Category: English

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Nina Fontana, Researcher in Native American Studies, University of California, Davis

It took decades, stacks of legal paperwork and countless phone calls, but, in the spring of 2025, a California Chuckchansi Native American woman and her daughter walked onto a 5-acre parcel of land, shaded by oaks and pines, for the first time.

This land near the foothills of the Sierra National Forest is part of an unusual category of land that has been largely left alone for more than a century. The parcel, like roughly 400 other parcels across the state totaling 16,000 acres in area, is held in trust by the federal government for the benefit of specific Indigenous people – such as a family member of the woman visiting the land with her daughter.

Largely inaccessible for more than a century, and therefore so far of little actual benefit to those it is meant for, this land provides an opportunity for Indigenous people to not only have recognized land rights but also to care for their land in traditional ways that could help reduce the threat of intensifying wildfires as part of a changing climate.

In collaboration with families who have long been connected to this land, our research team at the University of California, Davis is working to clarify ownership records, document ecological conditions and share information to help allottees access and use their allotments.

California’s unique historical situation

As European nations colonized the area that became the United States, they entered into treaties with Native nations. These treaties established tribal reservations and secured some Indigenous rights to resources and land.

Just after California became a state in 1850, the federal government negotiated 18 treaties with 134 tribes, reserving about 7.5 million acres, roughly 7.5% of the state, for tribes’ exclusive use.

However, land speculators and early state politicians considered the land too valuable to give away, so the U.S. Senate refused to ratify the treaties – while allowing the tribes to think they were valid and legally binding. As a result, most California Native Americans were left landless and subject to violent, state-sanctioned removals by incoming miners and settlers.

Then, in 1887, Congress passed the Dawes Act, which allowed Native people across the U.S. to be assigned or apply for land individually. Though it called the seized land – their former tribal homelands – the “public domain,” the Dawes Act presented a significant opportunity for the landless Native people in California to secure land rights that would be recognized by the government.

These land parcels, called allotments, are not private land, public land or reservation land – rather, they are individual parcels held in trust by the federal government for the benefit of allottees and their descendants.

Many of these allotments were remote – ecologically rich, yet hard to access. They were carved out of ancestral territories but often lacked access to infrastructure like roads, water or electricity. In some cases, allotments were separated from traditional village sites, ceremonial areas or vital water resources, cutting them off from broader ecosystems and community networks.

Federal officials often drew rough or incorrect maps and even lost track of which parcels had been allotted and to whom, especially as original allottees passed away. As a result, many allotments were claimed and occupied by others, coming into private hands without the full knowledge or consent of the Native families they were held in trust for.

There were once 2,522 public domain allotments in California totaling 336,409 acres. In 2025, approximately 400 of these allotments remain, encompassing just over 16,000 acres. They are some of the only remaining, legally recognized tracts of land where California Native American families can maintain ties to place, which make them uniquely significant for cultural survival, sovereignty and ecological stewardship.

The allotments today

Because of their remoteness, many of these lands remained relatively undisturbed by human activity and are home to diverse habitats, native plants and traditional gathering places. And because they are held in trust for Native people, they present an opportunity to exercise Indigenous practices of land and resource management, which have sustained people and ecosystems through millennia of climate shifts.

We and our UC Davis research team partner with allottee families; legal advocates including California Indian Legal Services, a Native-led legal nonprofit; and California Public Domain Allottee Association, an allottee-led nonprofit that supports allottees to access and care for their lands. Together, we are studying various aspects of the remaining allotments, including seeking to understand how vulnerable they are to wildfire and drought, and identifying options for managing the land to reduce those vulnerabilities.

An opportunity for learning

So far, our surveys of the vegetation on these lands suggest that they could serve as places that sustain both flora and fauna as the climate changes.

Many of these parcels are located in remote, less-developed foothills or steep terrain where they have remained relatively intact, retaining more native species and diverse habitats than surrounding lands. Many of these parcels have elements like oak woodlands, meadows, brooks and rivers that create cooler, wetter areas that help plants and animals endure wildfires or periods of extreme heat or drought.

Allotment lands also offer the potential for the return of stewardship methods that – before European colonization – sustained and improved these lands for generations. For example, Indigenous communities have long used fire to tend plants, reduce overgrowth, restore water tables and generally keep ecosystems healthy.

