     2,957  
    Net interest income after provision for credit losses   26,779   27,173     25,160     80,250     73,567  
    Other Operating Income:                             
    Mortgage banking income   7,047   5,884     4,405     16,962     10,326  
    Bankcard fees   1,196   1,105     1,022     3,218     2,916  
    Purchased receivable income   1,033   1,242     1,180     3,620     3,175  
    Service charges on deposit accounts   605   572     550     1,726     1,512  
    Unrealized gain (loss) on marketable equity securities   576   (60 )   12     830     (445 )
    Other income   1,130   834     833     2,652     2,406  
    Total other operating income   11,587   9,577     8,002     29,008     19,890  
    Other Operating Expense:                            
    Salaries and other personnel expense   17,549   16,627     15,657     49,593     46,324  
    Data processing expense   2,618   2,601     2,589     7,878     7,321  
    Occupancy expense   1,911   1,843     1,857     5,716     5,611  
    Professional and outside services   903   726     803     2,384     2,326  
    Marketing expense   860   690     499     2,063     1,996  
    Insurance expense   596   692     640     2,067     1,844  
    OREO expense, net rental income and gains on sale   2   2     (784 )   (387 )   (766 )
    Intangible asset amortization expense   —   —     4     —     11  
    Other operating expense   2,289   2,013     1,631     6,246     5,521  
    Total other operating expense   26,728   25,194     22,896     75,560     70,188  
                                 
    Income before provision for income taxes   11,638   11,556     10,266     33,698     23,269  
    Provision for income taxes   2,813   2,536     1,892     7,654     4,488  
    Net income $8,825 $9,020   $8,374   $26,044   $18,781  
    Basic EPS $1.60 $1.64   $1.50   $4.73   $3.34  
    Diluted EPS $1.57 $1.62   $1.48   $4.67   $3.30  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, basic   5,501,943   5,500,588     5,569,238     5,500,703     5,630,948  
    Weighted average shares outstanding, diluted   5,583,055   5,558,580     5,624,906     5,574,135     5,688,687  
    Balance Sheet
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)    		 September 30, June 30, September 30,
        2024     2024     2023  
    Assets:            
    Cash and due from banks $42,805   $33,364   $31,276  
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks   60,071     21,058     79,952  
    Investment securities available for sale, at fair value   545,210     584,964     652,150  
    Investment securities held to maturity   36,750     36,750     36,750  
    Marketable equity securities, at fair value   12,957     12,381     10,615  
    Investment in Federal Home Loan Bank stock   4,318     4,929     6,334  
    Loans held for sale   97,937     85,926     63,151  
                       
    Portfolio loans   2,007,565     1,875,907     1,720,091  
    Allowance for credit losses, loans   (19,528 )   (17,694 )   (16,491 )
    Net portfolio loans   1,988,037     1,858,213     1,703,600  
    Purchased receivables, net   23,564     25,722     34,578  
    Mortgage servicing rights, at fair value   21,570     21,077     19,396  
    Other real estate owned, net   —     —     150  
    Premises and equipment, net   39,625     40,393     40,920  
    Lease right of use asset   7,616     8,244     9,673  
    Goodwill and intangible assets   15,967     15,967     15,973  
    Other assets   66,965     72,680     85,671  
    Total assets $2,963,392   $2,821,668   $2,790,189  
    Liabilities:            
    Demand deposits $763,595   $704,471   $764,647  
    Interest-bearing demand   979,238     906,010     875,814  
    Savings deposits   245,043     238,156     265,799  
    Money market deposits   201,821     195,159     230,814  
    Time deposits   435,870     420,010     290,856  
    Total deposits   2,625,567     2,463,806     2,427,930  
    Other borrowings   13,354     43,961     63,781  
    Junior subordinated debentures   10,310     10,310     10,310  
    Lease liability   7,635     8,269     9,673  
    Other liabilities   46,476     48,122     53,236  
    Total liabilities   2,703,342     2,574,468     2,564,930  
    Shareholders’ Equity:                  
    Total shareholders’ equity   260,050     247,200     225,259  
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $2,963,392   $2,821,668   $2,790,189  

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Composition of Portfolio Loans

        September 30,
    2024    		 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024 December 31,
    2023    		 September 30,
    2023
      Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total
    Commercial loans $492,414   24 % $495,781   26 % $475,220   26 % $486,057   27 % $492,145   28 %
    Commercial real estate:                    
    Owner occupied properties   412,827   20 %   383,832   20 %   372,507   20 %   368,357   20 %   359,019   21 %
    Nonowner occupied and                    
    multifamily properties   584,302   31 %   551,130   30 %   529,904   30 %   519,115   30 %   509,939   30 %
    Residential real estate:                    
    1-4 family properties                    
    secured by first liens   248,514   12 %   222,026   12 %   218,552   12 %   203,534   11 %   180,719   10 %
    1-4 family properties                    
    secured by junior liens &                    
    revolving secured by first liens   45,262   2 %   41,258   2 %   35,460   2 %   33,783   2 %   27,342   2 %
    1-4 family construction   39,794   2 %   29,510   2 %   27,751   2 %   31,239   2 %   32,374   2 %
    Construction loans   185,362   9 %   154,009   8 %   153,537   8 %   149,788   8 %   120,909   7 %
    Consumer loans   7,836   — %   6,679   — %   6,444   — %   6,180   — %   5,930   — %
    Subtotal   2,016,311       1,884,225       1,819,375       1,798,053       1,728,377    
    Unearned loan fees, net   (8,746 )     (8,318 )     (8,240 )     (8,556 )     (8,286 )  
    Total portfolio loans $2,007,565     $1,875,907     $1,811,135     $1,789,497     $1,720,091    


    Composition     of Deposits

      September 30, 2024 June 30, 2024 March 31, 2024 December 31, 2023 September 30, 2023
      Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total    		 Balance % of
    total
    Demand deposits $763,595 29 % $704,471 29 % $714,244 29 % $749,683 31 % $764,647 31 %
    Interest-bearing demand   979,238 37 %   906,010 36 %   889,581 37 %   927,291 37 %   875,814 36 %
    Savings deposits   245,043 9 %   238,156 10 %   246,902 10 %   255,338 10 %   265,799 11 %
    Money market deposits   201,821 8 %   195,159 8 %   209,785 9 %   221,492 9 %   230,814 10 %
    Time deposits   435,870 17 %   420,010 17 %   373,571 15 %   331,251 13 %   290,856 12 %
    Total deposits $2,625,567   $2,463,806   $2,434,083   $2,485,055   $2,427,930  

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Asset Quality   

        September 30,
    2024     		   June 30,
    2024    		   September 30,
    2023    		  
    Nonaccrual loans $4,944   $4,830   $6,492  
    Loans 90 days past due and accruing   17   17   28  
    Total nonperforming loans   4,961   4,847   6,520  
    Nonperforming loans guaranteed by government   —   —   (1,455)  
    Net nonperforming loans   4,961   4,847   5,065  
    Other real estate owned —   —   150  
    Repossessed assets 297   297   —  
    Net nonperforming assets $5,258   $5,144   $5,215  
    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans   0.25 %  0.26 % 0.29 %
    Nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees   0.26 % 0.28 % 0.31 %
    Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets   0.18 % 0.18 %  0.19 %
    Nonperforming assets, net of government guarantees / total assets net of government guarantees   0.19 % 0.19 %  0.19 %
    Adversely classified loans, net of government guarantees $6,503   $7,068   $7,250  
    Special mention loans, net of government guarantees $9,641   $8,902   $5,457  
    Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans   0.08 % 0.03 % — % 
    Loans 30-89 days past due and accruing, net of government guarantees / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees   0.09 % 0.04 %  — %
    Allowance for credit losses / portfolio loans   0.97 %  0.94 % 0.96 %
    Allowance for credit losses / portfolio loans, net of government guarantees   1.04 %  1.01 %  1.02 %
    Allowance for credit losses / nonperforming loans, net of government guarantees   394 % 365 %  326 %
    Gross loan charge-offs for the quarter $15   $—   $91  
    Gross loan recoveries for the quarter   ($111)   ($26)   ($187)  
    Net loan (recoveries) charge-offs for the quarter   ($96)   ($26)   ($96)  
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) year-to-date   ($164)   ($68)   ($134)  
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) for the quarter / average loans, for the quarter   —  %  —  %  (0.01) % 
    Net loan charge-offs (recoveries) year-to-date / average loans, year-to-date annualized   (0.01) %  (0.01)  %  (0.01) % 
           

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands)
    (Unaudited)

    Average Balances, Yields, and Rates                

      Three Months Ended
      September 30, 2024   June 30, 2024   September 30, 2023  
      Average Balance Average
    Tax
    Equivalent
    Yield/Rate    		 Average
    Balance    		 Average
    Tax
    Equivalent
    Yield/Rate    		 Average
    Balance    		 Average
    Tax
    Equivalent
    Yield/Rate
    Assets            
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks $ 28,409   5.28 % $ 17,352   5.27 % $ 42,273   5.39 %
    Portfolio investments   619,012   2.80 %   639,980   2.82 %   715,767   2.43 %
    Loans held for sale   93,689   6.20 %   65,102   6.08 %   62,350   6.34 %
    Portfolio loans   1,933,181   6.91 %   1,845,832   6.87 %   1,695,736   6.61 %
    Total interest-earning assets   2,674,291   5.92 %   2,568,266   5.83 %   2,516,126   5.48 %
    Nonearning assets   196,266       204,509       205,770    
    Total assets $ 2,870,557     $ 2,772,775     $ 2,721,896    

    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity

    		            
    Interest-bearing deposits $ 1,796,107   2.24 % $ 1,725,013   2.21 % $ 1,619,478   1.75 %
    Borrowings   43,555   4.07 %   38,390   3.92 %   76,681   4.73 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   1,839,662   2.29 %   1,763,403   2.25 %   1,696,159   1.88 %
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits   722,000       706,339       747,147    
    Other liabilities   52,387       58,549       52,078    
    Shareholders’ equity   256,508       244,484       226,512    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $ 2,870,557     $ 2,772,775     $ 2,721,896    
    Net spread   3.63 %   3.58 %   3.60 %
    NIM   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.15 %
    NIMTE*   4.35 %   4.30 %   4.21 %
    Cost of funds   1.64 %   1.60 %   1.31 %
    Average portfolio loans to average            
    interest-earning assets   72.29 %     71.87 %     67.39 %  
    Average portfolio loans to average total deposits   76.77 %     75.92 %     71.65 %  
    Average non-interest deposits to average            
    total deposits   28.67 %     29.05 %     31.57 %  
    Average interest-earning assets to average            
    interest-bearing liabilities   145.37 %     145.64 %     148.34 %  

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands) (Unaudited)

    Average Balances, Yields, and Rates        

      Year-to-date
      September 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
      Average Average
    Tax Equivalent    		   Average Average
    Tax Equivalent
    Balance Yield/Rate   Balance Yield/Rate
    Assets          
    Interest bearing deposits in other banks $35,747   5.34 %   $79,362   4.82 %
    Portfolio investments   643,221   2.82 %     723,693   2.41 %
    Loans held for sale   63,917   6.14 %     40,433   6.06 %
    Portfolio loans   1,857,756   6.85 %     1,608,293   6.46 %
    Total interest-earning assets   2,600,641   5.81 %     2,451,781   5.30 %
    Nonearning assets   200,619         192,430    
    Total assets $2,801,260       $2,644,211    

    Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity

    		          
    Interest-bearing deposits $1,751,179   2.20 %   $1,577,308   1.51 %
    Borrowings   35,327   3.76 %     52,075   4.23 %
    Total interest-bearing liabilities   1,786,506   2.23 %     1,629,383   1.60 %
    Noninterest-bearing demand deposits   711,197         746,251    
    Other liabilities   57,097         42,596    
    Shareholders’ equity   246,460         225,981    
    Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity $2,801,260       $2,644,211    
    Net spread   3.58 %     3.70 %
    NIM   4.23 %     4.17 %
    NIMTE*   4.29 %     4.24 %
    Cost of funds   1.59 %     1.10 %
    Average portfolio loans to average interest-earning assets   71.43 %       65.60 %  
    Average portfolio loans to average total deposits   75.45 %       69.22 %  
    Average non-interest deposits to average total deposits   28.88 %       32.12 %  
    Average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities   145.57 %       150.47 %  

    Additional Financial Information
    (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Capital Data (At quarter end)

         
                September 30, 2024       June 30, 2024   September 30, 2023
    Book value per share           $47.27   $44.93   $40.60  
    Tangible book value per share*           $44.36   $42.03   $37.72  
    Total shareholders’ equity/total assets           8.78 %  8.76 %    8.07  %
    Tangible Common Equity/Tangible Assets*           8.28 %  8.24 %    7.54  %
    Tier 1 Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets           11.53 %  11.68 %    11.67  %
    Total Capital / Risk Adjusted Assets           12.50 %  12.58 %    12.58  %
    Tier 1 Capital / Average Assets           9.08 %  9.17 %    9.02  %
    Shares outstanding           5,501,943   5,501,562     5,548,436  
    Total unrealized loss on AFS debt securities, net of income taxes           ($7,617)   ($15,197)     ($26,526 )
    Total unrealized gain on derivatives and hedging activities, net of
    income taxes    		           $863   $1,212   $1,485  
         
    Profitability Ratios    
        September 30, 
    2024    		   June 30,
    2024    		   March 31, 
    2024    		   December 31, 2023   September 30,
    2023

    For the quarter:

    		    
    NIM         4.29%   4.24%   4.16%   4.06%     4.15%  
    NIMTE*         4.35%   4.30%   4.22%   4.12%     4.21%  
    Efficiency ratio         66.11%   68.78%   68.93%   72.21%     66.64%  
    Return on average assets         1.22%   1.31%   1.19%   0.93%     1.22%  
    Return on average equity         13.69%   14.84%   13.84%   11.36%     14.67%  
      September 30,   September 30,  
    2024   2023
    Year-to-date:      
    NIM 4.23 % 4.17 %
    NIMTE* 4.29 % 4.24 %
    Efficiency ratio 67.86 % 72.79 %
    Return on average assets 1.24 % 0.95 %
    Return on average equity 14.12 % 11.11 %


    *Non-GAAP     Financial Measures
    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data) (Unaudited)

    Non-GAAP financial measures have inherent limitations, are not required to be uniformly applied, and are not audited. Although we believe these non-GAAP financial measures are frequently used by stakeholders in the evaluation of the Company, they have limitations as analytical tools and should not be considered in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of results as reported under GAAP.

