Inquirer.com – Zurich DR

Tag: no-latest

  • How to make the beach your gym

    How to make the beach your gym

    If you’ve been to the beach with kids, you know it can become an instant playground.

    The beach can be a playground for adults, too, and allow you to move in new and different ways, which can bring fitness benefits you can’t usually get in a gym. The soft sand, wide-open spaces and splashing waves all lend themselves to movement, even when the sun is blazing.

    When you’re navigating seashells and seagulls, “you have to be a little bit more playful, and really present,” said Erin Sampson, a yoga instructor who trains aspiring teachers in Costa Rica and Colorado.

    Compared with exercising on a hard, even surface indoors or even at a park, exercising on sand works your muscles differently, helping to build lower-body strength and improve stability and balance, said Josh Goldman, a sports medicine specialist and team physician for UCLA Athletics.

    And moving in nature and environments that inspire awe can reduce stress and may even lower blood pressure.

    We asked coaches and experts in exercise science how to get the most out of moving on the sand.

    Beach workouts can be short

    The environment may be serene, but exercising on the beach will most likely feel hard: Because sand is less stable than a gym floor or even a trail, your body has to exert more force and energy to walk, run or jump compared with working out on firmer ground, Goldman said.

    Your feet, ankles, hip, and core muscles also have to work harder to provide stability and balance during both propulsive workouts and body-weight exercises like yoga.

    While exercising on sand puts less impact on your joints, the softer the surface, the more challenging any movement becomes, he said. In response, your cardiovascular system will have to work harder to power the same exercise than it would on a firmer and more even surface.

    Soccer and running coaches with access to beaches often have their athletes practice on sand precisely because it is harder, Goldman said.

    But don’t let this scare you: These extra demands on your body mean that you can get a great workout in less time, said Heather Jeffcoat, a physical therapist in Los Angeles. If you can perform well on sand, competing on firmer surfaces may feel like a breeze.

    If you usually work out at the gym or on firmer surfaces, Jeffcoat recommended starting by doing roughly 25 to 30% of what you would typically do when exercising on the beach, to avoid injury and overexertion. For example, if you typically run 3 miles, run about a mile and see how you feel the next day. She also recommended starting on the firmest part of the shoreline, close to the water.

    A similar principle applies to yoga and body-weight training: Easing into these exercises and even starting with less challenging versions of movements you typically do inside can help build the strength and mind-body connection to reap the most benefits. So if you typically do 15 pushups, aim for about five on sand.

    If you have regular access to a beach, you can gradually increase the duration and intensity of your beach workouts as your body adapts, she said.

    Moving in nature and environments that inspire awe can reduce stress and may even lower blood pressure.Amanda Friedman

    They can build mental resilience

    When you take a workout out of the gym and onto the beach, you are opening it up to many more unknowns. There’s the heat and humidity that come with any outdoor workout, but also the possibility of sand on your legs, wildlife and, if you’re on vacation, new terrain.

    It’s not clean or controlled, but that’s the point, Sampson said. The challenge becomes staying focused despite the distractions, and adapting as the ground literally shifts beneath you.

    “It’s the ultimate physical metaphor,” she said, adding that learning to move through obstacles like these can build mental toughness.

    Sand socks can help to protect your feet from heat.Amanda Friedman

    They require a few precautions

    Of course, with all of these additional challenges, you’ll get the most from a beach workout if you come prepared, the experts said.

    Before exercising on the beach, think about your footwear, Jeffcoat said. Walking, running or jumping barefoot can help strengthen your feet and contribute to ankle and leg stability. Sand socks, which beach volleyball players and other athletes sometimes wear while training, can help to protect your feet from heat.

    But if you typically wear orthotics or very supportive shoes while training, doing the same activity barefoot could put you at risk for injury. Jeffcoat recommended starting in sneakers and potentially testing out short bouts of barefoot movement to build strength and stability.

    You should also hydrate before, during and after exercising on the beach, rather than relying on when you feel thirsty, said Cedric Bryant, an exercise physiologist and CEO of American Council on Exercise. You will be exposed to direct sunlight on the beach, along with heat reflected off the sand and water, even on cloudy days, he said, which can put you at risk for overheating and dehydration.

    For all of these reasons, the experts recommended wearing sunscreen, a hat, sunglasses, and moisture-wicking clothing. Sampson typically tells her yoga students to wear close-fitting clothing. “The tighter your clothes are, the less sand you’re gonna have going down or up or around them,” she said.

    A swimsuit also works: When you’re done exercising, you can run into the ocean for an all-natural cold plunge.

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

  • House vote exposes Democrats’ widening divide over Israel

    House vote exposes Democrats’ widening divide over Israel

    A striking number of House Democrats — 103 — voted Wednesday to cut off military aid to Israel for the next fiscal year, in a sign of the growing disconnect between the Democratic leadership’s long-standing support for the Jewish state and the party’s left wing.

