As Parks Get Shortchanged on City Budget, NYC Biodiversity Faces Risks, Report Says

posted in: All news | 0

A recent report by the NYC Biodiversity Task Force says the city needs more funds to protect its increasingly at-risk fauna and flora.

Jamaica Bay in Queens is a critical habitat for birds, supporting some 325 species. (Photo by Adi Talwar)

Most people think of New York City as a concrete jungle where nature is hard to find. But a new report on the importance of protecting the Big Apple’s biodiversity begs to differ. 

The city is also a rich ecological hotspot that rare species like the Monarch Butterfly, the Atlantic Coast Leopard Frog, and the endangered Butternut tree call home, the report notes.

“We have a lot of nature here. It’s really important to highlight that because when we don’t, city officials undermine it,” said botanist Marielle Anzelone, lead author of the report and co-founder of the NYC Biodiversity Task Force, which published it.

Last month, budget negotiations came to a close with New York City setting aside only 0.6 percent of its $115.9 billion budget for the Parks Department, which is in charge of managing the city’s fauna and flora.

A chronically underfunded Parks Department—which has received between 0.5 and 0.6 percent of the city’s total budget for 30 years—and the lack of a citywide biodiversity protection plan puts the city’s natural wonders at risk, the report says.

The Big Apple has already lost 84 percent of its salt marshes and 99 percent of its freshwater wetlands and streams over the last 120 years, according to the report, thanks in large part to coastal fill and development.

“This makes the plants and animals that depend on these systems extraordinarily rare in the five boroughs,” the report notes. 

New York is located along the Atlantic Flyway, a major migratory path that hundreds of species of birds, bats, butterflies, and dragonflies pass through annually, relying on its green spaces and waterways to find shelter as they do.

They find solace in the mosaic of ecosystems that cover approximately 20,000 acres of land across the five boroughs from forests to grasslands, beaches, and freshwater wetlands.

Wetlands on Staten Island. (Photo by Adi Talwar)

New Yorkers might spot the American Beaver lurking in the Bronx River or come across 200 native kinds of bees buzzing through its skyscrapers.

Keeping the city’s biodiversity alive is important because thriving ecosystems guarantee cleaner air and water, cooler temperatures and prevent diseases. This is especially important in low-income communities, as the neighborhoods with the highest poverty rates in the five boroughs also have the highest asthma rates, according to the city’s Health Department

To keep this vast ecologically rich environment alive and thriving, the city needs to pour more resources and political willpower into protecting it, the NYC Biodiversity Task Force says. 

The city’s Parks Department, which manages 12,400 acres of parkland where ecologically significant fauna and flora thrive, has been chronically underfunded for decades.  

Back in the 1960s, Parks received 1.4 percent of the city’s budget, according to the non-profit New Yorkers for Parks. But after a fiscal crisis hit in the late 1970s, the agency’s budget was slashed to between 0.5 percent and 0.6 percent, where it remains today.

By comparison, other major U.S cities like Los Angeles, Chicago and Minneapolis, reportedly dedicate between 2 and 5 percent of their municipal budgets to parks. 

When Mayor Eric Adams campaigned for office he promised to dedicate 1 percent of the city’s total budget to parks, but has yet to make due on his pledge. 

Parks does plan to spend $10.4 billion on capital improvements over the next 10 years, which includes $891 million for land acquisition, tree planting, and green infrastructure, the mayor’s office noted in an email.

And in the most recent budget deal for fiscal year 2026, which elected officials finalized last month, $687.6 million was set aside for parks. That includes a $47 million bump than what City Hall initially intended to spend when funding negotiations first kicked off, the mayor’s office noted in an email. 

But the budget falls short of the $79.5 million environmental advocates said is needed to restore 795 vital staff positions that help take care of the city’s natural wonders.  

The final budget does guarantee $6.1 million to hire over 70 additional parks maintenance workers and lift a current hiring freeze for certain positions. 

Still, the new budget “only restores roughly one fourth of the positions, leaving the Parks Department down roughly 600 positions still,” according to the Play Fair for Parks Coalition. 

Central Park. (Daniel Avila/NYC Parks)

“We’ve made major investments to improve our parks and public amenities, including increasing the Parks budget and headcount to their highest level, as we aim to reach the 1 percent target,” a City Hall spokesperson said in an email.

But taking care of the city’s biodiversity shouldn’t fall on the shoulders of the Park’s Department alone, Anzelone says. 

“They are not able to do this work on their own. Nor should the topic of biodiversity be siloed into just the Parks Department. We need a citywide plan to protect our natural environment,” Anzelone said.