Guided by Indigenous knowledge and rooted in the specific cultures and ecologies of place, this practice, often called cultural burning, reduces dry materials that could fuel future wildfires, making landscapes more fire-resilient and lowering both ecological and economic damage when wildfires occur. At the same time, it brings back plants for food, medicine, fiber and basketry for California Native communities.

Challenges on allotments

The Chuckchansi family who reached their land for the first time in the spring of 2025 would like to move onto the land. However, the parcel is surrounded by private property, and they need to seek permission from neighboring landowners to even walk onto their own parcel.

In addition, a small number of employees at the Bureau of Indian Affairs are responsible for allotments, and they must also deal with issues on larger reservations and other tribal lands.

Further, because the lands are held in federal trust, allottees’ ability to engage in traditional management practices like cultural burning often face more stringent federal permitting processes than state or private landowners – including restrictions under the Clean Air Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

To our knowledge, no fire management plans have been approved by the Bureau of Indian Affairs on California Native American public domain allotments. Nonetheless, many families are interested in following traditional practices to manage their land. These efforts were a key topic at the most recent California Public Domain Allottees Conference, which included about 100 participants, including many allottee families.

Why it matters

As California searches for ideas to help its people adapt to climate change, the allotment lands offer what we believe is a meaningful opportunity to elevate Indigenous leadership in climate adaptation. Indigenous land stewardship strategies have shown they can reduce wildfire risk, restoring ecosystems and sustaining culturally important plants and foods. Though the parcels are small, the practices applied there – such as cultural burning, selective gathering and water stewardship – are often low-cost, community-based and potentially adaptable to larger parcels elsewhere around the state.

One option could be to shift some of the regulatory authority from the Bureau of Indian Affairs to the allottees themselves. Shifting authority to Indigenous peoples has improved forest health elsewhere, as found in a collaborative study between University of California Extension foresters and Hoopa Tribal Forestry. That research found that when the Hoopa Tribe gained control of forestry on their reservation along the Klamath River basin in northern California, tribal members moved away from large-scale clear-cutting. They decreased allowable logging amounts, created buffers around streams and protected species that were culturally important, while still reducing the buildup of downed or dead wood that can fuel wildfires.

At a time when California faces record-breaking wildfires and intensifying climate extremes, allotments offer rare pockets of intact habitat with the potential to be managed with cultural knowledge and ecological care. They show that adapting to change is not just about infrastructure or technology, but also about relationships – between people and place, culture and ecology, past and future.

Kristin Ruppel from Montana State University, author of “Unearthing Indian Land, and Jay Petersen from California Indian Legal Services also contributed to the drafting of this article.

This research was funded by the California Climate Action Seed Grant (#R02CP7261: Planning Landscape Resilience for California Indian Allotment Lands) and the United States Geological Survey (G22AC00076-00, Indigenous-Led Climate Adaptation Strategies: Integrating Landscape Condition, Monitoring, and Cultural Fire with the North Fork Mono Tribe, and G23AC00682-00, Future of Fire Phase II: Learning by Doing with Cultural Fire Practitioners).

This research was funded by the Climate Action Grant (California Climate Action Seed Grant #R02CP7261: Planning Landscape Resilience for California Indian Allotment Lands) and the United States Geological Survey (G22AC00076-00, Indigenous-Led Climate Adaptation Strategies: Integrating Landscape Condition, Monitoring, and Cultural Fire with the North Fork Mono Tribe, and G23AC00682-00, Future of Fire Phase II: Learning by Doing with Cultural Fire Practitioners).

– ref. What Native-held lands in California can teach about resilience and the future of wildfire – https://theconversation.com/what-native-held-lands-in-california-can-teach-about-resilience-and-the-future-of-wildfire-260859

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Sarah J. Morath, Professor of Law and Associate Dean for International Affairs, Wake Forest University

Microplastics seem to be everywhere – in the air we breathe, the water we drink, the food we eat. They have turned up in human organs, blood, testicles, placentas and even brains.

While the full health consequences of that exposure are not yet known, researchers are exploring potential links between microplastics and negative health effects such as male infertility, inflammation, liver disease and other metabolic problems, and heart attack or stroke.