    The vote was on a largely symbolic amendment introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R., Ky.) to an appropriations package for the State Department and other national security agencies.

    Despite the considerable Democratic support, the amendment failed in the House. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) voted against it. Massie was the only Republican to vote for the amendment. Ten Democrats voted present.

    Still, the large support for the amendment comes amid a sharp shift among Democratic voters on Israel. A number of Democrats who have voiced support for Israel voted for the amendment, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) and Katherine Clark (D., Mass.), the minority whip.

    In a statement, Clark — the No. 2 House Democrat — said, “the status quo is not tenable.”

    She added: “We should not provide a blank check for military aid to any country that does not comply with U.S. law, interests, and values. The Netanyahu government has failed to meet that standard.”

    Public support for Israel has plummeted over the country’s military campaigns in Gaza and Lebanon, particularly among Democrats. Nearly three-quarters of Democrats want to reduce or end military support for Israel, according to a Washington Post-Ipsos poll conducted July 8-13. Forty percent of Democrats want to eliminate military support to Israel entirely, including 58% of “very liberal” Democrats.

    Views have shifted dramatically in recent years. Shortly after the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel, 28% of Democratic registered voters felt the U.S. was too supportive of Israel, according to polling by Quinnipiac University. That rose to 41% by early 2024 and to 66% last month, including clear majorities of older and younger Democrats.

    Rahm Emanuel, a potential Democratic presidential candidate and former top adviser to Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, recently traveled to Tel Aviv to warn Israelis that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had led the country toward dangerous diplomatic isolation.

    Emanuel said U.S. support for Israel was “plummeting around the world” and argued that the United States should end “the American taxpayer’s subsidy of Israel’s defense budget.”

    Jeffries has resisted calls from the base to end all aid to Israel’s government, balancing the priorities of his Democratic members who have stood by the U.S.-Israel relationship. He wrote in a Monday letter to his fellow Democrats that he would be voting against the measure, saying it is too broad.

    But Jeffries said “given the strongly held views throughout the Caucus,” he would let members vote their conscience on the measure.

    A progressive campaign push

    Progressive candidates have cast the divide as evidence that the Democratic establishment is misaligned with its own voters — not only on the war in Gaza, but also on money in politics and the use of U.S. tax dollars abroad.

    “The Democratic Party has been out of step with its own base on Gaza and Palestinian human rights for years. People in this country can’t afford rent, groceries, or a doctor’s visit — and instead of fighting for them, our politicians are sending billions to fund a genocide,” said Darializa Avila Chevalier, a democratic socialist candidate who won a competitive New York primary last month.

    The strategy has had several notable successes.

    In New York, three vocal leftist critics of Israel including Avila Chevalier handily won their primaries, including one in which support for Israel became a central distinction with the moderate incumbent. Candidates making similar arguments also won primaries in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Colorado.

    The trend continues in competitive primary races this summer, including in Michigan’s highly watched Senate race where criticism of Israel forms a pillar to progressive candidate Abdul El-Sayed’s message.

    In a statement for this story, Jeffries said the party “must recommit to a two-state solution that prioritizes a safe and secure Israel as a Jewish and Democratic state living side by side in peace and prosperity with a Palestinian state that provides dignity, respect, and self-determination for the Palestinian people.”

    He continued, “It is also imperative that we support the complete reconstruction of Gaza, aggressively surge humanitarian aid to Palestinian civilians and strongly oppose the reprehensible conduct of the far-right Netanyahu government in the West Bank.”

    He added in his letter to fellow Democrats that Israel has reached a point where it should be able to pay for its own defense and that the U.S. should reassess future aid agreements with the country.

    The call for a reset was a significant move for the leader given his past firm support for the U.S.-Israel alliance, said Jeremy Ben-Ami, president and CEO of the liberal pro-Israel group J Street.

    But several progressives have still demanded a stronger stance on the issue than Jeffries’s attempts to balance the positions of the caucus.

    “The Democratic voting base and the American voting base have shifted here,” said Brad Lander, who won a competitive New York primary against Rep. Dan Goldman, a longtime supporter of Israel. “I do believe that the Democratic Party leadership is going to have to catch up.” Lander, like Goldman, is Jewish and supports a two-state solution but differed from Goldman in labeling Israel’s actions in Gaza a genocide.

    The American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the preeminent pro-Israel lobbying group, has become a particular target on the left, held up as an example of what progressives call the corrupting influence of money in politics. Progressive candidates regularly criticize moderate candidates who benefit from spending by AIPAC-affiliated groups, asserting the group’s campaign funding pushes candidates away from the party base’s stance on Israel. AIPAC’s political network supports pro-Israel Democrats and Republicans, including all of the top members of House Democratic leadership.

    El-Sayed has accused his opponent, Rep. Haley Stevens, of failing to adequately condemn the actions of the Israeli government because of what he says is the influence of the pro-Israel lobby. A super PAC affiliated with AIPAC has poured more than $20 million into boosting Stevens.