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis

    Net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis (“NIMTE”) is a non-GAAP performance measurement in which interest income on non-taxable investments and loans is presented on a tax equivalent basis using a combined federal and state statutory rate of 28.43% in both 2024 and 2023. The most comparable GAAP measure is net interest margin and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of NIMTE to net interest margin for the periods indicated.

      Three Months Ended
        September 30,       March 31,     December     September 30,  
        2024   June 30, 2024   2024     31, 2023     2023  
    Net interest income $28,842   $27,053   $26,447   $26,732   $26,350  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets   2,674,291     2,568,266     2,558,558     2,612,297     2,516,126  
    Net interest margin (“NIM”)2   4.29 %   4.24 %   4.16 %   4.06 %   4.15 %
    Net interest income $28,842   $27,053   $26,447   $26,732   $26,350  
    Plus: reduction in tax expense related to
    tax-exempt interest income    		   385     378     379     374     373  
        $29,227     $27,431     $26,826     $27,106     $26,723  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets NIMTE2   2,674,291     2,568,266     2,558,558     2,612,297     2,516,126  
        4.35 %   4.30 %   4.22 %   4.12 %   4.21 %
      Year-to-date
      September 30, September 30,
      2024     2023  
    Net interest income $82,342   $76,524  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets   2,600,641     2,451,781  
    Net interest margin (“NIM”)3   4.23 %   4.17 %
    Net interest income
    Plus: reduction in tax expense related to    		 $82,342   $76,524  
    tax-exempt interest income   1,142     1,202  
      $83,484   $77,726  
    Divided by average interest-bearing assets   2,600,641     2,451,781  
    NIMTE3   4.29 %   4.24 %


    2    Calculated using actual days in the quarter divided by 366 for the quarters ended in 2024 and 365 for the quarters ended in 2023, respectively.

    3Calculated using actual days in the year divided by 366 for year-to-date period in 2024 and 365 for year-to-date period in 2023, respectively.


    *Non-GAAP Financial Measures
    (Dollars and shares in thousands, except per share data)
    (Unaudited)

    Tangible Book Value Per Share

    Tangible book value per share is a non-GAAP measure defined as shareholders’ equity, less intangible assets, divided by shares outstanding. The most comparable GAAP measure is book value per share and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible book value per share and book value per share for the periods indicated.

        September 30, 
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31, 
    2024    		   December
    31, 2023    		   September 30,
    2023
    Total shareholders’ equity $260,050 $247,200 $239,327 $234,718 $225,259
    Divided by shares outstanding   5,502   5,502   5,500   5,513   5,548
    Book value per share $47.27 $44.93 $43.52 $42.57 $40.60
        September 30, 
    2024    		   June 30, 2024   March 31, 
    2024    		   December
    31, 2023    		   September 30,
    2023
    Total shareholders’ equity $260,050 $247,200 $239,327 $234,718 $225,259
    Less: goodwill and intangible assets   15,967   15,967   15,967   15,967   15,973
      $244,083 $231,233 $223,360 $218,751 $209,286
    Divided by shares outstanding   5,502   5,502   5,500   5,513   5,548
    Tangible book value per share $44.36 $42.03 $40.61 $39.68 $37.72


    Tangible     Common Equity to Tangible Assets

    Tangible common equity to tangible assets is a non-GAAP ratio that represents total equity less goodwill and intangible assets divided by total assets less goodwill and intangible assets. The most comparable GAAP measure of shareholders’ equity to total assets is calculated by dividing total shareholders’ equity by total assets and the following table sets forth the reconciliation of tangible common equity to tangible assets and shareholders’ equity to total assets.

    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. September 30,     March 31,   December September 30,
      2024 June 30, 2024   2024     31, 2023     2023  
    Total shareholders’ equity $260,050 $247,200 $239,327   $234,718   $225,259  
    Total assets 2,963,392 2,821,668   2,759,560     2,807,497     2,790,189  
    Total shareholders’ equity to total assets 8.78 % 8.76 %   8.67 %   8.36 %   8.07 %
    Northrim BanCorp, Inc. September 30,   March 31, December September 30,
      2024 June 30, 2024   2024     31, 2023     2023  
    Total shareholders’ equity $260,050 $247,200 $239,327   $234,718   $225,259  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net 15,967 15,967   15,967     15,967     15,973  
    Tangible common shareholders’ equity $244,083 $231,233 $223,360   $218,751   $209,286  
    Total assets $2,963,392 $2,821,668 $2,759,560   $2,807,497   $2,790,189  
    Less: goodwill and other intangible assets, net 15,967 15,967   15,967     15,967     15,973  
    Tangible assets $2,947,425 $2,805,701 $2,743,593   $2,791,530   $2,774,216  
    Tangible common equity ratio 8.28 % 8.24 %   8.14 %   7.84 %   7.54 %

    Note Transmitted on GlobeNewswire on October 23, 2024, at 2:30 pm Alaska Standard Time.

       
    Contact: Mike Huston, President, CEO, and COO
      (907) 261-8750
      Jed Ballard, Chief Financial Officer
      (907) 261-3539

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-Evening Report: We tried a different preschool curriculum to prevent youth crime. Checking in 20 years later, it worked

    Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jacqueline Allen, Senior Lecturer, Griffith University

    Shutterstock

    There’s been an increased political and media focus recently on so-called youth crime waves, particularly in Queensland and the Northern Territory.

    This has unfortunately led to crackdowns from governments and police. Young people in Alice Springs have been subject to curfews.

    Queensland Opposition Leader David Crisafulli (who’s ahead in the polls ahead of this weekend’s election) has suggested young people found guilty of some crimes should be sentenced as adults.

    But punitive youth crime policies violate children’s human rights and are an expensive way of making the community less safe. It’s much better to stop youth crime before it starts by supporting children’s positive development in early childhood.

    In a new evaluation published today, we found a preschool program reduced the amount of young people before the courts by more than 50%. When the right family support was provided too, the chances of the children committing crimes were even lower.

    Our original study

    Early community-based crime prevention strategies have been greatly neglected in Australia. This is despite international evidence and the recommendations of a widely circulated 1999 Commonwealth government report.

    Scientific evidence has been accumulating for more than 50 years that shows the root causes of serious youth crime can be addressed in early childhood through prevention initiatives. The most famous example is the Perry Preschool Project, implemented in a disadvantaged area of Michigan in the early 1960s.

    In Australia, the Pathways to Prevention Project operated in a disadvantaged, multicultural region of Brisbane from 2002 to 2011.

    It was a collaboration between Griffith University, the Queensland Department of Education, and national community agency Mission Australia.

    The children in the study learned communication skills through reading and games.
    Shutterstock

    The project aimed to improve child and youth outcomes by partnering with local preschools, schools, families and community organisations.

    In 2002 and 2003, 214 four-year-old children attending two local preschools received an enhanced program focused on communication skills. This is called an “enriched preschool program”.

    It was integrated into the standard curriculum and delivered by specialist teachers working with the children’s classroom teachers and their parents.

    Evidence at the time showed communication skills were directly linked to success at school. They were also linked to to success in life through improved behaviour and enhanced social skills.

    The communication program brought children together in small groups with similar levels of language competence. The groups were balanced in terms of gender and cultural background. They completed carefully curated activities including games, bookmaking and reading.

    Reading was a large part of the enriched preschool curriculum.
    Shutterstock

    These provided children with the opportunity to extend and practice oral language skills in ways that were personally meaningful. These activities were led by the specialist teachers who had postgraduate qualifications in communication and oral language development.

    The specialist teachers engaged parents and children in joint activities, and actively supported reading and language activities at home. By year one, children who received the communication curriculum had better language proficiency, social skills, classroom behaviour and academic achievement than children in the other preschools.

    The children’s families could also access practical support from community workers from their own cultural background. This included parenting education, advocacy with government agencies and counselling. This continued until 2011.

    What’s new?

    Earlier evaluations showed the enhanced curriculum helped improve children’s readiness for school, among a range of other benefits. Now we’ve evaluated the success of the program over the long term.

    Using anonymised data-linkage procedures, we followed up the students who received the enhanced curriculum back in 2002 to see what’s happened since.

    Children who received the enhanced curriculum had improved classroom behaviour throughout primary school. They were also 56% less likely to be involved in serious youth crime by age 17.



    Read more:
    Is Australia in the grips of a youth crime crisis? This is what the data says

    Remarkably, our evaluation found none of the children whose families also received support in the preschool years went on to offend.

    The full Pathways Program was implemented widely in the community over a ten-year period, so we thought it might have had an impact more broadly.

    We looked at the rate of youth offending in the region in the years 2008–16, when members of the 2002–03 preschool cohort were between 10 and 17 years old. It was 20% lower in this region than in other Queensland regions at the same low socioeconomic level.

    How does this lead to less youth crime?

    Programs like this work by levelling the playing field and improving the lives of children early in their developmental pathways. Developmental pathways are events and experiences that follow on from each other, or cascade, across the course of life.

    For instance, a difficult transition to school increases the likelihood of poor engagement and academic problems. These are well-known risk factors for antisocial behaviour.

    The long-term impact of Pathways to Prevention on youth offending means it could be a model for similar programs across Australia.

    This is especially the case given our nation’s chronic under-investment in community-based developmental crime prevention. We need more programs in disadvantaged communities that are open to everyone and don’t stigmatise people.

    Overwhelmingly, efforts across the country are devoted to early intervention with children identified as “at risk” in some way (such as showing disruptive behaviour), or to the treatment of young people who become enmeshed in the youth justice system.

    In Queensland, there is an over-reliance on youth detention, which is often very harmful for children and of no preventative value.

    Using Pathways as a model for other communities doesn’t necessarily mean exactly replicating what we did (though this is also important). Any early prevention initiative will have the best chance of success if it includes evidence-based strategies that improve children’s life chances.

    These can be implemented cost-effectively through existing systems including preschools, schools and primary care. Ideally, they should operate through local partnerships involved at all stages of planning, data collection, implementation and evaluation.

    Jacqueline Allen received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants.

    Kate Freiberg holds an unpaid position at RealWell and received funding from the Australian Research Council and the Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants.

    Emeritus Professor Ross Homel received funding from the Australian Research Council, Australian Institute of Criminology Research Grants, the Queensland Government and the John Barnes Foundation. He is affiliated with the Justice Reform Initiative as a Queensland Patron and provides honorary research support to RealWell Pty Ltd.

    – ref. We tried a different preschool curriculum to prevent youth crime. Checking in 20 years later, it worked – https://theconversation.com/we-tried-a-different-preschool-curriculum-to-prevent-youth-crime-checking-in-20-years-later-it-worked-235888

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Minister Shorten interview on 3AW Radio Melbourne with Tom Elliott

    Source: Ministers for Social Services

    E&OE TRANSCRIPT

    SUBJECTS: Melbourne Water flood rezoning in Kensington Banks; future of the NDIS

    TOM ELLIOTT, HOST: So, a couple of years ago there were those terrible floods in mainly, well, it was all up and down the Maribyrnong River, but particularly in Kensington. There was a group of, or there was a bit of land that had previously been considered flood prone and then it wasn’t, so people built houses on it. And then during the floods, hundreds of houses got badly flooded. And these people now face a future where if they want to sell their house, well, it’s going to be very difficult because it’s now a declared flood zone. If they say no, it will stay, but we need to insure our house against future floods, well, that would be hideously expensive because we’ve already had a flood. It’s not dissimilar to suddenly having, you know, having a fire, a bushfire, and your house is suddenly declared to be in a bushfire zone when it wasn’t previously in a bushfire zone. Our next guest is a Member for Maribyrnong. He’s also the Minister for the NDIS in the Federal government, Bill Shorten, good morning.

    BILL SHORTEN, MINISTER FOR THE NDIS AND GOVERNMENT SERVICES: Good morning, Tom.

    ELLIOTT: So, I got this right. We’ve got a group of your constituents who are in flood damaged homes and see no way out.

    SHORTEN: Yeah, listen in June of this year, Melbourne Water had been doing some modelling about increased flood risk. And the great irony is sometimes in the west and the northwest of Melbourne, we feel we get things last compared to the Southeast, whether or not that’s true, it’s sometimes how we feel. But Melbourne Water very kindly decided to evaluate the flood risk in the Maribyrnong and before other parts of Melbourne and residents in Kensington, and Freshwater on the other side of the Maribyrnong, who bought in good faith land and houses, put their investment, their single most important investment, discovered on about 17 June, sometimes just through the media reporting, not even, you know, advance notice, that the rules had changed all of a sudden that their houses were in flood risk areas.

    I want to be very clear. We should look after all Australians who are in, you know, bushfires or flood risk areas. But these residents did the due diligence and Kensington Banks did not have the flood rating that it’s now got. Now, the flood ratings, we’ve got to deal with truth. If because of climate change or other reasons, there’s an increased flood rating, that’s a development, the science is the science. But what’s happened since June is that Melbourne Water, in my opinion, has been singularly deficient in the way in which they communicate with the residents whose lives they’ve changed. They’ve got people have got to think about what does it mean for their safety, but I think more practically their house values, the cost of insurance. And I held a public meeting Tuesday night, the local state member for Melbourne was there, Ellen Sandell, Daniel Mulino, who covers some of the federal turf on the other side of the river. We got the head of the Insurance Council of Australia there, we’ve got the Coordinator General, the National Emergency Management Authority. Melbourne Water had said they were coming, but then they thought it was all too political, so they didn’t turn up on the panel. You can’t keep people in the dark, Tom. You’ve got to tell them the truth.

    ELLIOTT: So, okay, so there’s a short and a long-term issue I’m seeing here. So, on one hand you hold a public meeting to try and talk reasonably and responsibly about this changing of the flood rating and Melbourne Water, which has the power to do things about it, doesn’t show up. So, that’s one issue. The second issue, long term, is there something that Melbourne Water could do to try and offset the flood risk? Because, I mean, I look at Flemington and the VRC. I mean, several years ago they built a giant wall, which meant that they’re sort of, they seem to be immune from floods now. Could something like that be done?

    SHORTEN: Yes. The short answer, yes. I was able to get the Water Minister, Harriet Shing, on the phone when I realised Melbourne Water had just pulled the plug at short notice. She made them turn up, but at least they turned up and sat up the back and took some notes. So, there was some poor old Melbourne Water staff there, but they were let down by their leadership. So, the short-term issue is when you give the community a major development, major news, which is like your house values are tanked at the moment until we get mitigation strategies in place, you don’t get to be the only people who call the shots. The community have a say, they have a voice.