Countries have tried for the past few years to write a global plastics treaty that might reduce human exposure to plastic particles and their harm to wildlife and ecosystems, but the latest negotiations collapsed in August 2025. Most plastics are made with chemicals from fossil fuels, and oil-producing countries, including the U.S., have opposed efforts that might limit plastics production.

While U.S. and global solutions seem far off, policies to limit harm from microplastics are gaining traction at the state and local levels.

As an environmental lawyer and author of the book “Our Plastic Problem and How to Solve It,” I see four promising policy strategies.

Banning added microplastics: Glitter, confetti and turf

Some microplastics are deliberately manufactured to be small and added to products. Think glitter in cosmetics, confetti released at celebrations and plastic pellet infill, used between the blades in turf fields to provide cushion and stability.

These tiny plastics inevitably end up in the environment, making their way into the air, water and soil, where they can be inhaled or ingested by humans and other organisms.

California has proposed banning plastic glitter in personal care products. No other state has pursued glitter, however some cities, such as Boca Raton, Florida, have restricted plastic confetti. In 2023, the European Union passed a ban on all nonbiodegradable plastic glitter as well as microplastics intentionally added to products.

Artificial turf has also come under scrutiny. Although turf is popular for its low maintenance, these artificial fields shed microplastics.

European regulators targeted turf infill through the same law for glitter, and municipalities in Connecticut and Massachusetts are considering local bans.

Rhode Island’s proposed law, which would ban all intentionally added microplastics by 2029, is broad enough to include glitter, turf and confetti.

Reducing secondary microplastics: Textiles and tires

Most microplastics don’t start small; rather, they break off from larger items. Two of the biggest culprits of secondary microplastics are synthetic clothing and vehicle tires.

A study in 2019 estimated that textiles accounted for 35% of all microplastics entering the ocean – shed from polyester, nylon or acrylic clothing when washed. Microplastics can carry chemicals and other pollutants, which can bioaccumulate up the food chain.

In an effort to capture the fibers before they are released, France will require filters in all new washing machines by 2029.

Several U.S. states, including Oregon, Illinois, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, are considering similar legislation. California came close in 2023, passing legislation to require microfiber filters for washing machines, but it was ultimately vetoed due to concerns about the cost of adding the filters. Even so, data submitted in support of the bill showed that such filters could cut microplastic releases from laundry by nearly 80%.

Some states, such as California and New York, are considering warnings on clothing made with synthetic fibers that would alert consumers to the shedding of microplastics.

Tires are another large source of microplastics. As they wear down, tires release millions of tons of particles annually, many of which end up in rivers and oceans. These particles include 6PPD-quinone, a chemical linked to mass die-offs of salmon in the Pacific Northwest.

One approach would be to redesign the product to include safer alternatives. California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control recently added 6PPD-quinone to its priority product list, requiring manufacturers to explain how they will either redesign their product or remove it from the market.

Regulating disposal

Microplastics can also be dealt with at the disposal stage.

Disposable wipes, for example, contain plastic fibers but are still flushed down toilets, clogging pipes and releasing microplastics. States such as New York, California and Michigan have passed “no-flush” labeling laws requiring clear warnings on packaging, alerting consumers to dispose of these wipes another way.

Construction sites also contribute to local microplastic pollution. Towns along the New Jersey shore have enacted ordinances that require builders to prevent microplastics from entering storm drains that can carry them to waterways and the ocean. Such methods include using saws and drills with vacuums to reduce the release of microplastics and cleaning worksites each day.

Oregon and Colorado have new producer responsibility laws that require manufacturers that sell products in plastic packaging to fund recycling programs. California requires manufacturers of expanded polystyrene plastic products to ensure increasing levels of recycling of their products.

Statewide strategies and disclosure laws

Some states are experimenting with broader, statewide strategies based on research.

California’s statewide microplastic strategy, eg: link error. adopted in 2022, is the first of its kind. It requires standardized testing for microplastics in drinking water and sets out a multiyear road map for reducing pollution from textiles, tires and other sources.

California has also begun treating microplastics themselves as a “chemical of concern.” That shifts disclosure and risk assessment obligations to manufacturers, rather than leaving the burden on consumers or local governments.