    “Her entire campaign is bankrolled by outside organizations who know that they’re going to buy a reliable vote to send our tax dollars elsewhere instead of solving actual problems here in Michigan,” El-Sayed said.

    On Wednesday, Stevens voted against the House amendment.

    Stevens is a longtime supporter of Israel, though she has also criticized the government’s handling of the war in Gaza and said Israel’s actions have made Jews around the world less safe. During a debate this month, she said she was the only candidate who truly advocated for the creation of a Palestinian state alongside Israel.

    Stevens’ campaign responded that El-Sayed was “peddling in conspiracy theories” by asserting she was working at the behest of AIPAC.

    “Haley has always believed this race is about the future of Michigan, and that’s why her focus is and has been on promoting policies that will reduce costs, grow the economy and create a strong 21st century manufacturing industry that will carry Michigan forward,” her campaign said in a statement.

    Patrick Dorton, a spokesperson for AIPAC’s super PAC, said the group has the right to partake in the primary process like any other interest group and noted that super PACs have also been spending heavily to back candidates opposed to the U.S.-Israel relationship.

    “The anti-Israel fringe left uses the dark money argument when it suits them and funds super PACs when it’s to their advantage,” Dorton said. “These are red herring arguments to drive pro-Israel Democrats out of the party and out of the primary process.”

    Deryn Sousa, a spokesperson for AIPAC, said that the organization’s membership crosses party lines and the group supports candidates based on their alignment with its support for the U.S.-Israel relationship. Hundreds of AIPAC-backed candidates have won their primaries this year, Sousa noted.

    Democrats for Israel

    Israel still has its ardent defenders among congressional Democrats, several of whom argue that the growing number of vocal Israel critics fails to grasp the reality on the ground.

    “War is terrible, and it’s very hard to be successful in an urban war and successful in the public relations war,” said Rep. Brad Sherman (D., Calif.), a longtime supporter of Israel and co-chair of the Israel Allies Caucus.

    Sherman said he and most other Democrats have been able to criticize the government of Israel without going after the U.S.-Israel relationship, one of the strongest partnerships in the Middle East. He warned that some of the criticism has amounted to demonization and antisemitism.

    And even among the progressive candidates criticizing the party’s stance toward Israel, there is disagreement on the future of the relationship with Jerusalem. While Lander identifies himself as a Zionist, El-Sayed said liberal democracy was incompatible with the idea of a Jewish state.

    The next House Democratic Caucus is likely to include an unusually large number of members openly critical of Israel. Still, foundational disagreements over Israel are nothing new to the caucus.

    Sherman recalled a pushback on similar criticisms against Israel in the 1980s, when the country invaded Lebanon, though he noted the resistance to Israel is greater now among Democrats than then. He was a founding leader at the time of Democrats for Israel, a grassroots group dedicated to rooting out anti-Israel sentiment in the party.

    Avila Chevalier said she would work with anyone “serious about lowering the cost of living working-class people” regardless of their stances on Israel.

    Rep. Bradley Schneider (D., Ill.), a moderate who is largely supportive of the U.S.-Israel relationship, noted Israel critics already serve in the Democratic Caucus and that he is still able to work with them on other issues, including healthcare, housing and education.

    “Democrats are a big tent,” Schneider said. “We welcome diverse opinions.”

  • Blanche confronts skeptical questioning of fund, tax deal for Trump at Senate confirmation hearing

    Blanche confronts skeptical questioning of fund, tax deal for Trump at Senate confirmation hearing

    WASHINGTON — Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche confronted skeptical questioning at a Senate confirmation hearing Wednesday about the creation of a fund to compensate President Donald Trump’s allies and a tax immunity deal for the president as he aimed to lock down the Republican support needed to advance his nomination.

    Blanche insisted that the $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” which was scrapped after fierce bipartisan backlash, was “not moving forward.” But lawmakers, including Republican Sen. John Cornyn, conveyed concerns that the Trump administration has yet to commit in writing that the fund is dead and could therefore conceivably be resurrected.

    “Just to be clear, the president of the United States, who’s a plaintiff in this lawsuit, has not agreed in writing to delete the ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ and there’s no guarantee that he won’t raise it in the future?” Cornyn asked. Blanche replied that Trump has no power over the fund, which was to have been administered by the Justice Department but never launched.

    Cornyn’s questions were closely watched since Blanche requires the backing of all Republicans on the Judiciary Committee and the Texas senator has not committed his support.

    The hearing arrived at a tumultuous time for the Justice Department, with mass firings and resignations hollowing out the workforce and Democrats and other critics raising alarms that Blanche is still functioning as the president’s personal lawyer. He has led the department on an interim basis since April, functioning as the public face of the maligned and later-withdrawn fund and accelerating investigations into perceived Trump adversaries.

    Even as he said the fund had been shelved, he made clear that immunity from tax audits afforded to Trump this year remained in place.

    Those actions, plus the flawed release of files from the Jeffrey Epstein sex-trafficking investigation, received fresh scrutiny Wednesday.