    And the point about this is the people, they’re not sort of, this is not some radical issue. This is your own home. A statutory authority said, hello, your own home, the value of it, we’re going to make a decision based on science and it affects your home value. But what’s happened is Melbourne Water think that they’re the only experts on consultation, so they’ve got their processes. I’m not saying they haven’t done anything. They put out a leaflet telling people how to floodproof their kitchens. You know, like, that’s not a strategy.

    To go to the long-term question, you’re asking. I’ve been the Insurance Minister in Australia. I’ve seen what we’re able to do at Roma and where you build levies, mitigate, I’ve seen what’s happened in Launceston with a Tamar, when you build levies, it works. But Melbourne Water’s sort of got their own secret squirrel process on what they’re going to do and their options, and they’re keeping residents in the dark. I don’t think they’re adequately talking to the Federal Government or council and I’m just calling out an arrogant statutory body who thinks that somehow, they’re above talking to people on any other terms other than the rules they set.

    ELLIOTT: So, is it possible that Melbourne Water behind the scenes, will agree to build some sort of a wall or a levee? Or are they just saying, no, no, no, the river, we have to let the river do what the river wants to do or what?

    SHORTEN: No, I think they’ve put out a tender, not that anyone else has seen the terms of reference, to look at mitigation options. The thing is, it’s now been four months. Melbourne Water’s moving to the beat of their own drum, to the beat of their own clock. That’s not satisfactory. The residents, the people who are affected, have been kept in limbo and stressed for four months. When the local elected representatives call a meeting, which the statutory body, Melbourne Water, says they’re coming to, then they pull out at the last minute because they think it’s political, when you – statutory bodies are not above dealing with the rest of us. So, I’m filthy at the way Melbourne Water’s handled the consultation so far. Their leadership need to get their head out of their bottom and start talking to people not just in the way they want to, but in the way that people need to be involved in.

    ELLIOTT: Well, I’ll tell you what, we will get in touch with Melbourne Water and just see if we can perhaps expedite that process a bit. Tell me, I mean, your constituents are affected. It must be, you know, like a man’s house is his castle and all that sort of thing. But to not know the future of hundreds of properties, like, are we going to be permanently flood prone or is a wall going to be built? Or if we sell, do we take a massive loss? I mean, that must be making life very difficult for some people.

    SHORTEN: It is very stressful for people. I actually think the Kensington Banks residents have been remarkably reasonable. I mean, they’re toey, toeier than a Roman sandal. I get that. But they’ve been more reasonable than I think maybe you or I would be in the same circumstances. Melbourne Water just has to change their approach. They can’t – you know, no more control freak behaviour. They’ve got to set up an advisory board, all levels of government, you know, down there, you know, there’s public transport, railway bridges, there’s industry that are affected. You’ve got to get those; you’ve got to get the community there. There’s got to be full transparency on the modelling. What are the terms of reference? I mean, floods are not new in Australia.

    ELLIOTT: No.

    SHORTEN: In Lismore where unfortunately they get a lot of floods, they’ve got this Northern Rivers living laboratory where they have a shop front and the citizens can come in and say, oh, this is what we think is a good idea. They can see what ideas are being done. Melbourne Water, I think, needs to up its, bring its A game to stakeholder consultation in a way which it doesn’t say it controls everything. That’s for the whole Maribyrnong catchment area.

    ELLIOTT: Well, we’ll get in touch with them and see if we can get them on the program and I’ll put your concerns to them. Now, look, you’re retiring in a few months. Are you going to have the NDIS all sorted out before you vacate the office?

    SHORTEN: The NDIS is like painting the harbour bridge. When you get to one end of it, you start again. But do I think that we’re getting on top of some of the rorts? Yes, I’m changing jobs, not retiring. The thing about it is, when I came in at the beginning of the three years, I knew the scheme was changing lives for the better, but there was a complete naivety about how to administer the scheme. What we’ve done in the last two and a half years is we’ve upped the tempo on catching crooks. We’ve now got 500 investigations, we’ve got 55, 56 people in the courts or heading to court. We’ve got people in jail now. We’ve now said what you can spend money on after talking to people, what you can’t spend money on. We’re now sorting out the assessment process. We’ve now got the legal ability to make sure the assessment process is consistent, transparent and equitable. I love the scheme, I’m very proud of it. The rest of the world looks at it. The idea of giving a personal budget to people with profound and severe disabilities and their families is life changing. But we need to register most of the service providers, they weren’t registered. We need a much better back office in the way we – you can’t just put in an invoice with no ABN and no explanation and expect to get paid. All of these matters we’ve now either stopped or got the legal authority to start stamping out. So, I do think the NDIS is on a more sustainable trajectory. So, it’s there for future generations and it’s serving the original purpose of the scheme.

    ELLIOTT: Look, good luck with that and good luck with your future career as I think it’s Vice Chancellor of Canberra University, Bill Shorten there. He’s still the NDIS Minister and the Member for Maribyrnong and, well, very passionate about the shortcomings of Melbourne Water

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: An outdoor camping adventure is calling!

    Source: Auckland Council

    Epic views, great camping options at affordable prices, and taking in the outdoors in all its glory – sound like a dream?  Make it your reality at any one of Auckland’s 28 regional parks, boasting over 30 campgrounds between them! That’s right, an outdoor adventure is calling, and it’s here in Auckland’s backyard! 

    The beauty of camping in Auckland is the accessibility – you don’t have to travel too far. Plus, with fees starting at $17 per night for adults and $6.50 for children at our main campgrounds, Auckland camping is an affordable way to holiday at some of our region’s most scenic locations. 

    Whether you’re a freedom camper, a glamper or a total camping newbie – we’ve got you covered. Your next Auckland-based outdoor adventure awaits – so get booking now! 

    I’m keen – where do I start? 

    It’s easy as, all you have to do is choose your preferred spot from the list of regional parks on Auckland Council’s website. Are you looking for a coastal, farm or forest experience? Each campsite listing contains photos of the park, and you can click through to specific photos and information about the different types of camping available.

    To make it even simpler, the camping booking site includes a calendar showing availability so you can instantly see dates to choose from. You’ll also find a handy park brochure with a map, information about tracks, interesting features in the area, and important alerts. For most campgrounds you can drive right up to your selected camping area, so you don’t have to lug your gear long distances. However, be aware some campgrounds take a bit more effort to reach, such as the Mita Bay campground at Mahurangi Regional Park (West), which is accessible by foot, and the campground at Waitawa Regional Park, which can only be accessed by sea kayak. Remember to check the access prior to booking to understand the location of the campground. 

    Be an early bird and book ahead 

    All our regional parks are precious taonga, each with their own unique features, but over the summer some are busier than others and get booked out quickly. Fortunately, regional park campsites can be booked up to six months in advance, so it’s a good idea to set a reminder on your phone and book your spot as soon as you can so you don’t miss out!

    The booking calendar for each campground also shows how many spaces are available, which is handy if you’re planning on camping with a larger group (note there are some group size limits over the summer). And you can book up to seven glorious nights. If your plans change, no worries! You can make unlimited amendments to your booking, or cancel (with a full refund), up to two days before the date of your arrival. 

    Before you leave home 

    When you book your stay at a regional park campground, you’ll be emailed instructions including a combination code to get through the gate into the campground. Make sure you note it down on your phone or on a piece of paper before you leave in case mobile reception is patchy at your destination. 

    Make sure you note down the combination code of your campground before leaving home

    The main access gates for regional parks are locked overnight (daylight saving hours are generally 6am-9pm, and 6am-7pm for the rest of the year), so if you’re arriving in the evening, be sure to take note of the closing hours so you don’t end up carting your gear to the campground by foot. When staying, remember if you need to pop out for supplies, the access code will not open the main park gate. 

    Choose your camping experience – from rugged to glamping 

    If you’re up for a truly outdoors camping experience, many of Auckland’s regional parks supply only the bare basics – including the classic kiwi long drop! Be sure to read up on the facilities available at specific campgrounds, so you can choose the camping style that best suits your needs.  

    All campgrounds have drinkable water available (although sometimes you will need to boil it first), but many of the campsites at regional parks don’t have flushable toilets or shower blocks. These rugged campgrounds are a lot more spacious and less populated than commercial campgrounds, offering a truly remote outdoors experience. If that’s a step too far though for you or your fellow camping newbies, Shakespear Regional Park has flushable toilets and two cold showers onsite. 

    If camping in comfort is more your thing, many of the vehicle-based campgrounds allow campervan and caravans as well but check the rules before booking. Or bypass the regional park entirely and stay in a fully furnished glamping tent at either Ōrewa Beach Holiday Park, Whangateau Holiday Park or Martins Bay Holiday Park.

    Do your research on the park so you pack the right gear

    Make sure you read up on prime leisure activities at your location. For example, if you’re heading to a great surf beach like Omaha Beach, the kids will want boogie boards for catching waves and riding down the campground’s famous hill, and you’ll all want beach shoes for rock pooling.

    While it is possible to fish at some regional parks, it’s strictly prohibited at parks that are also marine reserves. Some parks have access to extensive walking and mountain-bike tracks, golf and disc golf courses and did we mention the birdlife? Also, don’t forget your book from Auckland Libraries for some relaxing reading in the sun. 

    Be a tidy Kiwi 

    When you arrive at your site, be sure to follow the rules. Stay off sign-posted wahi tapu areas (sites which are sacred to Māori), and steer clear of restricted conservation areas where birds may be nesting. 

    Remember that lighting open fires is prohibited across all public areas in the Auckland region, and that noise must be kept to a minimum in regional parks after 9pm. 

    Also please dispose of all your rubbish correctly in the designated bins if available or take your rubbish home with you. 

    So, what are you waiting for? Your adventure awaits! 

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Boeing Strike Will Continue as Workers Reject Latest Proposal from Company

    Source: US GOIAM Union

    SEATTLE – Frontline Boeing workers voted 64% against accepting the latest contract proposal put forth by their employer. 

    Jon Holden, President of IAM District 751 and Brandon Bryant, President of IAM District W24, issued the following joint statement following the votes being tallied:

    “The elected negotiating committee of workers did not recommend for or against this particular proposal. After 10 years of sacrifices, we still have ground to make up, and we’re hopeful to do so by resuming negotiations promptly. This is workplace democracy – and also clear evidence that there are consequences when a company mistreats its workers year after year. Workers across America know what it’s like for a company to take and take – and Boeing workers are saying they are fully and strongly committed to balancing that out by winning back more of what was taken from them by the company for more than a decade. Ten years of holding workers back unfortunately cannot be undone quickly or easily, but we will continue to negotiate in good faith until we have made gains that workers feel adequately make up for what the company took from them in the past.”

    IAM International President Brian Bryant issued the following statement:

    “The entire IAM Union, all 600,000 members across North America, stand with our District 751 and W24 membership. Their fight is our fight – and we support their decision to continue this strike for fairness and dignity for Boeing workers.”

    33,000 IAM District 751 and W24 members at Boeing in Washington state, Oregon and California are seeking to make up ground for nearly 10 years of stagnant wages and many givebacks that were part of prior negotiations. Their strike will continue and the union said it plans to immediately send new dates for further negotiations to the company.

    # # #

    The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) is one of North America’s largest and most diverse industrial trade unions, representing approximately 600,000 active and retired members in the aerospace, defense, airlines, railroad, transit, healthcare, automotive, and other industries.

    goIAM.org | @MachinistsUnion

    Share and Follow:

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI New Zealand: Greenpeace – Seabed mining sinks offshore wind industry

    Source: Greenpeace

    Greenpeace says the decision by an offshore wind developer to cancel its plans for wind farms in New Zealand due to conflict with a seabed mining project included in the Fast Track demonstrates just how regressive the new legislation is.
    Spanish offshore wind developer BlueFloat Energy has announced it will no longer pursue its plans for wind farms off the coast of Taranaki and Waikato, citing uncertainties around seabed allocation.
    The South Taranaki Bight is the area where the Australian-owned wannabe seabed miner Trans-Tasman Resources intends to gouge out tens of millions of tonnes of sand every year for 35 years, and the wind energy industry has previously said that would be incompatible with offshore wind farms.
    Greenpeace seabed campaigner Juressa Lee (Te Rarawa, Ngāpuhi, Rarotonga) says: “The offshore wind industry warned the government that seabed mining was fundamentally incompatible with offshore wind farms, but they went ahead anyway, and now we all pay the price.
    “Including Trans-Tasman Resources on the list of projects for Fast Track Approvals highlights the Luxon government’s unhealthy fixation on extractive industries and fossil fuels.
    “At the same time as the Luxon Government is closing the door on a renewable energy industry, they’re talking about opening up new oil and gas exploration and building a fossil gas importation terminal. It’s straight-out climate denial,” says Lee.
    Trans-Tasman Resources has been seeking to mine 50 million tons of sand every year in the South Taranaki Bight for 35 years. For over a decade, it has faced stiff opposition from marine experts, local iwi, community, and environmental groups.
    Since initially getting consent in 2017, TTR has had that consent quashed by three courts, with the Supreme Court finally sending it back to the EPA, requiring the company to prove it will cause no material harm.
    TTR pulled out of that EPA hearing in March this year, soon after the fast-track bill was announced and then confirmed that they had been invited by the coalition government to apply to have their seabed mining project fast-tracked.
    Seabed mining would be a significant threat to marine life, including blue whales, Māui and Hector’s dolphins, little blue penguins, and critical fishing grounds.

    MIL OSI New Zealand News –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: The Maldives WTO Trade Policy Review: UK Statement, October 2024

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    The UK’s Permanent Representative to the World Trade Organization (WTO) and UN in Geneva, Simon Manley, gave a statement during The Maldives Trade Policy Review.

    Location:
    Geneva
    Delivered on:
    (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered)

    Chair, let me offer a warm welcome to the delegation from the Maldives led by the Minister of State. Let me also express my gratitude, both to him and his team for their report and to the WTO Secretariat, for their report. I also thank you Chair, for your very good introduction and let me also pay tribute to our Discussant, my very good friend, Ambassador Murdoch, for an intervention. If I may say, for those of us that are of a cricketing bent, Ambassador, combined the elegance and power of your good friend Sir Viv Richards with the intellectual rigour of my own hero Mike Brearley.

    Reports analysis

    1. Chair, the Maldives experience exemplifies the benefits of open trade to sustainable development. You spoke of it as a shining example, I would agree with that. That openness has clearly been a factor in enabling significant infrastructure development, an increasingly diverse tourism sector (in which so many of us aspire to be customers) and a highly sustainable fishing industry – to which both the Minister and Ambassador Murdoch paid tribute.