Other states are pursuing statewide strategies. Virginia, New Jersey and Illinois have considered bills to monitor microplastics in drinking water. A Minnesota bill would study microplastics in meat and poultry, and the findings and recommendations could influence future consumer safety regulations in the state.

State and local initiatives in the U.S. and abroad – be they bans, labels, disclosures or studies – can help keep microplastics out of our environment and lay the foundation for future large-scale regulation.

Federal ripple effects

These state-level initiatives are starting to influence policymakers in Washington.

In June 2025, the U.S. House passed the bipartisan WIPPES Act, modeled on state “no-flush” laws, and sent it to the Senate for consideration.

Another bipartisan bill was introduced in July 2025, the Microplastic Safety Act, which would direct the FDA to research microplastics’ human health impacts, particularly on children and reproductive systems.

Proposals to require microfiber filters in washing machines, first tested at the state level, are also being considered at the federal level.

This pattern is not new. A decade ago, state bans on wash-off cosmetic microbeads paved the way for the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, the only federal law to date that directly bans a type of microplastic. That history suggests today’s state and local actions could again catalyze broader national reform.

Small steps with big impact

Microplastics are a daunting challenge: They come from many sources, are hard to clean up once released, and pose risks to our health and the environment.

While global treaties and sweeping federal legislation remain out of reach, local and state governments are showing a path forward. These microsolutions may not eliminate microplastics, but they can reduce pollution in immediate and measurable ways, creating momentum for larger reforms.

Sarah J. Morath is affiliated with the Global Council for Science and the Environment.

– ref. Solving the world’s microplastics problem: 4 solutions cities and states are trying after global treaty talks collapsed – https://theconversation.com/solving-the-worlds-microplastics-problem-4-solutions-cities-and-states-are-trying-after-global-treaty-talks-collapsed-263782

Source: The Conversation – USA (2) – By Aeimit Lakdawala, Associate Professor of Economics, Wake Forest University

Republican-leaning economists tend to predict stronger economic growth when a Republican is president than Democrats do – and because of this partisan optimism, their forecasts end up being less accurate.

I’m an economist, and my colleagues and I found this by analyzing nearly 40 years of responses to The Wall Street Journal’s Economic Forecasting Survey. Unlike most such surveys, the Journal publishes each forecaster’s name, allowing us to link their predictions to their political affiliations.

The respondents were professional economists at major banks, consulting firms and universities whose forecasts help guide financial markets and business decisions. Out of more than 300 economists in our sample, we could identify the political affiliations of 122. We did this by looking at the forecasters’ political donation records, voter registration data and work histories with partisan groups.

The pattern was striking: Republican forecasters systematically predicted higher gross domestic product growth when their party controlled the presidency, representing roughly 10% to 15% of average growth rates during our study period.

When we examined forecast accuracy using real-time GDP data, Republican forecasters made larger errors when their preferred party held office. This suggests partisan optimism makes their professional judgment worse.

What makes this finding particularly notable is its asymmetry. The partisan gap emerged specifically during Republican presidencies. Under Democratic Presidents Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden, Republican and Democratic forecasters made virtually identical predictions. That wasn’t the case when George W. Bush, and later Donald Trump, occupied the White House.

Interestingly, this bias appears only in GDP forecasts. When we analyzed predictions for inflation, unemployment and interest rates, we found no systematic differences between Republican and Democratic forecasters.

That makes sense, because GDP forecasts are inherently more uncertain than other economic predictions. Professional forecasters tend to disagree more and make more mistakes when predicting GDP compared to inflation or unemployment rates. This creates opportunities for partisan ideologies to sneak in.

We traced the bias to different views about the effectiveness of tax policies. Using Google Trends data to measure when tax cuts were in the news, we found Republican forecasters become systematically more optimistic precisely when tax policy discussions heat up.

Why it matters

Previous research has found that most people have a strong partisan bias when they make economic predictions. Our work is the first to show that professional economists can also succumb to such influences – despite their training and market incentives to be accurate.

Their errors can come at a high price. Financial markets, policymakers and businesses rely on economists’ forecasts to make major decisions. When the Federal Reserve sets interest rates, when companies plan investments and when investors allocate portfolios, they often reference these professional consensus forecasts.