    “You’re in charge of a Department of Justice I don’t recognize, prosecuting the president’s political enemies, firing rank and file prosecutors and FBI agents,” Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware told Blanche. “These are some actions that in your previous confirmation hearing before us, you said you would not take.”

    Blanche, for his part, insisted he has presided over a course correction following Justice Department investigations into Trump during the Biden administration.

    “In recent years, we watched the Justice Department turned against many of you and a former president, and it damaged the public’s faith in justice,” Blanche argued. “We are fixing that.”

    Blanche will need the support of each Republican on the panel

    Key to Blanche’s confirmation are Cornyn of Texas, who in May lost his primary, and Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican who has opted not to seek reelection. Entering the final stretches of their Senate career, both are seen as more likely than before to split from Trump and both have been outspoken critics of the fund the Trump administration created to compensate people who feel unjustly persecuted by the criminal justice system.

    After questioning Blanche about the fund, Cornyn told CNN he continues “to have some concerns” and is not “going to make any decisions at this point.” Tillis, meanwhile, indicated during questioning that he is likely to support Blanche, even as he said he wanted “to stick a fork in this turkey of a 1776 fund.”

    The death of South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, who was a member of the committee, level 11 Republicans and 10 Democrats on the panel. A no-vote by even a single Republican on the committee could scuttle his nomination.

    Blanche insists the fund is dead. Lawmakers aren’t so sure

    The fund emerged from a settlement of Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over his leaked tax returns. Blanche had initially defended the initiative only to later reveal that it was being scrapped following fierce bipartisan backlash.

    The judge who presided over the case said in a scathing ruling Monday that Trump and his lawyers had manipulated the court system through the lawsuit and subsequent settlement and said she was troubled Blanche had signed the settlement given his prior representation of Trump and was concerned he had given misleading testimony. Blanche said Wednesday that he disagreed “with the judge’s insinuations about me.”

    Blanche also defended a separate element of the settlement that afforded Trump and members of his family protection from tax audits and that, he has said, remains on track despite outrage over it even from Republicans. Blanche said the deal covers any existing audits but does not protect the president from examination of future tax filings.

    “Nobody is above the law,” Blanche said. Such a settlement “doesn’t make any of those individuals above the law.”

    Epstein files are also under scrutiny

    Blanche was also pressed on the department’s staggered release of the Epstein files, a process beset by problems, including redaction errors that left exposed nude photos showing the faces of potential victims.

    During a podcast interview with Joe Rogan released Wednesday, Vice President JD Vance said the administration “absolutely” mishandled the communications surrounding the files, including when then-Attorney General Pam Bondi distributed binders of Epstein documents at the White House to far-right influencers that contained already-public material.

    Blanche acknowledged that “mistakes were made” in the release process but nonetheless defended the work.

    “I want to make sure that the American people know that this administration, when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein, has been more transparent than any administration,” he said. The Justice Department only released additional files after Trump bowed to bipartisan pressure to sign a law forcing the department to do so.

    A former federal prosecutor and key member of Trump’s defense team as the Republican battled four indictments, Blanche arrived at the Justice Department last year as deputy attorney general. At one point, under friendly questioning from Republican Sen. John Kennedy about whether he and Trump are friends, Blanche responded: “I’m his lawyer,” before quickly correcting himself to say he “was his lawyer.”

    He ascended to the top job in April after Trump ousted Bondi, who had frustrated the White House by struggling to bring successful cases against Trump’s political opponents. Blanche has tried to satisfy Trump in that regard, including with an indictment of ex-FBI Director James Comey, another Trump adversary, on charges of threatening the 47th president by posting a social media photograph of seashells in the numerical arrangement of “86 47.”

    Comey has said the numbers were not a call to violence.

    Blanche was also asked about Jan. 6 violence

    Tillis, who has said he would not support for attorney general anyone who equivocates on the events of Jan. 6, 2021, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the U.S. Capitol, denounced the Biden administration Justice Department for what he said were excessive prosecutions and punishments.

    Democrats, meanwhile, pressed Blanche on the violence and Trump’s sweeping clemency action benefiting more than 1,500 people, including those convicted of violently attacking police.

    Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse criticized Blanche for comments at a political conference this year where he appeared to characterize the Jan. 6 pardons as an administration accomplishment. Blanche replied that he has “never said that any sort of violence against law enforcement is appropriate.”

    “He has the absolute right to pardon anybody for any reason he sees fit,” Blanche said of the president. “I am not celebrating that. It is a fact.”

  • U.S. reimposes blockade and steps up strikes as Iran threatens to halt Mideast energy exports

    U.S. reimposes blockade and steps up strikes as Iran threatens to halt Mideast energy exports

    DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — The U.S. reimposed a naval blockade on Iran and intensified its airstrike campaign Wednesday in retaliation for Tehran’s attacks on ships trying to pass through the Strait of Hormuz. The American strikes hit an Iranian army barracks, killed at least seven troops and wounded hundreds of people across the country, Iranian officials said.