    2. While the COVID-19 pandemic had a severe impact on the Maldives’ economy, as it did on ours and so many around this organisation, the tourism industry clearly drove forward a strong recovery. A tourism industry which is deeply appreciated by Brits, who come in such droves that the UK consistently features in the top four nationalities visiting your country. You may detect a theme here, Minister.

    3. The reports also demonstrate the continued strength in the Maldives’ trade in services sector, which increased by 47% from 2017 to 2022, driven by a 64% increase in travel service exports. If I may say, yet another example of how trade in services can drive sustainable development in developing countries, which I think is a wider point for this organisation.

    4. Redistribution of that revenue from trade has allowed Maldives, as others have said, to transform from an LDC to an upper middle-income country, classed as a high human development country according to the Human Development Index. So congratulations Minister, congratulations to you, your government and your team here.

    Bilateral trade

    1. Chair, as a fellow Commonwealth member, indeed you, the Maldives, and Ambassador Murdoch, we are coming together in Samoa for the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM), the UK – Maldives relationship is marked by rich, historical and contemporary ties that are woven into every facet of the enduring friendship between our Governments, our businesses and our people.

    2. We collaborate closely on governance, security, counter terrorism, climate change, environmental protection. And if I may venture out of this building for a second, also on Human Rights, where if I may say, Maldives has played such an important role here in Geneva, punching well above its weight, particularly in its support to fellow SIDS and LDCs, through its role as the co-chair of the Contact Group on HRC membership. And, of course, trade are key areas of collaboration between our two nations. And they are areas of partnership which we will both be seeking to strengthen in Samoa this week.

    3. Protecting the Maldives’ thriving marine biodiversity, is a key objective in our relationship – not just for the enjoyment of the British tourists but also for the future and preservation of our planet. We have a shared interest in the entry to force of Fish I and the early conclusion of Fish II.

    4. Our ties extend to our businesses as well. Total trade in goods and services between the UK and Maldives was worth over half a billion pounds in the four quarters to the end of Q1 2024, and we are proud to be the third largest market for the Maldives’ merchandise exports, those fisheries that Ambassador Murdoch referred to.

    5. A British Business Group was launched in May 2024, as an opportunity to promote trade, and foster business and commercial partnerships and other links between our two nations.

    Business environment and women in trade

    1. Chair, let me encourage Maldives to continue its work to promote a business-friendly environment that supports economic diversification. And if I may add, with two hats, both as UK PR and co-chair on the working group on trade and gender we value its efforts in advancing women’s economic empowerment and its engagement on trade and gender equality at the WTO.

    2. Equally, let me highlight the SME Development Financing Corporation, established by the Maldives in 2019 to support financial inclusion for MSMEs, women and youth, again very admirable initiatives.

    UK support programmes [the Maldives Development Partnership]

    1. As I previously alluded to, a key area of partnership between our two nations is through our mutual environmental objectives. Under the Blue Planet Fund, the Ocean Country Partnership Programme focuses extensive work on Marine Pollution and Biodiversity. Meanwhile the Climate Action for a Resilient Asia programme is funding a Climate Finance Network programme on transforming the Blue Economy with Maldives MSME Empowerment and Blended Finance.

    2. This year, in these few weeks ahead of us, when we have the three Rio Convention COPs meeting in quick succession, it is essential that we work together to deliver on our commitments across all issues of environmental sustainability, an issue of such critical importance to the Maldives, as the Minister reminded us at the start.

    WTO and multilateral institutions

    1. The continued commitment Maldives has shown to the Multilateral Trading System, as a founding member of the WTO, and, more recently, Maldives’ engagement with discussions on environmentally sustainable trade practices is welcome. Others have suggested other areas where we could increase that participation here.

    2. We have also been pleased to see the progress that Maldives have made on the ratification of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, supported, I might add by the UK’s Accelerate Trade Facilitation programme. Just this month British colleagues were in Maldives for the validation of their National Trade Facilitation roadmap. We look forward to working with the Maldives to implement further measures.

    3. Fisheries, as we’ve reflected, is a huge pillar of the Maldivian economy, and the practice of pole and line fishing is one of the most sustainable methods for fishing. We urge Maldives to ratify Fish I, which will help us to deliver on SDG mandate 14.6. The UK is fully behind Maldives, and others, not least our distinguished permanent representative from Iceland, in securing agreement on the second phase of negotiations on Fisheries Subsidies at the very earliest possible opportunity.

    Conclusion

    1. In conclusion, Chair, let me thank you, the Discussant, and the whole delegation from the Maldives for your work on this Review and the accompanying Reports.

    2. Chair, Maldives is known as a beautiful holiday destination – many newlyweds travel from far and wide to see the rare white sands beaches and diverse sea life. The story these reports tell of the Maldives’ trade and its coupling with the WTO, show a match made in heaven – a true case study for the story of free, fair and open trade that the multilateral system allows us to see.

    Thank you very much indeed.

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 October 2024

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Australia: Press Conference Apia, Samoa

    Source: Australian Government – Minister of Foreign Affairs

    Penny Wong, Foreign Minister: Look, can I say how wonderful it is to be here in Samoa as it hosts its first ever Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, the first time this has been held in a Pacific Island country. And Australia has been really pleased to partner with Samoa, and we are really pleased – I’m really pleased to be here, and I know the Prime Minister is very pleased to be able to join us this evening.

    I want to thank a woman for whom I have such great regard, Prime Minister Fiamē, for her leadership, for her hospitality, for her thoughtful hosting of this meeting and, the way in which she has sought to elevate Pacific priorities and voices on the international stage.

    It’s certainly been a busy day today. It kicked off with a meeting about investment, finance and investment, hosted by David Lammy, the UK Foreign Secretary. And we recognise that economic integration and investment are central to development, are central to alleviating poverty and enabling opportunity. And we’re partnering with the United Kingdom to develop a new Commonwealth Investment Network to support Commonwealth members, particularly smaller states who often have challenges accessing finance, accessing investment, to do just that – to attract and access investment.

    I’ve also been at the first session of the Commonwealth Foreign Affairs Ministers Meeting. Obviously, that’s in preparation for the Leaders’ Meeting tomorrow. Top of the agenda is, as you would expect here in Pacific, climate. And as you would have heard me say from the first day I was – I stood in the Pacific as Foreign Minister, and I’ve consistently recognised this as I have travelled throughout the Pacific, climate change is an existential threat. It is the number one national security threat, it is the number one economic threat to the peoples of the Pacific and to many members of the Commonwealth.

    We heard today from a number of African countries, including Zambia, about the escalating impacts of climate change, the effects on food insecurity. And I’m really pleased that we are able to announce a new Africa-Australia partnership for climate responsive agriculture. This is to be developed by the Australian Centre for International Agriculture Research, and it will address food insecurity in the region.

    Can I talk about what this means? One of the things Australia is good at is agriculture in very dry climates – for obvious reason. It is one of the areas we have an expertise, and this – I’m very excited about this partnership because it leverages a particular Australian expertise into a continent for which food insecurity is an ongoing and rising challenge. It’s another example of our commitment as a government to helping partners around the world in the fight against climate change. It’s about shaping the world for the better.

    I’ve also spoken to Pacific leaders about the ways in which Australia is transitioning our entire economy. It’s a big task, started later than it should have, but we are committed to making the very large change.

    I’ve had productive meetings with counterparts from Malta and Solomon Islands, and I’ve just returned from an event hosted by Samoa attended by Her Majesty the Queen, advocating for women and girls in the Commonwealth where we talked about the challenges facing women and girls, including violence against women, and we spoke about Australia’s progress in tackling cervical cancer.

    I’m looking forward to the rest of the program, and happy to take your questions shortly.

    I just want to make one comment about another matter, which is the deeply troubling news about North Korea’s contribution to Russia’s illegal and immoral war in Ukraine. This is a deeply concerning development to see not only Russia continue its illegal and immoral war but to see a state such as North Korea be invited by President Putin, encouraged by President Putin, to join or to support this illegal war. And Australia stands with the remained of the international community not only against Russia’s war but against North Korea’s involvement in what is an illegal and immoral and disruptive war.

    Happy to take questions.

    Journalist: My name is Deidre from TV1, a local reporter. I just wanted to ask, first question is: what kind of support has Australia provided for Samoa for CHOGM, aside from providing assistance in terms of police officers who have come and helped?

    Foreign Minister: Sure, yes, well, obviously that’s the more – most visible recent assistance, which I have to be really clear about is not just Australia. This is a multi-country initiative. It’s obviously contributions from many Pacific Island countries. When we announced the Pacific Policing Initiative at the Pacific Islands Forum I think the Prime Minister and certainly I’ve made the comment, you know, this is Pacific led. And that’s the approach we’ve seen in Samoa. So, it’s good to see these police cooperating on the ground.

    But the behind-the-scenes assistance or contribution obviously was primarily towards the arrangement of CHOGM and supporting – providing support at a diplomatic level. I can – we can talk to you about that in more detail.

    I want to say, though, to you, your country has done an extraordinary job. For a country of this size to be able to host a conference like this, you really all should be very proud. And I’ve no doubt knowing the Pacific and Samoa, this is a whole-of-nation effort, isn’t it? Like everybody steps up. I was talking to Prime Minister Fiamē, and she spoke about everybody stepping forward. And that’s what you see. And your diplomatic influence, your diplomatic standing, is far bigger than your population in terms of the proportion of the world. I see that at the UN when your Prime Minister speaks and your diplomats speak, and I see that in this conference.

    So, my congratulations to my very good friend Prime Minister Fiamē, but also to the people of Samoa for what has been a fantastic CHOGM, and I hope tomorrow goes as well. I’m sure it will.

    Journalist: Foreign Minister, just on the Falepili Union, Feleti Teo has said this morning that he believes that Australia does have a commitment or at least an implied commitment under the text of the Falepili Union to take a hard look at fossil fuel exports, not just Australia’s own internal commitments. What’s your response? Is there any sort of implied commitment in the Falepili Union towards fossil fuel exports? Do you disagree with that analysis?

    Foreign Minister: I think whether it’s the PIF declarations or the public statements we have made, I think we all understand the existential threat that climate change poses to the peoples of the Pacific. I think we all understand the effects of climate change in Australia which we have seen. We’re not a government like Mr Abbott’s and Mr Morrison’s or that has the views Mr Dutton has demonstrated where the science of climate change isn’t accepted, and the experience of Pacific peoples is diminished. Do you remember him saying – talking about making jokes about water lapping at the door?

    So, we understand the extent of this. I’ve spoken at length to the Prime Minister of Tuvalu about the transition in the Australian economy, and it is a very big transition. And I wish we had – you know, when we came to government, we had seen not just 30 per cent renewables but much more because we have to get to in excess of 80 per cent by the end of the decade. But that’s the transition we’re in and we will engage in it.

    On the broader issue of fossil fuel usage, not just in Australia but globally, of course we all have to, we all have to peak our emissions and reduce them, and Australia’s emissions peaked in 2005. We know that there are countries which are still increasing their supply, their coal-fired power stations. Of course, we all know that the whole world has to respond.

    The point I’ve made previously is that there are two emerging economies in the world which, you know, account for 40 per cent of global emissions – India and China. And in order for us to have a chance at restraining global temperature rise, we all have to commit to reducing emissions and to transitioning to cleaner energy. So, we’re up for that. It will take longer than I would have liked because, you know, obviously nothing was done for 10 years.

    Journalist: But can Australia shrug its shoulders in terms of those exports and simply say there is no problem with Australia expanding fossil fuel projects if there’s an appetite for it? The point that I think that Prime Minister Teo is making is that on the one hand Australia points to its own record, on the other hand, you’ve got countries like India and China continuing to expand fossil fuels. He doesn’t perhaps care who takes responsibility; the cycle has to be brought to a close.

    Foreign Minister: Yeah, I think we all have to take responsibility, which is why you also see Australia partnering with other countries to try and work with others to transition the global energy supply to renewable energy. You would have seen I work with Singapore; you’d see that we’re working with Germany. You know, Chris Bowen has spoken at length about the work that he is doing internationally.

    I wish we were – you know, when I was Climate Minister between 2007 and 2010, including the famous Copenhagen conference, I wish that what we were trying to get agreed then had been agreed and you and I would be having a very different conversation. But that isn’t what happened globally. That isn’t what happened in Australia, and we went backwards as a country. We know we have a lot of work to do. And I’ve been upfront with every partner in the Pacific. Of course, I listen, I hear what they say. And I think they also see in us a partner who wants to make this transition. And we will. We will.

    Journalist: Foreign Minister, in terms of Pacific Engagement Visa, I know our government does not want to participate in the first wave. So, my question is: have you received or has the government of Australia received any update from our government? And if the government did not, is Australia – will Australia be pushing for the Samoan government to support the visa?

    Foreign Minister: Yeah, Mr Dziedzic asked me those “if” questions, and I usually tell him off for doing that. But look, as a matter of principle, the Pacific Engagement Visa responds to a longstanding call from Pacific Island nations about wanting a different relationship with Australia. And you would have seen the fact demonstrated by the number of people who have sought to come to Australia in those countries where we have those arrangements. It’s been massive low oversubscribed and, you know, I understand that.

    I’ve also been very clear from the beginning, just like PALM, this is a question for the sending country. If people want it, we will work with whichever country, whichever Pacific Island nation, to set up the arrangements in ways they feel comfortable with. If countries don’t wish to go down this path, it’s not a compulsory path for us.

    We responded. A number of countries have very enthusiastically taken it up. It’s entirely a matter for others whether they choose to or not and, if they do, how they want it to work.

    Journalist: Just to follow up on that, if our government does not want to support it, is Australia willing to reconsider if individuals want to participate?

    Foreign Minister: No, we want this to be something – it’s a government-to-government arrangement for the process of it and the arrangements associated with it, so we wouldn’t want to see that. But, you know, we’re also – we’re not – there’s no deadline for – in the sense that we’re not saying, ‘unless you – you have to do it by this year or never at all.’ It’s a policy that’s in place. I anticipate that countries may work through some of the issues and then may decide that they want to be part of this in time to come. But that’s entirely a matter for them.

    Journalist: Just finally, if I might, Foreign Minister, on the question of Australia’s broader Pacific policy, can you give us a sense, when the Falepili Union was signed the Prime Minister and others made it clear that Australia was looking at if not signing similar agreements, then perhaps integrating more closely with the Pacific. There have been murmurs, obviously, about similar agreements with countries like Nauru and others. Can you give us a sense of where that program is up to and how Australia envisions this?