Our research challenges a common assumption in economics: that aggregating diverse expert forecasts eliminates individual biases and improves accuracy.

This doesn’t mean professional forecasters are incompetent or dishonest. These are highly trained economists with strong financial incentives for accuracy. Rather, our findings reveal how even experts with the best intentions can be unconsciously influenced by their own ideological beliefs – especially when dealing with inherently uncertain data.

What still isn’t known

Several important questions remain unanswered. It’s unclear how this bias might be reduced. Would making forecasters more aware of their political leanings help reduce the effect? Or would developing new forecasting methods that weight predictions based on historical accuracy during different political regimes improve consensus forecasts?

We’re also curious whether institutional factors matter. Might forecasters at institutions with explicit political diversity policies show less bias? How do international forecasters viewing the U.S. economy compare to domestic ones?

Finally, our research focuses on U.S. forecasters during a period of increasing political polarization. Whether similar patterns emerge in other countries with different political systems, or during less polarized times, remains an open question.

The Research Brief is a short take on interesting academic work.

Aeimit Lakdawala has previously received funding from NSF.

– ref. Even professional economists can’t escape political bias – https://theconversation.com/even-professional-economists-cant-escape-political-bias-263153

Source: The Conversation – USA (3) – By Alice Zhang, Assistant Professor of Family and Community Medicine, Penn State

In the lobby of the YMCA in Reading, Pennsylvania, stands a row of vending machines – but one machine is different from the rest.

Instead of stocking chips or soda, this vending machine has drug-testing strips, hygiene kits, socks, soap, wound care supplies and naloxone, a medication also known by its brand name Narcan that is used to reverse opioid overdoses – all completely free.

The Health To Go vending machine has been in the Reading YMCA for over a year. Another one is in Harrisburg, outside of the UPMC Harrisburg Emergency Department. The machines list the names of resources such as mental health care, food banks, housing assistance and substance use disorder treatment on the screen and provide contact information and a QR code to scan for more info.

We are a physician and assistant professor of family and community medicine and a criminal justice professor at Penn State University and have been part of a collective effort to put these two Health To Go vending machines in place. The vending machines are part of a growing movement in the United States to provide easy access to harm-reduction resources.

Naloxone, wound care kits and more

Harm-reduction vending machines became popular in cities across the U.S. during the COVID-19 pandemic, when people could not easily access in-person services and when drug overdose deaths also rose dramatically.

Most machines dispense naloxone nasal spray to reverse overdoses and other items such as syringes and fentanyl test strips. Some, like the Health To Go machines, also offer general health and hygiene items such as soap, toothpaste and toothbrushes, and pregnancy tests. If a person is seen at the machine, they could be getting a toothbrush and socks or they could be getting naloxone – no one watching would necessarily know. Also, the nature of the vending machine means the people using them don’t need to interact with a person to obtain Narcan or drug-checking strips, as many people with substance use disorder feel stigma or embarrassment about their addiction.

The Health To Go vending machines are interactive, with a large touch screen in the front. The vending machine is connected to WiFi and cellular data and is able to capture anonymous information on how people are using the machine. The machine can also ask users survey questions to get their feedback, such as whether there are other items they would like to see in the machine or whether they think the machine is having an impact on reducing stigma on substance use.

These machines in Pennsylvania, where over 3,300 people died of drug overdose in 2024, down from over 5,300 in 2021, are funded by grants from Penn State College of Medicine, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, UPMC Pinnacle Foundation and opioid settlement funds from Dauphin and Berks counties.

All of this data helps the team know how to improve the machine to better serve people with opioid addiction, as well as people experiencing homelessness and having trouble affording basic needs. The touch screen is also able to play videos, such as a quick explainer on how to use fentanyl testing strips and testimonials from people in recovery, and display local community resources and services where people can get help.

Over the past year, the two Health To Go vending machines in Reading and Harrisburg have dispensed more than 11,000 items. The most popular items are the hygiene kits, with over 3,300 dispensed. The kits contain toothbrushes, toothpaste, socks, combs, nail clippers, ChapStick, mouthwash, soap and towels. The machines also have dispensed nearly 1,900 doses of naloxone, 1,700 wound care kits, and over 1,500 safer sex kits.