    Days of back-and-forth strikes by the U.S. and Iran across the Middle East — and renewed threats to the waterway crucial to global energy supplies — have shredded the interim deal to end the conflict and the region could tip back into all-out war.

    The U.S. first imposed a blockade in April and then lifted it last month after signing the interim deal that paused the fighting and set a 60-day period for negotiations over issues such as Iran’s nuclear program. Those talks have stalled as fighting over the Strait of Hormuz has intensified.

    When the U.S. and Israel launched the war on Iran on Feb. 28, Tehran effectively closed the waterway to shipping traffic — a move that sent the price of oil, fertilizer, and many other goods soaring far beyond the region and gave Iran major leverage in negotiations. Those rising prices pose a particular challenge to President Donald Trump and his Republican Party, which hopes to retain control of Congress in elections in November. But Washington has struggled to successfully reopen the waterway.

    Iran’s parliament speaker and lead negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, said Iran was prepared for a fuller military confrontation if the U.S. does not live up to the terms of the interim deal, and Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard threatened to halt all energy exports from the Middle East over the blockade.

    “The export of oil and gas from the region will be either for everyone or for no one,” the Guard said.

    Soon after the U.S. launched its third wave of strikes in 24 hours, Trump said Iran was ready to strike a peace deal, but he did not elaborate.

    “They don’t like what we’re doing, and they do want to settle. We’ll find out whether or not we settle with them, or we just finish it off,” he said Wednesday at a defense summit at the U.S. Army War College in Pennsylvania.

    Trump insisted that the U.S. is “doing really well with Iran” and added that the Islamic Republic “is not happy right now.”

    Both the U.S. and Iran launch attacks as the blockade is reimposed

    The U.S. carried out a wave of strikes, hitting dozens of targets overnight, the military’s Central Command said Wednesday, and then resumed striking Iran during daylight — an unusual move that further signaled the increasing tempo of the attacks. Another wave of strikes began late Wednesday.

    About 24 hours after the blockade went into effect, the U.S. military opened fire and disabled a merchant vessel Wednesday.

    U.S. Central Command said that they spotted Curacao-flagged oil tanker Belma sailing toward Kharg Island and, after the ship “ignored multiple warnings,” a U.S. aircraft disabled the vessel after firing hellfire missiles into the ship’s smokestack.

    In addition to the now-disabled Belma, the U.S. military said it has also had to speak with two other commercial vessels but they complied with their instructions to turn away.

    Among the U.S. military’s targets was Greater Tunb Island, which is viewed as a strategic point in the Strait of Hormuz. Central Command said the attack targeted Iranian defense and missile sites.

    Iran took control of three islands — Abu Musa, Greater Tunb and Lesser Tunb — from what would become the United Arab Emirates in 1971. The UAE has sought to reclaim them.

    Some analysts have suggested that if the U.S. seized the islands, they could allow it to control the strait.

    The U.S. military said its bombing campaign hit targets along Iran’s southern coast in Bandar Abbas, Khormuj, Ahvaz, Qeshm, Bushehr, and Kuh-e Stak — a list that includes several coastal towns and another island near the strait.

    Another strike targeted a barracks for Iran’s 388th Mechanized Infantry Brigade, which operates tanks and armored vehicles, in Sistan and Baluchestan province, Iranian state television reported. The report said the Americans fired at least 13 missiles in the attack and that the seven dead included conscripts and career soldiers. A number of troops were wounded.

    More than 35 people have been killed and more than 300 wounded by U.S. airstrikes in recent days, said Hossein Kermanpour, a spokesperson for the Iranian Health Ministry. At least 72 people are hospitalized, he added.

    Kermanpour did not break down the figures between civilians and combatants.

    The announcement marked the first overall toll given by Iranian authorities for this round of fighting. The number of wounded was far larger than for any other recent violence between Iran and the U.S. The army said it would make “a decisive response,” according to state TV.

    U.S. Navy Adm. Brad Cooper, who leads Central Command, said in a statement that Iran had launched dozens of missiles and drones at neighboring Gulf Arab countries.

    Missile-alert warnings sounded Wednesday in Bahrain and Kuwait as they faced incoming Iranian fire — a daily occurrence in recent days. In a post on X late in the day, Bahrain’s Interior Ministry urged people to “head to the nearest safe place.”

    Jordan said it shot down three incoming Iranian missiles. Iran claimed attacks on the three nations, all of which host U.S. forces.

    In a statement published online, Qalibaf said the United States had not lived up to the terms of the interim peace deal, which he said included “Iranian arrangements” over the Strait of Hormuz.

    “Now that we have entered the implementation phase, the United States, having exhausted its legal and diplomatic options, is trying to undermine those Iranian arrangements through force,” he wrote.

    Qalibaf’s comments appeared aimed at critics within Iran who oppose negotiations with the U.S. He argued that negotiations should not be equated with compromise or surrender, but as part of a broader strategy of resistance.