    Foreign Minister: That’s a good question. And it’s one that the whole country and both parties of government need to be part of. And unfortunately, we’ve not had an opposition that’s been willing, for example, to understand the importance of the Pacific Engagement Visa.

    Your question goes to the – is the right one though – how do you envisage the relationship? And we envisage the relationship as family, as close as we are able to be, recognising the sovereignty of all nations. And we see the benefit in different types of integration with the countries of the Pacific. Now, they’ll not always be the same. So, we have obviously a particular set of arrangements with some countries which are simply PALM or the Pacific Engagement Visa. With Tuvalu, we have a much deeper integration where there is much more that we have put on the table and that Tuvalu has put on the table as well.

    So obviously it will not be the same approach for each country. Countries will make their own decisions. But we see real benefit in responding to Pacific countries’, I suppose, aspirations for the relationship.

    Journalist: What are your expectations for the conference tomorrow? Regarding the continued fighting of the Pacific Islands towards climate change? What are your expectations of the outcome?

    Foreign Minister: Well, I hope that the leader’s communique or statement will be forward leaning on climate. I hope it will be collective in the sense that we recognise – I’ve seen a lot of things over the years – and it really goes to the question Mr Dziedzic asked earlier where we point the finger at each other but actually all of us have to respond on climate, all major economies, in particular. And I hope also that some of the progress that the Pacific has made in relation to sovereignty in the face of sea level rise, which we have backed in, I hope there is progress on that as well in terms of Leaders’ discussion. I know it’s a big step, but I think the Pacific has done a lot of quite innovative international legal work in ensuring that countries can retain sovereignty and retain their, you know, sovereignty over their EEZ, even in the face of sea level rise and that whatever we can do with the Pacific to continue to broaden that out I think is a good thing. And you would have seen that we’ve done that at the PIF and we’ve done that in the Falepili treaty.

    Journalist: One more question please –

    Foreign Minister: Last one.

    Journalist: What are your thoughts on Samoa’s government’s concerns of brain drain for RSE program and also – last one – have you visited one of the villages that is representing Australia in the rural area?

    Foreign Minister: No, no, I haven’t done – I haven’t been out of Apia, I’m afraid, on this visit. Some of the concerns that countries who are considering whether how to handle labour mobility programs, there are a range of concerns. You named one of them. What I have said at the PIF and privately and in meetings is we want these programs to work for you. So, we don’t offer access to the labour market because we are demanding labour; we see this as a partnership and as an economic development opportunity. So, we want the programs to work for you. So, however countries wish to have those programs designed within the limits of the program, we’ve sought to facilitate that. So, that’s how we do it. Okay? Thanks, everybody.

    MIL OSI News –

  • MIL-OSI USA: Justice Department Announces Four Cases Brought by Election Threats Task Force

    Source: US State of North Dakota

    The Justice Department’s Election Threats Task Force (ETTF) announced developments this week in four cases involving interstate transmissions of threats to election personnel and other victims.

    Teak Brockbank, 45, of Cortez, Colorado, pleaded guilty today to threatening a Colorado election official and making other threats to an Arizona election official, a Colorado state judge, and federal law enforcement agents between September 2021 and July 2024.

    Brian Jerry Ogstad, 60, of Cullman, Alabama, was sentenced on Monday to 30 months in prison for sending messages threatening violence to election workers with Maricopa County Elections in Phoenix from Aug. 2-4, 2022, during and immediately following the Arizona primary elections.

    Richard Glenn Kantwill, 61, of Tampa, Florida, was charged on Monday for allegedly sending a threat on Feb. 9 to an election official in addition to already pending charges for threats made to three other victims based on their political commentary in 2019 and 2020.

    John Pollard, 62, of Philadelphia, was charged on Monday for allegedly threatening on Sept. 6 to kill a representative of a Pennsylvania state political party who was recruiting official poll watchers.

    “As we approach Election Day, the Justice Department’s warning remains clear: anyone who illegally threatens an election worker, official, or volunteer will face the consequences,” said Attorney General Merrick B. Garland. “Over the past three and a half years, the Justice Department has been aggressively investigating and prosecuting those who threaten the public servants who administer our elections, and we will continue to do so in the weeks ahead. For our democracy to function, Americans who serve the public must be able to do their jobs without fearing for their lives.”

    “Threats to election workers are threats to our democratic process,” said Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco. “No one should face violence or threats of violence simply for doing their job. The actions announced today make clear that we will not tolerate those who use or threaten violence in an effort to undermine our democratic institutions. To carry out their essential work, election officials must be free from improper influence, physical threats, and others forms of intimidation.”

    “Our elections are made by possible by the hard work and patriotism of election workers in communities across the country who are also our neighbors, relatives and friends, and they deserve to do this important work without being subjected to threats,” said FBI Director Christopher Wray. “The fact that election workers need to be worried about their security is incomprehensible and unacceptable. While these four cases are examples of the kinds of threats election workers are unfortunately facing, these cases also represent the FBI’s dedication in holding accountable those who undermine our democracy with this conduct. The FBI and our partners on the ETTF will work tirelessly to charge and arrest those callous enough to make these threats and make sure they are held accountable. Free, fair, and safe elections are critical to our country and our democratic ideals.”

    “These defendants made serious threats of violence against members of the election community. Threats like these strike at the very heart of our democracy,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Nicole M. Argentieri, head of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division. “The cases announced today underscore the Criminal Division’s commitment to defending our democracy, safeguarding our elections, and protecting all election workers. Through the ETTF, the Department will vigorously investigate and prosecute all criminal threats against members of the election community.”

    The four cases were all brought by the ETTF. Created by Attorney General Merrick B. Garland and launched by Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco in June 2021, the task force has led the Department’s efforts to address threats of violence against election workers, and to ensure that all election workers — whether elected, appointed, or volunteer — are able to do their jobs free from threats and intimidation. The task force engages with the election community and state and local law enforcement to assess allegations and reports of threats against election workers, and has investigated and prosecuted these matters where appropriate, in partnership with FBI Field Offices and U.S. Attorneys’ Offices throughout the country. Three years after its formation, the task force is continuing this work and supporting U.S. Attorneys’ Offices and FBI Field Offices nationwide as they join the task force in its critical work.

    Under the leadership of the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General, the task force is led by the Criminal Division’s Public Integrity Section (PIN) and includes several other entities within the Justice Department, including the Criminal Division’s Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section, Civil Rights Division, National Security Division, and FBI, as well as key interagency partners, such as the Department of Homeland Security and U.S. Postal Inspection Service. For more information regarding the Justice Department’s efforts to combat threats against election workers, read the Deputy Attorney General’s memo.

    United States v. Brockbank (District of Colorado)

    According to court documents, Brockbank admitted to using three social media accounts to post messages threatening Colorado and Arizona election officials between September 2021 and July 2024.

    On Sept. 22, 2021, Brockbank posted the following message on social media:

    “[Election Official-1] . . . needs to- No has to Hang she has to Hang by the neck till she is Dead Dead Dead. There will be accountability for these peoples actions in Communist Colorado and it won’t be judges and it won’t be weakmided cops that bring it!!! It will be Me it will be You it Will be every day people that understand that there life does not matter anymore with the future our country has laid out before it.”

    As part of his plea, Brockbank also admitted to posting a message on Aug. 4, 2022, referring to election officials in Arizona and Colorado, saying: “Once those people start getting put to death then the rest will melt like snowflakes and turn on each other. . . . This is the only way. So those of us that have the stomach for what has to be done should prepare our minds for what we all [a]re going to do!!!!!! It is time.”

    In addition, Brockbank admitted to posting a message threatening a Colorado state judge on Oct. 2, 2021, saying: “I could pick up my rifle and I could go put a bullet in this Mans head and send him to explain himself to our Creator right now. I would be Justified!!! Not only justified but obligated by those in my family who fought and died for the freedom in this country. . . . What can I do other than kill this man my self?”

    Brockbank further admitted to threatening federal law enforcement on July 13, posting: “I believe every single FBI agent deserves to go explain themselves to our creator right away!!!! I am more than willing to send any/All of you there.”

    Finally, Brockbank admitted to illegally possessing multiple firearms and ammunition.

    “The security and sanctity of the American election system is core to the foundation of our Democracy,” said Acting U.S. Attorney Matt Kirsch for the District of Colorado. “We will prosecute people who threaten elections, election officials, or election workers to the fullest extent of the law.”

    Brockbank pleaded guilty today to interstate transmission of a threat. He is scheduled to be sentenced on Feb. 3, 2025, and faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI Denver Field Office is investigating the case.

    Acting Deputy Director Jonathan E. Jacobson of PIN’s Election Crimes Branch and Assistant U.S. Attorney Cyrus Y. Chung for the District of Colorado are prosecuting the case.

    United States v. Ogstad (District of Arizona)

    According to court documents, on or about Aug. 2, 2022, Arizona held primary elections for federal and state officeholders, including a gubernatorial primary election that received nationwide media coverage. From the day of the election through on or about Aug. 4, 2022, Ogstad sent multiple threatening direct messages to a social media account maintained by Maricopa County Elections. For instance, on or about Aug. 3, 2022, Ogstad stated: (1) “You did it! Now you are f*****.. Dead. You will all be executed for your crimes”; (2) F*** you! You are caught! They have it all. You f****** are dead”; (3) “You are lying, cheating m****** f******* . . . you better not come in my church, my business or send your kids to my school. You are f****** stupid if you think your lives are safe”; and (4) “You f******  are so dead.” On or about Aug. 4, 2022, Ogstad also stated, “[Y]ou people are so ducking stupid. Everyone knows you are lots, cheats, frauds and in doing so in relation to elections have committed treason. You will all be executed. Bang f******!” In the course of his messages to the recipient, Ogstad transmitted an image of the character “Woody,” from the Toy Story film franchise, lying face down with an unidentified projectile in its back.

    “In this election season we honor and respect those public servants who enable Americans to exercise their constitutional right to vote,” said U.S. Attorney Gary Restaino for the District of Arizona. “And we seek to protect all election workers from intimidation and harassment. Threats of violence, whether conveyed by words or deeds or pictures, will be met in this District with robust prosecution.”

    Ogstad was sentenced on Monday to 30 months in prison, followed by three years of supervised release and a $1,000 fine, after pleading guilty on July 25 to one count of interstate transmission of a threat.

    The FBI Phoenix Field Office investigated the case, with substantial assistance from the FBI Birmingham Field Office.

    Trial Attorney Tanya Senanayake of the National Security Division’s Counterterrorism Section and Assistant U.S. Attorney Mary Sue Feldmeier for the District of Arizona prosecuted the case.

    United States v. Kantwill (Middle District of Florida)

    According to court documents, from September 2019 to July 2020, Kantwill, a dentist, sent over 100 threats to various public figures via Facebook and Instagram messages, email, and text. As charged in the superseding information filed on Monday, those threats included a threat sent via email to an author, a threat sent via text to a religious leader, and a threat sent via Instagram to a television personality. From April 2022 to April 2024, Kantwill also sent at least seven additional threats to four public figures via Facebook, including a threat to an election official in another state on Feb. 9, when Kantwill wrote: “You are a degenerate c***. and you are now the target of our own investigation. Take note because liberal t***s like you get raped in alleys, by really big black guys that serve our cause. So, you t*** are going to get raped by at least 5 n*****s, and do nothing. You are the number 1 target, you degenerate t***.”

    “If you threaten someone with violence, we will take you at your word,” said U.S. Attorney Roger Handberg for the Middle District of Florida. “Law enforcement officers and members of my office will work together to hold accountable and federally prosecute individuals who threaten to injure or kill others.”

    Kantwill is charged with four counts of interstate transmission of a threat. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison for each count. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI is investigating the case.

    Trial Attorney Aaron L. Jennen of PIN and Assistant U.S. Attorney Abigail K. King for the Middle District of Florida are prosecuting the case, with assistance from Assistant U.S. Attorney Cyrus Y. Chung for the District of Colorado.

    United States v. Pollard (Western District of Pennsylvania)

    According to the indictment, on Sept. 6, Pollard sent threatening text messages to Victim 1, a resident of the Western District of Pennsylvania. Victim 1 had previously posted online, in Victim 1’s capacity as an employee of a state political party, that Victim 1 was recruiting volunteers to “help[] observe at the polls on Election Day” and included Victim 1’s phone number. Pollard allegedly texted Victim 1 that he was “interested in being a poll watcher” and included Victim 1’s first name. Pollard then allegedly texted three threats to Victim 1: (1) “I will KILL YOU IF YOU DON’T ANSWER ME!”; (2) “Your days are numbered, B****!”; and (3) “GONNA F***ING FIND YOU AND SKIN YOU ALIVE AND USE YOUR SKIN FOR F***ING TOILET PAPER, YOU F***ING KKK**T!”

    “Threats of violence have no place in our society,” said U.S. Attorney Eric G. Olshan for the Western District of Pennsylvania. “This is no less true when those threats of violence are directed at individuals associated with our electoral process — in this case, someone seeking to organize poll watchers. This conduct will not be tolerated in our district, and we will continue to work with our partners at the FBI to prosecute these offenses with the full weight of the law.”

    Pollard was arrested on Monday and appeared in federal court in Philadelphia. He is charged with one count of interstate transmission of a threat. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after considering the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

    The FBI Pittsburgh Field Office is investigating the case.

    Trial Attorney Jacob R. Steiner of PIN and Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicole A. Stockey for the Western District of Pennsylvania are prosecuting the case, with assistance from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

    *****

    An indictment or information is merely an allegation. All defendants are presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.

    To report suspected threats or violent acts, contact your local FBI office and request to speak with the Election Crimes Coordinator. Contact information for every FBI field office may be found at www.fbi.gov/contact-us/field-offices/. You may also contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL-FBI (225-5324) or file an online complaint at tips.fbi.gov/home. Complaints submitted will be reviewed by the task force and referred for investigation or response accordingly. If someone is in imminent danger or risk of harm, contact 911 or your local police immediately.

    MIL OSI USA News –

  • MIL-OSI: Prospera Energy Inc. Corporate Update: Three Years of Strategic Restructuring, Recovery, and Future Growth

    Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

    CALGARY, Alberta, Oct. 24, 2024 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Prospera Energy Inc. (“PEI”) (TSX.V: PEI, OTC: GXRFF, FRA: OF6B)

    The 2024 Prospera corporate update outlines the company’s restructuring efforts since 2021, highlighting key milestones achieved, challenges faced, and the strategic path forward to achieve production stability and profitability.