We interviewed 10 vending machine users in Reading in the winter and spring of 2025. “I was homeless and I didn’t have any money,” one woman shared with us. “It sounded too good to be true, and then I got here and got all that stuff for free. … Just having a clean pair of socks, that’s awesome.”

More than 2,300 distinct usernames were registered to the two machines in the past year. The usernames are the person’s birth year, a color and a nature or animal icon. This allows us to track individuals anonymously over time as they use the machine and get info as they answer survey questions. Nearly 40% of users reported being unemployed, and almost a quarter said they are experiencing homelessness or housing insecurity.

Out of those surveyed, 4 in 5 said they had trouble paying for basic needs, and over a third had not seen a health care provider in the past year.

A judgment-free alternative

Health To Go vending machine users reported that they used the machines because the supplies were free, available 24/7, and they could get what they needed easily and without facing judgment.

For people who feel uncomfortable in traditional health care settings or talking to someone in person, these vending machines offer a judgment-free alternative.

“You don’t have no one looking over your shoulder, you have no one condemning you for, you know, getting an HIV kit or getting a pregnancy test kit or getting a wound kit,” a vending machine user we surveyed told us. “There’s no one there behind you, just like, ‘Oh my God, you have HIV.’”

“Nobody wants to walk up to somebody and say, ‘Hey, excuse me, can I get a Narcan kit, or can I get a fentanyl test strip?’” another vending machine user said. “It just makes you feel … like not whole. I don’t want other people to know that I’m in an addiction.”

We think that putting naloxone and drug-checking strips alongside other health and hygiene items helps to normalize them. We also believe calling it Health To Go puts the focus on health, not just on substance use.

The team plans to install at least two more machines in central Pennsylvania within the next year. By removing barriers such as cost, hours of operation and potential stigma, the Health To Go vending machines are able to reach people who may otherwise fall through the cracks of traditional health care.

As one machine user explained, “They are saving people from STDs and stuff like that. They’re saving people from overdosing. They’re saving people from dying.”

Read more of our stories about Philadelphia and Pennsylvania.

Alice Zhang receives funding from National Institute on Drug Abuse, UPMC Pinnacle Foundation, Dauphin County, Berks County, York County, and Penn State College of Medicine.

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

– ref. Harm-reduction vending machines offer free naloxone, pregnancy tests and hygiene kits – https://theconversation.com/harm-reduction-vending-machines-offer-free-naloxone-pregnancy-tests-and-hygiene-kits-263159

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Stephen DiKerby, Postdoctoral Researcher in Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University

Curious Kids is a series for children of all ages. If you have a question you’d like an expert to answer, send it to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com.

---

“Is the Moon getting farther away from Earth?” – Judah, 9, Broken Arrow, Oklahoma

---

The Moon is getting 1½ inches (3.8 centimeters) farther away from the Earth every year.

Scientists measure the distance to the Moon by bouncing lasers off mirrors placed there by space probes and astronauts.

By measuring the amount of time it takes light to travel to the Moon and back, scientists can very precisely measure the distance to the Moon and how the distance changes.

The distance to the Moon actually changes over a single month as it goes around the Earth. The Moon is typically 239,000 miles (385,000 km) away from the Earth, but its orbit is not a perfect circle and changes by about 12,400 miles (20,000 km) as it orbits the Earth. This change is why some full moons are a bit bigger than others; these are called supermoons.

As an astrophysics researcher, I’m interested in the motion and interaction of objects such as planets, stars and galaxies. The motions of the Earth and Moon have many interesting consequences, and studying how they move over time can help researchers better understand how each has changed over the 4½ billion years since the Earth and Moon formed.

Tidal forces

So, why is the Moon getting farther away? It’s all because of tides.

Tides come from a difference in gravity across an object. The force of gravity exerted by the Moon is about 4% stronger on the side of Earth that faces toward the Moon, compared to the opposite side of the Earth facing away, because gravity gets weaker with distance.

This tidal force causes the oceans to slosh around in two bulges that point toward and away from the Moon. They do this because the gravitational force pulling on Earth by the Moon isn’t just an average force that’s the same strength everywhere. The Moon’s gravity is strongest on the closer side of the Earth, creating a bulge of water pointing toward the Moon. It’s weaker on the opposite side of the Earth, which leaves another bulge of water that lags behind the rest of the Earth.