    The Strait of Hormuz remains at the heart of the fighting

    The latest round of fighting is focused on the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas trade passes during peacetime. How to reopen the strait has bedeviled the U.S. since Iran choked it off in the early days of the war.

    During the interim deal, some ships began moving through the passage using a route near Oman overseen by the U.S. military that is outside Tehran’s control.

    In recent days, Iran attacked ships using that route — and back-and-forth attacks ensued. The U.S. has threatened to reopen the strait by force — but experts say that would require a much bigger armada if not tens of thousands of ground troops. Imposing the blockade is another way to put pressure on Iran.

    But in the meantime, oil prices are rising. The price for Brent crude oil, the international standard, traded above $85 a barrel on Wednesday — more than 15% higher than the price before the war, but still well below the nearly $120 reached at the height of the conflict.

    Analysts with the International Monetary Fund warned Wednesday that while a surplus of oil had kept prices low, “much of that room has now been used up.”

    “Unless inventories are replenished, the world will start from a weaker position when the next shock comes,” Azim Sadikov and Jean-Marc Natal wrote in a blog post.

  • War risk for businesses will mean higher prices no matter what happens

    War risk for businesses will mean higher prices no matter what happens

    LONDON — For chief executives and business owners around the world, the Iran war is hammering home an essential reality that they are operating in a world that is riskier and more unpredictable.

    And that also means more expensive. Even if the attacks end, the increased cost of doing business will linger. Higher prices look to be a long-lasting side effect of the war in Iran.

    Every business leader is saying, “I need to get myself options,” said Kevin O’Marah, chief research officer at Zero100, a firm that does research on supply chains. The urgency is felt by executives across sectors from pharmaceuticals to clothing to electronics.

    That means having alternative manufacturers in other locales, stockpiling goods in case of unexpected stoppages and developing new supply chains.

    “Flexibility is additional plant capacity, it’s additional pockets of inventory, it’s alternate routes,” he said. “But that flexibility costs money. And that’s inherently inflationary.”

    Last week, the International Monetary Fund predicted a fresh bout of global inflation, forecasting a rise to 4.7% in 2026 from 4.1% in 2025 because of higher prices for basics like energy, metals, fertilizer, and food.

    A market in Daloa, Ivory Coast, on June 11. The International Monetary Fund expects global inflation to climb in 2026, driven by higher energy and food prices.Finbarr O'Reilly

    And those calculations were made when oil prices had mostly returned to their prewar levels, before there was a sharp escalation in hostilities between Iran and the United States and oil prices shot up.

    President Donald Trump’s vow this week to extract a 20% fee on all cargo moved through the Strait of Hormuz, if it comes to pass, could double the cost of shipping, analysts say.

    With disruptions in the strait, shipping companies such as Maersk have had to employ workarounds. As of June, Maersk had delivered 44,000 containers of goods such as furniture, electronics, and food to Persian Gulf countries by rail and truck.

    It’s a cumbersome and costly process. Cargo is unloaded from ships at the Red Sea port of Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Then it is trucked to Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain by drivers who have journeyed from Jordan, Iraq, and Turkey to meet the increased demand.

    “That is obviously not the most effective way to do it normally, but if the strait is closed, it is the most effective way to do it,” said Vincent Clerc, CEO of Maersk, adding that the alternative route costs the company about $1,000 extra per container.

    If the disruptions continue, either the resulting higher costs will be passed on to consumers or retailers will see eroded profits, Clerc said.

    Higher costs caused by disruptions will cut into company profits or be passed on to customers, said Vincent Clerc, the Maersk chief executive.Charlotte de la Fuente

    The ripple effect has radiated far beyond the Gulf. The cost of sending a container from Shanghai has edged down from levels they hit in late June and early July.

    But rates are high by historical standards, according to Rhenus, a global logistic company. “Despite the recent decline, freight rates still remain 84% higher than a year ago,” the company said in an email.

    Southeast Asia has been particularly affected. Higher supply chain costs and delivery interruptions are interfering with manufacturing planning and schedules.

    “Longer lead times, higher freight costs and elevated energy costs may add pressure to consumer prices,” Rhenus reported.

    Longer routes aren’t the only reason delivery times increased by days or weeks during the crisis. When energy prices shot up, some shipping lines engaged in “slow steaming,” or reducing their speeds to save money on fuel, said Tobias Bartz, CEO of Rhenus.

    Insurance costs will also stay at the highest risk levels until there is at least six months of stability, Bartz said. But every time there is an incident, as in recent days, the clock resets.

    More important, higher costs won’t all disappear when the current crisis in the Gulf recedes.

    The heads of companies like Maersk, based in Copenhagen, Denmark, and French shipper CGM CMA have already said they can no longer depend on a single pathway but must develop alternatives.

    “This is the new operating environment,” Promixa, a global procurement and supply chain consultancy, concluded after surveying more than 500 CEOs of companies that generate income of more than $500 million a year.