    Preamble:
    By the end of 2020 Prospera faced a litany of financial challenges, including low production, high operating costs, and the global impacts of the Covid pandemic. The company’s liability was in excess of $24MM ($12MM ARO, $11MM AP arrears, & $1.5MM in Credit Facilities) mainly towards secured mezzanine capital, CRA, mineral royalties, municipality property tax, landowners lease payments, numerous local service providers, and high asset retirement obligations. Adding to the problems, Prospera had in excess of 400+ non-compliance infractions with spills, dysfunctional monitoring devices, and facilities that had been neglected and orphaned. Consequently, Prospera Energy Inc. was in a terminal position. In Q1 2021, the municipality and secured debt holder exercised their rights, taking control of payments from the limited revenue and production that remained. The then-CEO and directors were fleeing from the company’s obligations, especially to the CRA.

    Towards the end of 2020, PEI’s continuing operations had become difficult due to high and long-term liabilities, a situation further amplified by the pandemic and drastic reduction in produced volumes (less than 200 bpd Gross).

    At the time, Mr. Samuel David was leading a private company developing medium-light oil around the Brooks area and as a result of his association with the late Burkhart Franz, founder of Prospera Energy Inc. (formerly Georox Resources), Mr. David accepted a role as an advisor to help rescue the company from entering into CCA.

    Prospera Energy Restructure:
    Prospera Energy Inc’s restructuring commenced in Q1, 2021, with the appointment of Mr. David as President, CEO & Director. Mr. David observed legacy heavy (13-17API) oil fields were developed with numerous vertical wells on reduced spacing. These wells were in primary depletion without any patterned pressure support. Produced water was randomly disposed resulting in water recycling. Reserves were estimated on the decline of the small number of low producing wells and their economies were burdened by high surface lease costs and their high number of standing wells. Unprocessed 3-D seismic coverage was available over the entire reservoir of each asset, each of which has a facility processing capacity to handle large volumes of produced fluid, and the wells were tied into these central facilities. Clean oils were trucked out to a nearby terminal. Produced water was reinjected by central pumps at the facility to injectors throughout the field. These infrastructures had previously been neglected and not maintained.

    Mr. David recognized the recovery to date was low with respect to volumetric estimation of oil in place, and a significant amount of oil remains within adequate infrastructure. The recovery has been from an under pressured solution gas drive reservoir with low active edge water and exploited by vertical well technology only. However, high AP arrears, ARO and neglected infrastructure were significant obstacles. Overcoming poor technical conduct and neglect required sufficient capital to exploit the remaining reserves effectively and profitably. To rectify these issues, Samuel devised a development plan in phases to capture the significant remaining reserves.

    The Prospera development plan is comprised of three phases:

    1. Phase one was to bring operations to safe operating conditions and optimize low hanging opportunities to increase production.
    2. Phase two was to transition to horizontal wells and abandon depleted vertical wells along the path. This reduces the environmental footprint and the corresponding fixed operating cost. It would also diversify product mix by adding higher API oil assets.
    3. The third and final phase is to implement improved and enhanced recovery methods tailored to the reservoir conditions, aiming to reduce decline for sustained long-term production. This approach, combined with a reduced footprint and lower operating costs, is designed to yield higher margins.

    At the time, the minimum allowed for a private placement was five cents, while PEI stock was trading at one cent and at risk of being halted. Fortunately, a one-time, two-cents private placement offering opportunity, that was only offered during extraordinary circumstances such as the pandemic, was permitted. Utilizing this opportunity and the proposed engineering solutions, capital was raised with the assistance of Kurt Soost, who played a key role in connecting credible investors such as Peter Lacey, Dave Richardson, and others to the seed capital provided by the management group, which included Mr. David and Jaz Dhaliwal. They participated in the initial and subsequent private placement offerings, helping Prospera secure a financial lifeline.

    This realigned the PEI board, which requested Mr. David amalgamate his private company assets into Prospera at an equal interest, to avoid any perception of bias towards his assets and to ensure focus on Prospera’s asset development going forward. As a result, Prospera acquired a 50% working interest in a medium-light oil property with operatorship from Mr. David on favorable terms, with no upfront cash consideration and delayed consideration on a success basis. These terms were released on December 7th, 2022, and the transaction consideration was based on third-party evaluations, TSX approval, and independent scrutiny and approval resolution by the directors.

    Restructuring Efforts Resulted In:
    Oil in Place Validated – Prospera Oil in place and remaining reserves were authenticated by geological delineation, well control & production performance, 3D seismic confirmation, and by 3rd party evaluation

    • Total OOIP = 396.7 MMbbl
    • Produced = 34.2 MMbbl
    • Recovered = 8.6%

    NPV Appreciation – Net Present value of the reserves was steadily substantiated by PEI’s optimization and development. As a result:

    • Before Tax PDP reserves increased 508% from $4.4MM$ to $27.1MM$ in 2023 at a 10% discount rate
    • Before tax 2P reserves increased by $60.8m from $72.5m to $133.3MM$ in 2023 at a 10% discount rate
    • Total proved and probable reserves increased by 25% from 4,306 to 5,403 Mboe
    • Reserve life index increased by 6% from 28.4 to 30.0 years

    Increased Ownership – In the three core heavy oil properties from an average of 35% to 95% by settling out joint venture receivables.

    Regulator License Liability Rating – Asset to liability ratio was elevated by PEI restructured efforts

    • The Saskatchewan regulator assessed the company’s asset value 18MM$ higher due to the changes implemented
    • The asset to liability ratio has increased from 0.47 to 1.44 in Saskatchewan
    • The asset to liability ratio has increased from 0.90 to 2.60 in Alberta

    Diversify Production Mix – Acquired a 50% interest in Medium-oil development play and successfully perforated two existing wells with favorable results. In 2023, the first well was drilled, with initial production (IP) rates exceeding expectations. This led to attractive investment returns, with a payout achieved in just seven months.

    In 2024, four development wells were drilled, encountering pay, structure, and oil shows as anticipated. The first medium-oil horizontal well encountered 800 meters of porous reservoirs with oil shown in the lateral section. The well test demonstrated strong inflow, producing over 50 m³/d of fluid at 50% oil cuts. The oil quality is 26–30-degrees API. This well is now online and delivering consistent rates as it is stabilizing.

    Financial Position Appreciation – Netbook value (Total assets) has increased from $5.5 million in 2020 to approximately $59.0 million by the end of Q3 2024. This growth was driven by capital raised ($35MM) and cash flow from operations ($7MM), both of which were deployed for optimization and development. Additional value appreciation resulted from an impairment reversal, supported by the substantiation of remaining reserve value ($8 million) and the capitalization of a working interest acquisition ($3 million). Since 2021, the total asset value has been appreciated by $53+ million. 

    Due to capital deployed for optimization, non-compliance elimination, infrastructure upgrades and development aimed at increasing production and recoveries, the company is beginning to see operational profitability. 2022 saw production increased and, if not for the lower commodity prices in 2023, the company would have been profitable in 2022. Nonetheless, 2022 was a rebound year, generating $2.3 million in operating income compared to a substantial loss the previous year. With ongoing production optimization and development, Prospera has achieved approximately $2.6 million in cash operating income as of Q3, 2024.

    The restructuring efforts have transformed the company into cash-flow-positive operation. Prospera’s bare bones break-even operating expenses are $1.1 million per month (500 boe/d @ $75/boe CAD). Any cash flow above this break-even amount is allocated to servicing debt, addressing legacy arrears and further funding, optimization and development initiatives.

    With current production levels around 900 boe/d, the company has generated $2.6 million year to date Q3, 2024.

    Production Appreciation & Challenges – PEI’s restructuring efforts successfully optimized production from 80 boepd to 800 boepd during the phase one execution. By the end of 2023, peak production rates reach 1,800 boepd driven by horizontal development and medium oil development.

    While the restructuring yielded positive results, Prospera production progress and forecast were impacted by operational set-back and by severe cold weather conditions. These issues hindered expected production rates, preventing the company from achieving its short-term production and financial targets.

    PEI has continually implemented measures to address operational constraints, and restore and maintain peak production rates. These include failure analysis, calibrated equipment, revised operational procedures, and accountability for accurate and timely data to maximize run time with experienced personnel. As a result, Cuthbert operations are starting to stabilize while challenges are being addressed. Approximately 70+ m3/d of production is currently behind pipe at Cuthbert, and PEI is focused on capturing this additional volume.

    Revised 2024 Prospera Forecast
    Following a challenging recalibration, Prospera has expressed optimism going forward, however, PEI has faced a series of challenges including cold weather conditions, infrastructure breakdown, water recycling issues, legacy arrears, non-participating JV partners, and lower commodity prices. These factors have unexpectedly delayed the company’s timeline for attaining the initially projected targets.

    The legacy reservoirs are now in the final stages of primary pressure depletion and require additional energy in-situ to increase the mobility of the viscous oil. Enhanced recovery methods suited to the specific reservoir conditions must be applied gradually and methodically to maximize oil recovery, which will take time. PEI has initiated horizontal transformation while testing the recovery methods to be applied to the future horizontal wells while modifying necessary infrastructure adjustments. With the benefit of new information, extensive data, and a revised plan, Prospera has reassessed and incorporated the challenges and setback into the company’s updated forecast moving forward.

    Prospera has achieved many technical and financial successes, these accomplishments have been overshadowed by production shortfalls set out by optimistic early targets. Moving forward, PEI’s primary focus is on efficient operations to ensure sustained, stable production and production growth.  

    Conclusion
    Prospera Energy Inc. has come a long way since the brink of bankruptcy in Q1, 2021. Through a successful restructuring, PEI has eliminated the risk of insolvency, addressed critical regulatory non-compliances, and raised regulator license liability ratings by increasing production through optimization and development. The company has also substantiated the large amount of remaining reserves and substantially increased the proven asset value of the company. By improving cash flow from operations well above break-even, PEI has remained operational while deploying capital to address legacy accounts payable arrears and implement proven technical applications. Additionally, the acquisition of medium-oil assets has reduced dependency on heavy-oil differentials.

    In short, Prospera have made significant progress in positioning the company for future growth. However, PEI achievements have been overshadowed by production short fall set out by optimistic targets by optimization and drilling success. Prospera acknowledges these challenges encountered and has incorporated them into the revised 2024 forecast, to allocate sufficient time and resources to improve operational efficiencies, optimize well run times, and implement reservoir management applications while adhering to safety & regulatory guidelines. These proactive measures are being implemented in Q4 2024 and Q1 2025 to stabilize and support robust, sustained growth throughout Q2 and Q3 of 2025.

    While the company is revising the year-end production target down to 1,250 barrels, it is important to emphasize that the fundamentals of Prospera Energy’s assets remain strong. The significant recovery potential remains within reach, and PEI continues to execute on our long-term development plan to capitalize on these opportunities. The reduction in short-term targets does not diminish the company’s confidence in the strategic path forward. Prospera remains focused on optimizing production, improving efficiency, and unlocking the full value of PEI’s resources. As Prospera moves ahead, the company is committed to increasing production through optimization, horizontal transformation, and enhanced oil recovery.

    About Prospera
    Prospera is a publicly traded energy company based in Western Canada, specializing in the exploration, development, and production of crude oil and natural gas. Prospera is primarily focused on optimizing hydrocarbon recovery from legacy fields through environmentally safe and efficient reservoir development methods and production practices. Prospera was restructured in the first quarter of 2021 to become profitable and in compliance with regulatory, environmental, municipal, landowner, and service stakeholders.

    The company is in the midst of a three-stage restructuring process aimed at prioritizing cost effective operations while appreciating production capacity and reducing liabilities. Prospera has completed the first phase by optimizing low hanging opportunities, attaining free cash flow, while bringing operation to safe operating condition, all while remaining compliant. Currently, Prospera is executing phase II of the restructuring process, the horizontal transformation intended to accelerate growth and capture the significant oil in place (400 million bbls). These horizontal wells allow PEI to reduce its environmental and surface footprint by eliminating the numerous vertical well leases along the lateral path. Phase III of Prospera’s corporate redevelopment strategy is to optimize recovery through EOR applications. Furthermore, Prospera will pursue its acquisition strategy to diversify its product mix and expand its core area. Its goal is to attain 50% light oil, 40% heavy oil and 10% gas.

    The Corporation continues to apply efforts to minimize its environmental footprint. Also, efforts to reduce and eventually eliminate emissions, alongside pursuing innovative ESG methods to enhance API quality, thereby achieving higher margins and eliminating the need for diluents.

    For Further Information:
    Shawn Mehler, PR
    Email: investors@prosperaenergy.com
    Website: www.prosperaenergy.com

    FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
    This news release contains forward-looking statements relating to the future operations of the Corporation and other statements that are not historical facts. Forward-looking statements are often identified by terms such as “will,” “may,” “should,” “anticipate,” “expects” and similar expressions. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this release, including, without limitation, statements regarding future plans and objectives of the Corporation, are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements.

    Although Prospera believes that the expectations and assumptions on which the forward-looking statements are based are reasonable, undue reliance should not be placed on the forward-looking statements because Prospera can give no assurance that they will prove to be correct. Since forward-looking statements address future events and conditions, by their very nature they involve inherent risks and uncertainties. Actual results could differ materially from those currently anticipated due to a number of factors and risks. These include, but are not limited to, risks associated with the oil and gas industry in general (e.g., operational risks in development, exploration and production; delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures; the uncertainty of reserve estimates; the uncertainty of estimates and projections relating to production, costs and expenses, and health, safety and environmental risks), commodity price and exchange rate fluctuations and uncertainties resulting from potential delays or changes in plans with respect to exploration or development projects or capital expenditures.

    The reader is cautioned that assumptions used in the preparation of any forward-looking information may prove to be incorrect. Events or circumstances may cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted, as a result of numerous known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of Prospera. As a result, Prospera cannot guarantee that any forward-looking statement will materialize, and the reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward- looking information. Such information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward-looking statements contained in this news release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. The forward-looking statements contained in this news release are made as of the date of this news release, and Prospera does not undertake any obligation to update publicly or to revise any of the included forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as expressly required by Canadian securities law.

    Neither TSXV nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSXV) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

    Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/0b193b58-7798-4139-b69d-1f8aec58a8f7
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/46e266dc-9f3f-43b1-a3f7-1f71bb526cce
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/2d404ae6-c38e-40c3-910a-403f9376549f
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/506b134d-3ce3-4639-9a61-f0caa42b633e
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/b0ac6d1d-5ea5-4c86-b5b4-d49a72936f7b
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/e14fb81b-462a-456d-99fa-e4a54a549e7d
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/100176cb-60ba-45e8-9311-e94604dcd117
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/8fc83e60-6686-4b8f-93e8-84598ec586a0
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/6c20cd2d-ef07-41b7-9149-5d80f7288b16
    https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/fb37dc99-2c7f-4db1-bcab-a3807af55016

    The MIL Network –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Ocean Maid report and flyer published

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    Grounding and subsequent loss of a stern trawler on Cairnbulg Point, Aberdeenshire, Scotland.