The city does have a biodiversity public awareness campaign and it leads the Forever Wild Program, which aims to protect ecologically significant habitats across the parks system. It also operates a Plant Ecology Center and Nursery that includes the largest municipal seed collection in the country, according to City Hall. 

While the administration has a plan to tackle climate change and build a more resilient city through its PlaNYC agenda, Anzelone says it lacks a comprehensive biodiversity blueprint to protect fauna and flora. 

“New York City is a climate leader. We want New York City to be a biodiversity leader too,” she added. 

To reach the reporter behind this story, contact Mariana@citylimits.org. To reach the editor, contact Jeanmarie@citylimits.org

Want to republish this story? Find City Limits’ reprint policy here.

The post As Parks Get Shortchanged on City Budget, NYC Biodiversity Faces Risks, Report Says appeared first on City Limits.

Grilled chicken slathered in a homemade barbecue sauce stars in this $25 dinner for four

posted in: All news | 0

By Gretchen McKay, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

June is a great time to fire up your grill and move at least some of your daily or weekly dinner duties to the backyard.

Related Articles


Savory-spicy peanut dressing complements the sweetness of this tomato salad


Quick Cook: How to make Cherry Almond Ice Cream at home


Recipes: Chocolate and peanut butter go great together in these treats


Recipe: Use cherries to make this relish for grilled meat


Dried bay leaves bring layers of flavor to Portuguese-style beef skewers

Cooking outdoors is usually cooler, tends to have a better view and is generally a lot more fun for both the cook and those he or she is trying to feed.

Chicken is often a prime choice when it comes to proteins to cook on gas or charcoal because it’s cheaper to feed a crowd with than beef or seafood. It’s also a lot more forgiving since it doesn’t require a lot of technique so long as you 1) cook over a moderate heat, 2) use an instant read thermometer to know when it’s done and 3) remember to let the grilled chicken rest for at least 5 minutes before slicing or serving so it can reabsorb some of its juices.

And if you take the time to soak it in a tasty marinade or stir together a homemade sweet-and-tangy barbecue sauce for basting, it will both elevate the flavor of the finished product and help keep the meat moist and tender.

While chicken breast is often a favorite choice because it’s leaner and has a milder, more subtle flavor, it’s also more expensive than other parts of the bird. Without a whole lot of fat to protect it from flames or heat as you grill it, it’s really easy to overcook and dry out.

That’s why I almost always opt for chicken thigh when I’m planning a cookout. It’s true that, as a fattier meat, dark-colored thigh packs more calories onto your plate than chicken breast. Still, it’s so much juicier and incredibly flavorful.

Grilled boneless, skinless chicken thigh builds the foundation for this summery budget meal for four. A scratch, ketchup-based barbecue sauce sweetened with brown sugar and spiced up with hot sauce and vinegar adds the perfect mix of tang and sugar, and because our recipe makes a lot of it, there’s plenty left over for dipping.

We serve it with a corn salad made with fresh kernels off the cob, salty feta and cherry tomatoes tossed in a simple four-ingredient dressing (if you don’t count the salt and pepper) that can be whisked together in seconds.

Rounding out the meal are roasted sweet potato chips and super-easy brown sugar blondies studded with butterscotch chips and chopped pecans and topped with gooey swirls of homemade strawberry jam.

It’s a feast fit if not for a king or queen (that’d require steak) at the very least a member of a royal family — especially since you’ll probably get some leftovers out of it.

Also impressive: It rings up 28 cents under our budget of $25.

I’m always surprised when a salad dish ends up costing more than dessert, but there’s no getting around the fact that fresh fruits and vegetables are becoming increasingly more expensive. All told, the corn salad added up to $6.55, or almost three times the price of the sweet potatoes ($2.25 for two) and more than half the total cost of the chicken, including the barbecue sauce.

Then again, I went with fresh ears of corn instead of canned or frozen and added not just a nice crumble of feta but also a generous handful of fat and juicy cherry tomatoes I couldn’t resist in the produce aisle.

Thanks in (small) part to the decreasing price of eggs and the fact that I almost always have homemade jam in my refrigerator, the blondies were quite economical, even with the addition of chips and pecans. Where else can you find a decadent, butterscotch-forward dessert for 42 cents a serving but from a home kitchen?

As always, I reached into my pantry and fridge for some of the ingredients most home cooks and/or bakers have on hand — olive oil, baking soda, vanilla, honey, vinegar and mustard — and I also did not calculate the cost of the basil in the salad because as someone who loves Italian cuisine, I am never without it.

Ditto with the red onion, a few of which are always in my refrigerator crisper, and various spices (though I did try to calculate the cost based on price per ounce).