    The mindset isn’t just about reacting quickly when a crisis occurs, but rather “creating and running functions that are permanently crisis-ready.” Almost three-quarters of those surveyed said they would accept a cost increase of more than 10% to guarantee the resilience of their supply chains.

    Building that strength into oil and liquefied natural gas delivery routes is much more difficult, time-consuming and expensive. Some efforts, including pipeline expansions by the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia, were already underway before the Iran war.

    But the push has been turbocharged. Kuwait is so desperate to find alternatives to the Strait of Hormuz that it is looking at resurrecting a Saudi pipeline that runs through the Israeli-controlled portion of the Golan Heights and hasn’t been used in more than 35 years, said Jamie Ingram, senior editor at Middle East Economic Survey, a weekly newsletter and energy intelligence publication.

    Oman is expanding ports outside the strait; Iraq is studying pipeline proposals; Saudi Arabia and Turkey are exploring rail connections between Jordan and Syria. As one analyst described it, a “spaghetti junction” will be taking shape in the Gulf as pipelines, roads, rails, and ports sprout up to make sure that energy can get from producers to customers.

    For some new projects, Ingram said, “we’re now entering a new era where the benefits of these investments have gone from being pretty abstract theoretical issues to very concrete tangible quantifiable benefits.”

    Oil exporters like Saudi Arabia and importers like India are also investing in more storage capacity outside the Gulf region.

    All of which means higher costs.

    “We’re now in a world of not economizing for the most efficient option,” said David Goldwyn, a former U.S. diplomat and Energy Department official. “We’re in the world of investing in security and investing in resilience and redundancy.”

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

  • U.S. Mint to produce $1 coin with Trump’s face on it, treasury secretary says

    U.S. Mint to produce $1 coin with Trump’s face on it, treasury secretary says

    The U.S. Mint will soon begin producing a new $1 gold-hued coin with President Donald Trump’s face on it to commemorate America’s 250th birthday, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced this week.

    The coin’s face features Trump alongside the phrase “In God We Trust.” It is encircled with the phrases “Liberty” and “1776-2026.” The flip side of the coin shows an eagle holding arrows in one talon and olive branches in the other.

    Since the start of his second term, Trump and his allies have pushed to reissue federally created currency and documents to feature the president’s name and likeness. Examples include a commemorative passport with Trump’s image inside its pages and the addition of his signature on newly printed $100 bills. There are also proposals to feature the president’s image on 24-karat gold coins and commemorative $250 bills.

    Bessent said in a post on X that the coin “celebrates the strength of American values, and the promise of a nation dedicated to preserving freedom for all.”

    A Treasury Department spokesperson said the coin “is in production and minted in Philadelphia, and it will be available in the fall.” They also said that there is no gold in the coin but that it has a gold-like finish.

    Earlier drafts proposals of the $1 coin showed Trump standing with a clenched right fist in front of an American flag and the words “Fight Fight Fight” — a reference to the 2024 assassination attempt at his campaign rally in Pennsylvania.

    When plans for the $1 coin were revealed last year, concerns emerged over whether the proposal to include a living president’s image on U.S. currency could violate the law.

    Under a law passed in 2020, the Treasury Department can mint $1 coins during 2026 to mark the 250th anniversary “with designs emblematic of the U.S. semiquincentennial.” However, according to U.S. code, “[o]nly the portrait of a deceased individual may appear on United States currency and securities” — a law that sprang from a Colonial-era tradition against putting current presidents on American coins themselves from the British monarchy.

    In addition, the 2020 law states that “[n]o head and shoulders portrait or bust of any person, living or dead, and no portrait of a living person may be included in the design on the reverse of any coin” produced for the Semiquincentennial, which could be violated by having Trump’s image on both sides of the coin.

    Bessent argued that the $1 coin design was legal, telling Fox News this week that although he is otherwise barred from featuring a living person’s image on U.S. currency, “during the 150th, there was a Calvin Coolidge coin, so we can put living presidents’ images on a coin.”

    The design for the coin also was not what the Commission of Fine Arts, which is composed entirely of Trump appointees, recommended when members met in January. The obverse design recommended by the commission featured Trump’s face in profile, while the final design shows the president with his eyes forward. The treasury secretary has the final say on the design.

    Megan Sullivan, the acting chief of the U.S. Mint’s office of design management, said during the January commission meeting that “the legal research has been done both at the Mint and up into Treasury, and they have determined that [the proposed coin featuring Trump’s image] does not violate any laws.”

    Sullivan described the coins as being “a little bit larger than a quarter” and being composed of “manganese brass” and displaying as “golden in color.”

    The $1 coins are distinct from the 24-karat coins created by the Treasury Department that typically sell for thousands of dollars. Senate Democrats, in June, urged the Trump administration to halt production of that solid gold coin, citing concerns that some of the U.S. Mint’s gold could have links to foreign cartels.