As the Earth rotates, these bulges move around and keep pointing at the Moon because of its gravitational pull. In New York City or Los Angeles, the water level can change by about 5 feet due to these tidal bulges.

These liquid bulges do not quite line up with the Moon – they “lead” it a little bit because the Earth is rotating and dragging them forward. These bulges also exert a gravitational pull back on the Moon. The bulge closer to the Moon isn’t just pulling the Moon toward the center of the Earth, but also a little bit ahead in its orbit – like the boost a sports car gets as it goes around a curve.

This forward pull from the closer tidal bulge causes the Moon to speed up, which causes the size of its orbit to increase. Think of a baseball player hitting a home run. If the player hits the ball faster at home plate, it’ll zoom higher up into the sky.

So the bottom line is that the gravity of the closer tidal bulge on the Earth is pulling the Moon forward, which increases the size of the Moon’s orbit. This means that the Moon gets slightly farther away from the Earth. This effect is very gradual and only detectable on average over years.

Does the Moon’s increasing distance affect Earth?

The Moon gains momentum as its orbit gets bigger. Think about spinning a weight attached to a string. The longer the string, the more momentum the weight has, and the harder it is to stop.

Because the Earth is doing the work of increasing the Moon’s momentum, the Earth’s rotation slows down in turn, as its momentum goes to the Moon. To put it another way, as the Moon’s orbital momentum increases, the Earth’s rotational momentum decreases in exchange. This exchange makes a day get very slightly longer.

But don’t worry, these effects are so small: 1.5 inches per year compared to a distance of 239,000 miles (384,000 km) is just 0.00000001% per year. We’ll keep having eclipses, tides and days that last 24 hours for millions of years.

Was the Moon closer to us in the past?

The Earth’s days were shorter in the past.

The Moon probably formed around 4.5 billion years ago, when a young Earth was hit by a Mars-size protoplanet, causing a lot of material to get knocked off into space.

Eventually, that material formed the Moon, and it was initially much closer to the Earth. Back then, you’d see the Moon much bigger in the sky.

By examining fossilized clam shells for material showing their daily growth patterns, paleontologists found evidence that 70 million years ago – near the end of the time of dinosaurs – the day was only 23.5 hours long, just as predicted by astronomical data.

What will happen in the future?

So, will the Moon eventually escape from the Earth’s gravitational pull as it moves away?

If we fast-forward tens of billions of years into the future, eventually the Earth’s rotation could slow down until it is tidally locked with the Moon. That means that it would take just as long for the Earth to rotate as the Moon does to orbit. At this point, the Moon would stop getting more distant, and you would see the Moon only from one side of the Earth.

But two things will stop that from happening. First, in a billion years or so, the Sun will get brighter and boil away the oceans. Then, there won’t be large tidal bulges of water to cause the Moon to get more distant. A few billion years later, the Sun will expand into a red giant, probably destroying the Earth and the Moon.

But these events are so far in the future that you don’t need to worry about them. You just get to enjoy tides on the beach, solar eclipses and our beautiful Moon.

---

Hello, curious kids! Do you have a question you’d like an expert to answer? Ask an adult to send your question to CuriousKidsUS@theconversation.com. Please tell us your name, age and the city where you live.

And since curiosity has no age limit – adults, let us know what you’re wondering, too. We won’t be able to answer every question, but we will do our best.

Stephen DiKerby receives funding from NASA and NSF grants, as well as from Michigan State University.

– ref. The Moon is getting slightly farther away from the Earth each year − a physicist explains why – https://theconversation.com/the-moon-is-getting-slightly-farther-away-from-the-earth-each-year-a-physicist-explains-why-262106

Source: The Conversation – USA – By Amanda Siegrist, Associate Professor of Recreation and Sport Management, Coastal Carolina University

With two executive orders related to school sports, President Donald Trump recently tried to settle the growing legal conflict over the right of transgender students to participate in school sports.

That conflict, which the Biden administration tried to address and is now taking place in states, lower federal courts and the Department of Education, will reach the U.S. Supreme Court in its upcoming term.