Nothing on the menu takes more than 30 minutes to prepare, and if you get all your ducks in a row before you preheat the grill, you can make everything in one fell swoop.

As always, folks, remember to shop for ingredients at home before heading to the grocery store — it’s amazing how we forget what we already have on hand and then buy in duplicate, or let go to waste.

Ingredients for a budget-minded barbecue chicken dinner for four. (Gretchen McKay/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette/TNS)

Corn-Tomato Salad

PG tested

Fresh corn is best for this recipe, but you also can use canned or frozen. I threw it into a hot skillet with a drizzle of olive oil and fried it while continuously shaking the pan until the kernels were charred, about 7 minutes.

The salad is equally delicious warm, at room temperature or chilled, if you want to make it ahead.

For salad

4 cups fresh or frozen corn, rinsed and drained if frozen, and steamed, boiled or grilled if fresh
1 cup cherry or grape tomatoes, halved or quartered
1/3 cup crumbled feta
1/4 red onion, finely chopped
1/4 cup fresh basil (about a handful), thinly sliced, optional

For dressing

3 tablespoons extra-virgin olive oil
Juice of 1 lime
2 teaspoons honey
1 small clove garlic, minced
Kosher salt and freshly ground black pepper

Toss corn, tomatoes, feta, onion and basil in a large bowl and set aside while you make dressing.

In a small jar or bowl, stir together olive oil, lime juice, honey and garlic. Season to taste with salt and pepper

Add dressing to the corn mixture and mix well to combine. Taste and add more salt or pepper, if needed.

Serves 4.

— Gretchen McKay, Post-Gazette

Grilled Barbecue Chicken

PG tested

Chicken thighs are not only cheaper than chicken breast, but they’re also juicier and have a richer flavor. The homemade barbecue sauce that goes on top is spicy-sweet — brush it on while you’re cooking and also serve on the side for dipping.

For chicken

2 pounds boneless, skinless chicken breast
1 tablespoon dry rub of choice

For barbecue sauce

1 cup ketchup
2 tablespoons brown sugar
1 tablespoon apple cider vinegar
1 tablespoon hot sauce
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
1 tablespoon barbecue rub
1 tablespoon mustard
1/2 teaspoon each garlic and onion powder

Prepare barbecue sauce: In saucepan over medium-low heat, stir together ingredients until well combined. Simmer for 5-10 minutes and use immediately or transfer when cool to an airtight container and store in refrigerator for up to a month. (Makes about 1 cup.)

Preheat grill to medium-high heat (400 degrees) and lightly oil the grates. If using charcoal, set up the briquettes underneath the grill grate.

Place the chicken on the grill and cook for 3-4 minutes, until grill marks have formed and the chicken is nicely browned.

Flip the thighs over and let cook for 3 minutes. Brush on the side facing up lightly with barbecue sauce and cook an additional 3 minutes.

Flip the chicken again, and brush lightly with more barbecue sauce on this side. Cook for 2 minutes.

Flip one last time, and brush again with barbecue sauce.

Continue to cook until the internal temperature reaches 165 degrees (about 20 total minutes on the grill). Serve immediately, either whole or sliced.

Serves 4.

— Gretchen McKay, Post-Gazette

Roasted Sweet Potato Chips

PG tested

Sweet potatoes are more nutritious than regular potatoes, and they’re also so easy to cook. In this recipe, you just slice, sprinkle with spices and bake.

2 large sweet potatoes
Olive oil, for coating
Salt and paprika, for seasoning

Preheat the oven to 400 degrees.

Use a mandolin slicer or chefs knife to cut sweet potatoes into paper-thin rounds. Depending on how big your potatoes are, you may also want to then slice then into half-moons.

Pile sweet potato rounds into a large bowl and drizzle with olive oil. Using your hands, gently toss to coat every piece with oil. Lay the rounds out on the baking sheets in a single layer.

Sprinkle the chips lightly with salt and smoked paprika. Bake for 20-25 minutes, or until crisp and golden around the edges.

Serve immediately.

Serves 4.

— Gretchen McKay, Post-Gazette

Barbecued chicken thigh headlines this budget dinner for four. (Gretchen McKay/Pittsburgh Post-Gazette/TNS)

Strawberry-Pecan Blondies

PG tested

I used strawberry jam and pecans for this recipe, but it’s easy to customize with your favorite flavors. Try almonds and blueberry jam or pistachios and raspberry jam. Perfect for a simple dessert — or breakfast.