    Image courtesy of Alex Young and www.marinetraffic.com

    Today, we have published our accident investigation report into the grounding of the stern trawler Ocean Maid (BA 55) on Cairnbulg Point near the port of Fraserburgh, Scotland on 24 October 2022. The vessel later broke up and sank.

    The report, available via this link, contains details of what happened, subsequent actions taken and recommendations.

    A safety flyer to the fishing industry has also been produced with this report.

    Media enquiries (telephone only)

    Media enquiries during office hours 01932 440015

    Media enquiries out of hours 0300 7777878

    Updates to this page

    Published 24 October 2024

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Economics: Alwyn Jordan: Monitoring and assessing risks to financial stability in the Caribbean

    Source: Bank for International Settlements

    On behalf of the Central Bank of Barbados, it is my great pleasure to welcome you to this peer-to-peer exchange seminar. I’d like to extend a special welcome to Dr. Petr Jakubik from CARTAC, whose initiative has brought us together for this important event.

    This is not just another training seminar – it is a dynamic platform for the exchange of ideas, the sharing of expertise and the building of frameworks for future collaboration. In today’s rapidly evolving global landscape, where financial stability and economic resilience are increasingly intertwined with central bank regulation, peer exchanges like this are vital. They help us remain agile, informed and equip us with the latest knowledge and best practices to meet the challenges we face as central bankers and regulators.

    It is therefore a pleasure to be here today to discuss this issue with you, which is at the heart of economic development in the Caribbean. We all know that at first glance, financial stability may seem like a dry, technical topic, but for us in the Caribbean, it is central to safeguarding our economic well-being. As the global financial system becomes more interconnected, our economies are exposed to a variety of risks – both natural and man-made. Today, I want to highlight why financial stability is crucial for our region, with particular emphasis on challenges such as climate change, external shocks, and the evolving financial landscape. I will also shed some light on the difficulties faced by Caribbean central banks and other regulators in preparing comprehensive Financial Stability Reports.

    We all know that financial stability is about ensuring that various entities such as banks, insurance companies, financial markets, and payment systems operate smoothly without triggering major disruptions. When financial stability is maintained, businesses can secure credit, households can borrow and save, and governments can finance development. It is therefore the backbone of economic resilience.

    For the Caribbean, the stakes are particularly high. We are a region of small, open economies that are highly dependent on external trade, tourism, and foreign investment. Our economic structure makes us extremely vulnerable to external shocks, whether they are related to global financial conditions, natural disasters, or geopolitical events. Any significant disruption to the financial system, whether from internal weaknesses or external shocks can therefore quickly lead to a financial crisis. The resulting economic hardship can take years, or even decades, from which to recover. A very good example of this phenomenon was seen during and after the Global Financial Crisis. 

    Vulnerability to Climate Change

    But let me start by addressing one of the major external risks to Caribbean economies, namely the climate crisis. Our region is one of the most vulnerable to the impact of climate change. Indeed, when we refer to climate vulnerable economies, Caribbean countries are always the highest ranked by any measure. Rising sea levels, more intense storms such as hurricane Beryl, which caused significant damage to a number of Caribbean islands in late June, prolonged droughts, and flooding have become our unfortunate reality. These climate-related risks have a direct bearing on financial stability, as these systems don’t just devastate homes and infrastructure, they can also have adverse effects on the financial system.

    For example, the destruction of infrastructure can lead to loans becoming non-performing, as businesses and households may default on their debt. Banks and other large financial entities in turn, may face liquidity problems, which can trigger a systemic crisis. Furthermore, as governments attempt to rebuild after the event, this often leads to an increase in public debt, which puts further strain on their ability to finance essential services and infrastructure. Imagine the strain on our resources that would have occurred had any of our islands been hit by the back-to-back hurricanes that recently devastated Florida and other states along the US South coast. 

    Climate-related risks are particularly challenging to manage because of their unpredictable nature and the difficulty in quantifying their economic impact. Caribbean regulators must therefore continuously monitor these risks and implement forward-looking policies to mitigate their effects on the financial system.

    The Impact of Global Economic Shocks

    In addition to climate change, external economic shocks pose another serious risk to financial stability in the Caribbean. Our economies are heavily reliant on global trade, tourism, and remittances. Any disturbance in the global economy such as a recessions in our major trading partners or sudden changes in commodity prices can ripple through our financial systems. Take, for instance, the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic, which brought the world to a standstill in 2020. It was an economic shock of unprecedented proportions for the Caribbean. Indeed, our tourism sector, a lifeline for many economies, came to a grinding halt, leaving governments and businesses scrambling to stay afloat.

    Central banks in the region had to take swift action to ensure liquidity in the financial system, lower interest rates, and support government stimulus efforts. But the pandemic highlighted an ongoing challenge: our financial systems are vulnerable to global crises, and the lack of diversified economies in the region makes recovery more difficult. Regulators must therefore constantly balance the need to maintain stability, while responding to these shocks in an agile and effective manner.

    Navigating the New Financial Landscape

    But this is not the only challenge facing us as regulators, as the financial landscape is also evolving rapidly. The rise of fintech, digital currencies, and shadow banking, has created new opportunities for financial inclusion and innovation. However, it also presents new risks. Digital currencies, while offering the potential for greater financial inclusion, bring concerns about regulatory oversight, cybersecurity, and monetary policy transmission. Caribbean countries have been the pioneers in developing digital currency frameworks, but it still requires careful consideration of the impact on financial stability.

    Shadow banks – non-bank financial intermediaries that provide similar services as traditional banks – such as payday lenders or firms offering “buy now, pay later” options for buyers, are another concern. Given that these entities generally operate outside the regular regulatory framework, they are often opaque, and central banks may lack the tools to properly oversee their activities. They can, therefore, pose systemic risks without the safeguards that apply to the formal financial sector. If these institutions fail, the resulting financial contagion could spread quickly throughout the economy. Developing effective regulatory frameworks for shadow banks is therefore critical to ensuring financial stability in our region. 

    The Value of Financial Stability Reports

    It is against this backdrop that Caribbean central banks face the herculean task of monitoring, assessing, and mitigating these risks. One of the key tools at their disposal is macroprudential policy, which is still in its initial stage of implementation in most Caribbean economies. However, central banks have made significant improvements in communicating the risks to the public via their Financial Stability Reports (FSR). These FSRs, as you all know, provide a comprehensive assessment of the financial system’s health and highlight any emerging vulnerabilities. However, preparing a comprehensive FSR is a very challenging exercise, especially in the Caribbean context.

    One of the most significant challenges is the lack of comprehensive and timely data. Many countries in the region struggle with collecting and analysing the necessary data to fully assess financial risks. Without high-quality data, it is difficult for central banks to make accurate forecasts or take pre-emptive action. Improving data collection and our analytical capabilities must therefore be a priority for the region, if we are to produce meaningful and effective reports.

    Moreover, we know that preparing a high-quality FSR requires specialised knowledge in areas such as macroprudential policy, risk modelling, and scenario analysis. Given the complexity of financial systems and the fast-paced evolution of risks, Caribbean regulators must therefore invest in training and development, to ensure that they have the expertise required to produce comprehensive reports. 

    In our context, the Financial Stability Report of Barbados has evolved over the years, reflecting the growing complexity of the financial landscape in the country. I’d like to highlight some of the key milestones that have shaped this journey, all of which have been implemented as a result of our partnership with our sister regulator, the Financial Services Commission (FSC) and our collaboration with CARTAC (Caribbean Regional Technical Assistance Centre).

    A major accomplishment was the introduction of stress testing in 2016, as this allowed us to simulate how our banking sector would perform under adverse shocks. This tool gave the Bank, as a policymaker and regulator, a clearer understanding of the vulnerabilities that might emerge during a financial crisis, helping us better prepare for potential disruptions. This was a crucial step in ensuring that our banks and financial institutions remain resilient, even in the face of global uncertainties.

    As our financial system grew more diverse, it became essential to extend our focus beyond traditional banks. In 2018, the FSR began to include a detailed analysis of non-bank financial institutions (NBFIs) such as insurance companies, pension funds, and credit unions, though our collaboration with the FSC. This was a key milestone because non-bank financial institutions are integral to our economy, and their health is equally as important as that of the banking sector. By broadening the scope of the FSR, we now have a more comprehensive picture of the overall financial system.

    The next significant development occurred four years later in 2020, when we made an important breakthrough in acknowledging the significant risk that climate change poses to our financial system. With the inclusion of climate-related financial risk analysis, the Central Bank aligned Barbados with the global efforts to manage climate-related financial risks, underscoring our commitment to resilience.

    The results of this work, led by Dr. Saida Teleu and her team, were incorporated in Barbados’ 2023 FSR. With the invaluable assistance of the Coastal Zone Management Unit, we’ve implemented a climate stress test, focusing on projecting damage to the accommodation sector, which is deeply intertwined with our tourism industry. This collaboration has allowed us to assess the potential impacts of climate-related risks on financial stability in a more data-driven and precise manner.

    In the most recent FSR, the Bank has also successfully undertaken a significant revamp of its publication, with improvements that underscore our commitment to both innovation and comprehensive risk management. One of the key upgrades has been the introduction of a dynamic balance sheet approach to stress testing. Unlike traditional methods, this approach allows us to incorporate explicit macroeconomic scenarios and extend our stress testing over a longer horizon. This dynamic perspective offers us deeper insights into how our financial system would respond to shocks in a changing economic environment. Additionally, we’ve developed a non-performing loan satellite model, giving us a more accurate assessment of credit risk in our financial system. 

    We also recognised the growing importance of the real estate sector, and so we’ve enhanced our analysis of this sector. Real estate is not only a critical component of household wealth, but also a significant driver of lending and investment activity, making it essential to the stability of our financial system. 

    As the financial landscape changes, so too must our approach to assessing risks. In this regard, the 2023 FSR also incorporated the risks posed by digital financial services, fintech, and cybersecurity and issued a survey to the industry to gather vital data. This addition was particularly important given the rapid rise of cyber-crime and the increasing use of online financial services, and the recent publicised cyber-related breaches at the Barbados Revenue Authority and one of our credit unions give testament to this fact. As a country, we are keen to embrace innovation, but it is equally important that we understand and manage the risks that come with these technological advancements.

    These most recent advancements significantly upgraded our report. Indeed, the Bank’s FSR has now become, in our humble opinion, the regional benchmark for integrating climate change into financial stability assessments. However, we are keen to share our insights with our regional colleagues and we thank CARTAC for sponsoring two peer-to-peer missions, including this one, which serve to further strengthen financial stability efforts throughout the Caribbean. 

    Each of these milestones reflects our Bank’s commitment to ensuring a resilient financial system. From stress testing and climate risk analysis to the inclusion of cyber risks and more robust data analytics, we are continuously improving the tools and strategies we use to safeguard financial stability.

    But our work doesn’t end here. The financial system is always evolving, and we must stay ahead of the curve. By building on these achievements and addressing new challenges, we will continue to protect the financial well-being of Barbados, ensuring that we are resilient in the face of both local and global uncertainties.

    I am honoured to also explore some of the significant milestones achieved by two of our regional counterparts – the Financial Services Commission of Turks and Caicos and the Central Bank of Aruba – in their efforts to enhance their financial stability reporting. 

    Let me begin with Turks and Caicos. Your financial system plays a vital role in your country’s economy, particularly in your banking and offshore sectors. In collaboration with CARTAC, the FSC made great strides in developing its stress testing framework, which is very similar to the one we recently implemented, as a multi-factor and multi-period macroeconomic-stress test that can account for both domestic economic shocks such as a downturn in tourism and external shocks like global financial market volatility. By extending the horizon and refining the scenarios, the FSC is now better equipped to gauge the potential vulnerabilities within its financial system.

    We know that the Central Bank of Aruba does not currently publish a Financial Stability Report. However, the Bank does perform stress tests on its banking sector, the results of which are usually discussed with the banks individually via bilateral meetings. In 2023, the Bank conducted a stress test on the banking sector, with a key focus on concentration risk. This scenario analysis was driven by the developments in the US banking system that took place that year. 

    We will hear directly from these two institutions about their journey to enhance and assess financial stability in their respective jurisdictions. Over the next few days, you will participate in a diverse and robust line-up of sessions that promise to deepen our understanding and sharpen our capabilities. 

    I encourage all of you to actively participate in these discussions, as the true power of peer-to-peer learning lies in the collective wisdom and shared experiences of those in this room. Each of us brings a wealth of knowledge and experience, and together, we have the opportunity to generate innovative solutions that can strengthen the financial stability of our institutions and economies.

    I commend CARTAC, and Petr specifically, for hosting these peer-to-peer exchanges, which provide unique value to our professional growth. While we are all experts in our respective areas, there is tremendous strength in collaboration. This seminar is therefore a perfect opportunity to foster connections, engage in thought-provoking discussions, and together, to drive the innovation and progress that our institutions and economies need to thrive.

    I would like to take a moment to recognise and thank the organising team, especially the Financial Stability Unit led by Saida, who have worked tirelessly to put together this exceptional event, as well as Karen, who has done an excellent job in coordinating this event. Your dedication and efforts are deeply appreciated.

    I would also like to extend a special thank you to our speakers, including those from our sister regulator, the FSC, and our colleagues from the Turks & Caicos and Aruba, who have prepared valuable content for us. We look forward to the knowledge and insights you will bring to the table.

    In closing, I urge each of you to take full advantage of the opportunities this seminar provides. Whether through the formal sessions or during informal conversations during the coffee breaks, I encourage you to use this time to build stronger networks, exchange ideas, and learn from one another. Once again, thank you all for being here. I look forward to the meaningful discussions and practical takeaways that will undoubtedly emerge over the next few days and I wish everyone a productive and successful seminar.

    Thank you.

    MIL OSI Economics –

  • MIL-Evening Report: NZ’s Labour calls on other cities to follow Israel boycott lead

    Asia Pacific Report

    New Zealand’s opposition Labour Party has backed Christchurch City Council and called for other cities to block business with firms involved in Israel’s illegal settlements in the Occupied Palestine Territories.