Supporters of transgender athlete participation argue that gender is a social construct, shaped by societal norms and cultural beliefs more so than by biology. They say that people should have the right to self-identify. And they argue that there is no significant threat to fairness, safety or opportunity in student sports.

Opponents say that sex and gender identity are distinct from each other. They argue that including biologically born male athletes in women’s sports subverts fairness and threatens the impact of Title IX in women’s sports.

As a professor of sport management with a law degree, I believe the progress in equity, access and participation made by women in sport since the passage of Title IX is at risk if U.S. institutions and legislators depart from the federal law’s original intent: to ensure equal opportunities for women in education settings.

Inclusion versus fairness

Women’s sports are experiencing unprecedented success. In 2024, the NCAA women’s basketball championship final drew a larger TV audience than the men’s final for the first time ever. Sponsorship deals for women’s pro sports have witnessed double-digit growth year over year the past two athletic seasons.

The 2023-2024 academic year saw 235,735 student-athletes participate in NCAA women’s sports. That’s a record high.

When Congress passed Title IX in 1972, the goal was simple: make sure women have the same educational opportunities as men in school, including in sports programs.

For decades, it worked. Thousands of new teams and opportunities for women emerged, and participation skyrocketed. Before 1972, only about 30,000 women had participated in college sports. Today, 220,000 female athletes compete in NCAA sports.

But while Title IX was expanding access for women athletes in schools, the boundaries of women’s sports were being tested in professional leagues.

In 1977, Renée Richards, a transgender tennis player, successfully challenged the United States Tennis Association’s eligibility rules and was allowed to compete in women’s tennis after undergoing sex reassignment surgery.

She played in the 1977 women’s U.S. Open and competed on the women’s professional tour, where she played for four more years before retiring.

Richards was hailed as a pioneer for transgender athletes. But her perspective has shifted over time. In February 2025, Richards said: “I believe that having gone through male puberty disqualifies transgender women from the female category in sports.”

Richards’ perspective underscores the tension between the inclusion of transgender people and maintaining fairness in competition and opportunities for women – a tension that remains at the center of legal debates today.

Court challenges

Courts across the country are now confronting a new wave of challenges to policies on transgender athlete participation from K-12 through college.

In 2021, Becky Pepper-Jackson, a transgender girl, sued the West Virginia Board of Education in federal court over the state’s “Save Women’s Sports Act,” which requires that sport participation in schools must be based on biological sex at birth. Pepper-Jackson argued that the act violated Title IX and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment that requires states to treat people in similar situations equally.

A lower court struck down West Virginia’s law as unconstitutional, and in July 2025, the Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

In 2024, several college athletes filed a lawsuit against the NCAA and participating universities. The suit claims the organization violated the athletes’ Title IX rights by allowing transgender swimmer Lia Thomas at the University of Pennsylvania to compete at the national championships in 2022. The plaintiffs argued that competing against athletes who had undergone male puberty created unfair conditions in women’s sports.

The suit has not been resolved. But in April 2025, the Department of Education concluded that the University of Pennsylvania violated Title IX by allowing Thomas to swim on the women’s team during the 2021-2022 season. As part of a resolution agreement with the Education Department, the university was required to restore to female athletes all individual Division I swimming records broken by biologically born male athletes competing in women’s categories. Per the agreement, the university also issued an apology to the affected athletes and adopted biology-based eligibility standards.

These collegiate cases form part of a larger picture. From high school track meets to NCAA championships, the participation of transgender women in female sports has, in the opinion of some, altered outcomes, raised safety concerns and challenged the principle of fair play.

Studies show that males have strength and size advantages over women. Those differences translate to advantages in sport, even after hormone suppression. To introduce competitive disadvantages in women’s sport threatens the premise of Title IX: to provide women with equal opportunity.

As these court cases unfold, their resolutions will help define standards for transgender participation in women’s sports across educational levels.
They underscore the ongoing challenge for institutions and governing bodies to balance inclusion, competitive fairness and compliance with Title IX.

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

– ref. Transgender policies struggle to balance fairness with inclusion in women’s college sports – https://theconversation.com/transgender-policies-struggle-to-balance-fairness-with-inclusion-in-womens-college-sports-262082