4 tablespoons unsalted butter, plus more for pan
1 cup lightly packed brown sugar
1 1/2 teaspoons vanilla extract
1 large egg, slightly beaten
3/4 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon baking powder
1/4 cup butterscotch chips
1/4 cup chopped pecans
3 tablespoons strawberry jam

Preheat oven to 350 degrees. Line an 8-inch square baking pan with foil, leaving an overhang on 2 sides. (I used parchment paper.) Butter the foil.

Combine butter and brown sugar in a large microwave-safe bowl. Microwave until the butter is melted, about 1 minute.

Stir in vanilla. Let cool slightly, then stir in the egg.

Whisk the flour, salt and baking powder in a bowl. Stir into the butter mixture.

Stir in butterscotch chips and pecans and spread the batter in the pan. Drop dollops of strawberry jam on top and swirl with a knife.

Bake the blondies until set, about 20-25 minutes. Transfer to a rack and let cool 15 minutes, then lift out of the pan using the foil. Transfer to rack to cool completely.

Discard the foil and cut into squares.

Makes 9 blondies.

— adapted from “Baking for Fun: 75 Great Cookies, Cakes, Pies & More” by Food Network Magazine

©2025 PG Publishing Co. Visit at post-gazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

The US faces more frequent extreme weather events, but attitudes and actions aren’t keeping up

posted in: All news | 0

By SETH BORENSTEIN

WASHINGTON (AP) — After deadly flooding in central Texas in 1987, some thought they’d proven they could handle Mother Nature’s best punch. Then came this month’s horrific flash floods, when unfathomable amounts of rain fell in only hours and more than 100 people died.

Before 2021, the typically temperate Pacific Northwest and western Canada seemed highly unlikely to get a killer heat wave, but they did. Tropical Hawaii once felt an ocean away from drought-fueled wildfires, until it wasn’t. And many in inland North Carolina figured hurricanes were a coastal problem until the remnants of Helene blew in last year.

Climate change is making extreme weather events more frequent and intense, according to climate scientists and government data. But people and governments are generally living in the past and haven’t embraced that extreme weather is now the norm, to say nothing about preparing for the nastier future that’s in store, experts in meteorology, disasters and health told The Associated Press.

“What happens with climate change is that what used to be extreme becomes average, typical, and what used to never occur in a human lifetime or maybe even in a thousand years becomes the new extreme,” Princeton University climate scientist Michael Oppenheimer said. “We start to experience things that just basically never happened before.”

The 10-year summer average of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s climate extreme index, which tracks hurricanes, heavy rain, droughts and high and low temperatures, is 58% higher than it was in the 1980s.

Despite the grim trajectory, society isn’t acting with enough alarm, Oppenheimer said.

“There’s plenty of evidence that we sit there and do absolutely nothing while these risks are coming right at us like a moving railroad train and we’re standing in the tracks. And then all of a sudden, bam,” he said.

Shifting public perspective

Although the changing climate is the biggest problem, the way we react to or ignore the changes could make a bad situation worse, experts said.

Marshall Shepherd, a University of Georgia meteorology professor who previously served as president of the American Meteorological Society, said people tend to base decisions on how they fared during past extreme weather events, including storms that didn’t end up directly affecting them. This leaves them overly optimistic that they’ll also fare well today, even though storms have grown more fierce.

He points to the Texas flooding.

“That is flash flood alley. We know that floods happen in that region all the time. … I’ve already seen normalcy bias statements by people in the regions saying, well, we get flooding all the time,” Shepherd said, pointing out that the amount of rain that fell in only a few hours last week was anything but normal.

People need to shift how they think about disasters, even if they don’t live in the most disaster-prone locations, said Kim Klockow McClain, an extreme weather social scientist at the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research who studies communicating disaster warnings and risk.

“The message needs to be, if you’re used to some degree of nuisance flooding, every so often, look at what happened in Texas and realize that this is a shifting baseline,” she said.

Ignoring the problem won’t make it disappear

Time and again after catastrophic storms and wildfires, people whose lives were upended say they didn’t think it could happen to them. This mindset helps people cope, but with extreme weather happening more frequently and in more places, it can prevent them from adequately preparing.

“It’s sort of a psychological mechanism to protect us that it can’t happen to me,” said Susan Cutter, co-director of the Hazards Vulnerability & Resilience Institute at the University of South Carolina.

Surviving past extreme events can leave people believing that it won’t happen again or, if it does, that they’ll be fine, said Lori Peek, director of the Natural Hazards Center at the University of Colorado. She said this overconfidence can be dangerous: “Just because I’ve lived through a fire or a flood or a hurricane or a tornado, that does not mean that the next time is going to look like the last time.”

What’s being done

As the weather has grown more extreme, our ability to prepare for and react to it hasn’t kept pace, the scientists said.