    “It is great that Christchurch is the first council in New Zealand to take up this cause. We hope others will follow this example,” Labour’s associate foreign affairs spokesperson Phil Twyford said.

    “Christchurch City’s decision is in line with the recent International Court of Justice ruling on the illegal settlements, which said the international community should not ‘aid or assist’ the settlements.”

    Christchurch is New Zealand’s third-largest city with a population of 408,000. The council vote yesterday was 10 for sanctions, two against and three abstentions.

    Labour has called on the government to direct the Super Fund and the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) to divest from any companies on the United Nations list of companies complicit in building or maintaining the illegal settlements, and use its procurement rules to ban any future dealings with those firms.

    “New Zealanders want to see an end to Israel’s slaughter in Gaza, and a political solution that allows the establishment of a Palestinian state,” Twyford said.

    “Unfortunately, since the Oslo Accords in 1993, Israel has deliberately set out to colonise the Occupied West Bank with settlements housing more than 700,000 Israelis, designed to scuttle any hope of a two-state solution.

    “It is time for the international community to take action against this breach of international law.”

    MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

  • MIL-OSI Global: From a salty breeze to the stench of sewage, here’s how smell affects our ocean experience and reflects changing seas

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jieling Xiao, Reader in Architecture and Sensory Environments, School of Architecture and Design, Birmingham City University

    Happy Together/Shutterstock

    Apart from the breathtaking sight of vast blue waters or the rhythmic sound of crashing waves, the vivid smell of the sea ties us to the rhythms of nature and the ebb and flow of the tides. The salty freshness of a coastal breeze or the distinctive scent of seaweed can transport us back to memories of seaside holidays, fishing trips, or childhood adventures.

    A “smellscape” is the perceived smell environment which can be fleeting or may build over time, depending on our past experiences and backgrounds.

    My research investigates how smells trigger feelings, imaginations and memories in places. As geographer Paul W. Rodaway noted 30 years ago, “olfaction gives us not just a sensuous geography of places and spatial relationships, but also an emotional one of love and hate, pain and joy, attachment and alienation”.

    There’s no single ocean smell. Smellscapes of the sea are multi-layered; they are shaped by interactions between water, marine life and environmental conditions. Every time we breathe in sea air, we receive information from the marine environment – the chemicals generated from the ecological processes or contaminants produced by human activities.

    Swimming, sailing, even just building a sandcastle – the ocean benefits our physical and mental wellbeing. Curious about how a strong coastal connection helps drive marine conservation, scientists are diving in to investigate the power of blue health.

    This article is part of a series, Vitamin Sea, exploring how the ocean can be enhanced by our interaction with it.

    The main chemical that contributes to that distinctive sea smell is dimethyl sulphide. This volatile organic compound containing sulphur that’s present in air and water in all marine areas.

    Dimethyl sulphide, along with the evaporation of salty sea spray, creates that sharp, tangy smell that’s synonymous with the coastal experience. The concentration of dimethyl sulphide depends on many biological processes in the ocean. Marine algae produce a chemical called dimethylsulfoniopropionate (DMSP) which helps regulate their internal conditions during times of environmental stress. When algae die, that DMSP is released into the surrounding water where bacteria and enzymes convert it into dimethyl sulphide.

    The Moon also affects the smell of the sea because the growth of algae changes with the tides. American marine biologist Rachel Carson described the impact of moon cycle on the ocean smell in her book The Sea Around Us (1951):

    …for a time each spring, the waters may become blotched with brown, jellylike masses, and the fishermen’s nets come up dripping a brown slime and containing no fish, for the herring have turned away from these waters as though in loathing of the viscid, foul-smelling algae. But in less time than passes between the full moon and the new, the spring flowering of Phaeocystis is past and the waters have cleared again.

    Changing smells reflect the changes in dynamics between marine life, water, the atmosphere and human activities. The foul smell from algae indicates decomposition and anaerobic activity in the water. The smell of decay often accompanies oxygen-deprived environments where organic matter breaks down. Monitoring the olfactory signals of ecosystems, such as the concentration of dimethyl sulphide or the smell of decaying algae, can provide insights into the health of marine environments and signal potential problems like low oxygen levels or contamination.

    Scientists have started to explore the impact of climate change on the sea smells. Recent research by Matthew Salter, a marine biogeochemist at Stockholm University, investigates the volatile organic compounds (gaseous chemicals) emitted by cyanobacteria and other plankton that inhabit coastlines of the Baltic Sea. His team studies how these chemicals contribute to the formation of aerosols leading to climate change.

    Researchers at Stockholm University explain how the smell of the sea is linked to the climate.

    Saving healthy smellscapes

    Preserving the natural scents of the sea requires concerted efforts to reduce sewage pollution and plastic waste reaching the sea. That involves promoting sustainable fishing practices and urban development, and mitigating climate change that causes extreme weather and rising sea levels that threaten marine habitats and coastal landscapes. Oceans are becoming more acidic as more carbon dioxide enters the atmosphere.

    New findings suggest that ocean acidification may affect how sea creatures detect smells, which, in turn, affects their ability to detect predators, find food and track mates.



    Read more:
    Oceans may become too acidic for animals to smell their way around

    Melting ice caps and thawing permafrost are also releasing bacteria and other microbes that have been dormant for thousands or even millions of years. So how the sea smellscapes might change over the coming decades and centuries is unpredictable.

    Meanwhile, creatives are pioneering ways to document ocean smellscapes. In the tidalectics project, Norwegian chemist Sissel Tolaas collected oceanic smells from the Caribbean and the Pacific coasts of Costa Rica, analysed the key chemicals and reproduced them. At her exhibition, she presented smells from waves to pollution to alert people about ecological change through their noses.

    Researcher and artist Kate Mclean creates maps to illustrate smellscapes. In Newport, a seaside city on Rhode Island in the US, she documented the ocean-based smells to build a visual-olfactory catalogue. Different colour codes represent different collective responses to smells from people who joined Mclean on a smell walk. Blue lines show ocean smells spreading across the island as they are encountered frequently by residents and visitors.

    As the environment changes, documenting smellscapes of the ocean could provide insight into the state of our seas and our relationship with coastal waters. So next time you take a breath of fresh air, by the sea or otherwise, take a moment to think about scent ecology. Our relationships with smells play a crucial role in connecting us to nature and telling us more about the health of our oceans.

    Jieling Xiao does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. From a salty breeze to the stench of sewage, here’s how smell affects our ocean experience and reflects changing seas – https://theconversation.com/from-a-salty-breeze-to-the-stench-of-sewage-heres-how-smell-affects-our-ocean-experience-and-reflects-changing-seas-239022

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI Global: Research shows our understanding of ‘posh’ words is all wrong

    Source: The Conversation – UK – By Natalie Braber, Professor, Linguistics, School of Arts and Humanities, Nottingham Trent University

    Language use complicates the already-complex nature of class identity. Diane Bondareff/Shutterstock

    If you live in the UK or are familiar with its wide range of accents and dialects, you can probably tell the difference between a posh or upper-class accent, (think the “King’s English”) and one more associated with the working class (such as Cockney).

    Besides accents, it is a popular view, reinforced in media and pop culture, that certain words are used specifically by people of certain classes. For example, in the book Watching the English, social anthropologist Kate Fox comments that the word “sofa” is used by upper-middle-class speakers or above.

    In the 1950s, Alan Ross, a professor of linguistics at the University of Birmingham, claimed to identify behaviour that distinguished England’s upper classes from the rest of society. These included, among other things, not playing tennis in braces and an aversion to high tea.

    He also identified features of pronunciation, grammar and use of specific words which he thought differed. This was not based on empirical research, but solely on his own perceptions (“armchair linguistics”). While Ross’s claims are often referenced in the media, there has not been much research to see if these views hold up today.

    Through two studies carried out with our colleagues George Bailey and Eddie O’Hara Brown, we tried to find out. We investigated the use of words that Ross and others have identified as indicators of class: the supposedly upper-class words loo, napkin and sofa, with their supposedly non-upper-class counterparts, toilet, serviette and settee.

    In the first study, we used spot-the-difference tasks to prompt 80 participants of different ages, genders and social classes to say these words. For example, “the sofa is a different colour in that picture” or “the toilet is green in the left picture and white in the right one”. This meant that participants were focused more on the task than the actual words, so we were able to examine their natural usage.



    Read more:
    When did class stop predicting who people vote for in Britain? Know Your Place podcast

    While the supposedly upper-class napkin and sofa were more common than serviette or settee, the supposedly non-upper-class toilet was more common than loo. For example, where napkin was used by 72 participants, only 18 used serviette (some speakers used multiple words). This challenges Ross’s claims that words distinguish the upper class from the rest of society. If most people use a word, that word cannot be a reliable indicator of upper classness.

    In terms of social variation, we found that the usage of these words varied, but not in a way associated with social class. For example, there were some interesting results relating to age. While, on the one hand, the reportedly upper-class loo is used more by older speakers, the supposedly non-upper-class serviette and settee are also more commonly used by older speakers.

    Perception of words and class

    We also wanted to examine the perception of these words, as in whether people think certain words are associated with social characteristics, such as education level, professionalism, formality and poshness, which are traits associated with class.

    So, in a second experiment, we asked 100 participants to evaluate several social media posts, asking them to judge the writers. Half of the participants read the “upper-class word” and half read the “non-upper-class” word within an otherwise identical phrase, adapted from genuine posts on social media.

    For example, one message was: “My flatmate went to a wedding and I brought takeaway, was almost done eating before I saw something that looks like a fried egg, put it in my mouth and it was a napkin/serviette. God why me!?”

    From this experiment, we found that the perception of these words is not uniform across social groups. For example, the higher socioeconomic group thought sofa to be more posh, while the lower socioeconomic group perceived settee as more posh.

    There were no perceptual differences between toilet/loo. And serviette was perceived as more posh than napkin, despite being identified by Ross and others as the non-upper-class form.

    Napkin or serviette?
    Shutterstock

    Both of our studies, as well as complementary analysis of the spoken British National Corpus (a 10 million word database of spoken English), show that there is little consistency in the way that each of the investigated variables are used and perceived.

    Of course, this is not to say that there are no class-based vocabulary markers in contemporary British English, or that the effects of such perceptions do not have an effect. As much other linguistic research shows, class-based accent and dialect discrimination are unfortunately still alive and well.

    While the view that some words are posher than others has endured, our findings show that the claims popularised by Ross in the 1950s are not reflected in the reality of England today.

    The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

    – ref. Research shows our understanding of ‘posh’ words is all wrong – https://theconversation.com/research-shows-our-understanding-of-posh-words-is-all-wrong-240362

    MIL OSI – Global Reports –

  • MIL-OSI United Kingdom: Call for evidence: An inspection of General Maritime

    Source: United Kingdom – Executive Government & Departments

    The Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration invites anyone with knowledge and experience of General Maritime to submit evidence for the inspection.

    The Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration has begun an inspection of General Maritime, with the aim of identifying what improvements Border Force is able to make in the short-term (18-24 months) within existing resources, including through efficiencies, reorganisation, and reprioritisation. 

    For the purposes of this inspection, ‘General Maritime’ is understood to include: 

    • (a) all non-scheduled (not on a regular route) international maritime traffic arriving at an un-canalised location (one with no customs or immigration controls or no port approval, for example small harbours, marinas, beaches) 

    • (b) scheduled un-canalised international non-passenger services, whether commercial or pleasure 

    and encompasses yachts, tugs, rigid-hull inflatable boats (RHIBs), motorboats and small fishing vessels, as well as larger vessels where (a) or (b) apply. 

    This inspection will focus on: 

    • the levels of General Maritime-related operational activity nationally and regionally  

    • Border Force’s resourcing of General Maritime operational activity  

    • the outcomes from operational activity  

    • stakeholder engagement  

    • the ‘Submit a Pleasure Craft Report’ (sPCR) process  

    • a review of the previous ICIBI recommendations for Project Kraken 

    This call for evidence will remain open until Thursday 7 November 2024. 

    The Independent Chief Inspector invites anyone with knowledge and experience of General Maritime to submit evidence to inform this inspection and would be pleased to hear both what is working well and what could be improved. Submissions touching on any and all areas of interest, including those that may not be mentioned above, are therefore welcome. 

    Please note that the ICIBI’s statutory remit does not extend to investigating or making decisions about individual cases. This remains a Home Office responsibility. However, the Independent Chief Inspector can take an interest in individual cases to the extent that they illustrate or point to systemic problems. 

    Please also note that the information you submit may be quoted in the final inspection report. However, it is the ICIBI’s practice not to name sources and to anonymise as much as possible any examples or case studies. 

    Please click here to email your submission to the Independent Chief Inspector. 

    Data Protection 

    Information on how we process personal data submitted in response to a call for evidence can be found in the ICIBI privacy information notice available on the ICIBI website. 

    David Bolt, Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration 

    23 October 2024

    Updates to this page

    Published 23 October 2024

    MIL OSI United Kingdom –

  • MIL-OSI Russia: Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    Translation. Region: Russian Federation –

    Source: Government of the Russian Federation – An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    October 23, 2024

    Previous news Next news

    Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on the protection of Lake Baikal

    Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Patrushev held a meeting of the Government Commission on Lake Baikal Protection. The event was attended by the heads of three regions belonging to the Baikal Natural Territory, State Duma deputies, and representatives of relevant departments.

    “This water body is a unique natural resource of our country and plays a major socio-economic role in the development of nearby regions. Therefore, of course, preserving Lake Baikal is an important state task that requires a comprehensive approach and close cooperation of all interested parties,” said Dmitry Patrushev.

    In particular, it was noted that the reconstruction of the Bolsherechensky fish hatchery in Buryatia will almost double the artificial reproduction of the Baikal omul, one of the main symbols of the lake. Work on the facility should be completed by the end of this year.

    The government commission meeting also discussed the issue of construction and modernization of treatment facilities in the Baikal natural territory. Within the framework of the national project “Ecology”, activities are being implemented in three regions – Zabaikalsky Krai, Irkutsk Region and the Republic of Buryatia – a total of six facilities.

    In addition, the participants considered the issue of developing tourism infrastructure on Baikal. The Ministry of Economic Development has developed a corresponding draft “road map”, which provides for the creation of conditions for increasing visitor numbers to the Baikal natural territory. “It is important to understand how these activities are linked to the need to reduce the load on the lake’s ecosystem,” said Dmitry Patrushev.

    The draft road map for the development of tourism infrastructure on Lake Baikal must be submitted to the Government for approval by December 20.

    Please note: This information is raw content directly from the source of the information. It is exactly what the source states and does not reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.

    MIL OSI Russia News –