“Infrastructure is aging in our country and is more vulnerable given the fact that there are just simply, as a matter of fact, more people living in harm’s way,” Peek said. “As our population has continued to rise, it’s not only that we have more people in the country, it’s also that we have more people living in particularly hazardous areas like our coastal areas.”

The Trump Administration’s mass layoffs and planned cuts to agencies that study climate and help warn of and deal with disasters — the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Weather Service and research labs at the National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Geological Survey — could further worsen the situation, several experts said.

Related Articles


Intense downpours like those in Texas are more frequent, but there’s no telling where they’ll happen


Hazmat crews contain 2,000-gallon acid leak near Minnesota-North Dakota border


The Palisades fire spewed toxins into the Pacific. Summer surf camps are paying the price


Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails


Here’s what to know about clean energy in Republican megabill headed to Trump

Smart and experienced people have already left these agencies and it could take years to make up for their knowledge and abilities, they said.

“We’re destroying the capability we have that we’re going to need more and more in the future,” Oppenheimer said.

As for future disasters, the country needs to figure out and plan for the worst-case scenario instead of looking to the past, Peek said.

“This is our future,” Peek said. “It’s obvious that we’re living into a future where there are going to be more fires and floods and heat waves.”

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

How Americans think the government should respond to natural disasters, according to recent polls

posted in: All news | 0

By LINLEY SANDERS and AMELIA THOMSON-DEVEAUX

WASHINGTON (AP) — Most of the U.S. adults who have experienced major flooding in the past five years think climate change was at least a partial cause, according to polling conducted earlier this year, before the deadly Texas floods.

Related Articles


The US faces more frequent extreme weather events, but attitudes and actions aren’t keeping up


Intense downpours like those in Texas are more frequent, but there’s no telling where they’ll happen


Hazmat crews contain 2,000-gallon acid leak near Minnesota-North Dakota border


The Palisades fire spewed toxins into the Pacific. Summer surf camps are paying the price


Battles over public lands loom even after sell-off proposal fails

But while Americans largely believed the federal government should play a major role in preparing for and responding to natural disasters, an analysis of recent AP-NORC polls shows less consensus about whether the government should be involved in combating climate change to try to keep extreme weather from getting worse.

The polls from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research were conducted in February and June, before catastrophic flooding in Texas killed more than 100 people over the Fourth of July weekend and left others missing. The polls found that Americans generally had a high level of confidence in the National Weather Service and their local weather report, and most thought the federal government should play a central role in alerting Americans to weather events.

That trust could now be undermined, as officials face scrutiny over flood preparations and the timing of alerts and evacuations. Although meteorologists warn that human-caused climate change can make bad storms worse, it’s unclear if overall views of climate change — and the government’s role in combating it — will be altered.

Many have experienced recent major flooding

About 2 in 10 Americans said they had experienced major flooding in recent years, according to the February poll. And among those, about 7 in 10 said climate change was at least a partial cause of the recent weather events they had experienced.

That’s in line with the share of Americans who have been affected in the past five years by any severe weather event, including extreme heat, droughts, hurricanes or extreme cold.

Those living in the Northeast and the South were more likely to say they had been personally impacted by major flooding in recent years.

Most see a role for government in tracking weather events

About 7 in 10 Americans believe the federal government should have a “major role” in tracking weather events and warning people about them, according to AP-NORC polling from June.

That includes about 8 in 10 Democrats, compared with roughly two-thirds of Republicans.

About 8 in 10 Americans want the government to provide aid to affected communities and help with rebuilding efforts, the June poll found. But there was less agreement on whether the government should be combating climate change to try to keep extreme weather from getting worse.

Just over half, 56%, of U.S. adults say the government should have a key role in combating climate change to try to prevent extreme weather from worsening. Scientists have said climate change has led to frequent and more extreme alterations in weather patterns. About 8 in 10 Democrats say the government should play a major role in fighting climate change, compared with about 3 in 10 Republicans.

Confidence in the National Weather Service was high before the floods

Following the disaster, National Weather Service and local officials disagreed about who was ultimately to blame for the lack of awareness about the flood severity.

The AP-NORC polling showed that before the Texas floods, Americans placed a relatively high level of trust in the National Weather Service and their local weather report. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults said in the June survey that they were “extremely” or “very” confident in the National Weather Service or their local weather provider. Another 4 in 10, roughly, were “somewhat confident” in the National Weather Service or their local weather report.

Confidence in the Federal Emergency Management Agency was lower. Before the floods, only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults said they were “extremely” or “very” confident in FEMA, while about 4 in 10 said they were “somewhat” confident.

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. The AP is solely responsible for all content. Find the AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.