  • Biden will publish ‘Promise Me, America’ memoir after the November midterm elections

    NEW YORK — Former President Joe Biden will publish a memoir, Promise Me, America, which he says will touch upon everything from the economy to his decision to drop his bid for reelection.

    The memoir is scheduled to come out Nov. 17, publisher Little, Brown and Company told the Associated Press. The timing of the book — two weeks after midterm elections in which Democrats seek to regain control of Congress — could raise concerns within Biden’s party by putting him back into the spotlight.

    Democrats remain divided on Biden’s legacy, with many blaming his ill-fated determination to seek a second term for Republican President Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Leaders hope to keep the fall campaign focused on Trump and his record, and any leaks or promotional efforts before votes are cast could draw frustration.

    “Promise Me, America is about the challenges we faced as a nation. It’s about the decisions I made and why I made them,” Biden said in a video statement accompanying Wednesday’s announcement. “It’s about why I chose to run for reelection and why I chose to step aside.”

    This book cover image released by Little, Brown and Co. shows “Promise Me, America” by Joe Biden.Uncredited

    Reports of Biden’s book have circulated for more than a year, and the former president himself has referred to it during public remarks, appearing to suggest it would be released before November’s election.

    Biden, who will turn 84 three days after the publication of Promise Me, America, has long presented himself as an upholder of standards and traditions; presidential memoirs are one of them. With a handful of exceptions, modern presidents since Harry Truman in the 1950s have published books about their White House years. Like virtually all of his predecessors, Biden did not work on the book alone but was helped by a “small editorial team,” according to the publisher. Little, Brown declined to release financial details for Promise Me, America, although presidents have usually reached deals worth at least seven figures.

    The book’s title echoes a 2017 memoir by Biden, Promise Me, Dad, which centered on the death of his son, Beau Biden.

    Vowing as a candidate to “restore the soul” of his country, Biden was sworn into office in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic and in the aftermath of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters seeking to stop his certification as president. Biden’s term was defined by a wide range of conflicts and achievements, from his handling of wars in Ukraine and the Middle East to the passage of ambitious infrastructure and economic aid bills. But many readers will likely want to know more about his health while president, including the disastrous debate in June 2024 against Trump that led to his giving up his reelection bid. Then-Vice President Kamala Harris, who ran instead, lost decisively to Trump.

    Former first lady Jill Biden wrote in her own book that her husband seemed so weak and disoriented during the debate that she feared he was having a stroke. In View from the East Wing, published in June, she noted that the White House had initially said he was suffering from a cold.

    “The biggest lesson for us, I think, was that if you don’t explain something well enough then the question won’t go away,” she wrote. “There was never a satisfying enough explanation offered for Joe’s debate performance, and a lot of people never got over it.”

    Biden was the oldest man to serve as president and his health was a source of speculation for much of his term; Biden and his White House advisers have faced intense criticism from Democrats and Republicans for allegedly concealing the extent of his problems. A notable book release from 2025, Jake Tapper’s and Alex Thompson’s Original Sin, was subtitled “President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-Up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again.”

    That year, Biden announced he had been diagnosed with prostate cancer.

    Biden’s previous books also include Promises to Keep, a campaign work published to boost his run for president in 2008, when Barack Obama was the eventual nominee and Biden his running mate. Promise Me, America comes out during a year when nonfiction sales have declined and few political books have caught on, although recent bestsellers have included Vice President JD Vance’s Communion and an inside account of Trump’s second term, by New York Times reporters Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan, Regime Change.

    A Little, Brown spokesperson said that Biden plans to tour on behalf of the book and give interviews. In his video announcement, Biden said that many people had been asking him how he was doing.

    “I’ve been spending a lot of time with my family. I’m dealing with a cancer diagnosis, been getting treatment, and it’s going really well,” he said. “I want to thank all those who have offered their prayers and support and well-wishes. It’s meant the world to me and to Jill.”

  • U.S. war against Iran enters a new phase

    U.S. war against Iran enters a new phase

    WASHINGTON — The Trump administration has lurched back into a war against Iran that had never really ended.

    When the war started more than four months ago, U.S. forces targeted Iranian military bases, missile launchers, ships and naval facilities. Israel, fighting alongside the United States, hit leadership targets, hoping to bring down Iran’s hard-line government.

    Their record of success has been mixed, at best. Israel killed the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, but the leaders who succeeded him were even more hard-line. U.S. forces struck thousands of targets, but did not destroy Iran’s ability to control the Strait of Hormuz, the waterway through which about 20% of the world’s oil typically flows.

    For roughly 90 days beginning in April, an on-again-off-again ceasefire prevailed. And then it was over.

    The United States now appears to be entering Round 2 of its military campaign. This round has a new focus — but not necessarily a clearer strategy.

    Iran’s ability to control the strait, despite the pummeling its navy took, is by far the most important lesson of the first phase of the war. So it is no surprise that the Trump administration is focused on trying to loosen Iran’s grip on it.

    A satellite image shows an oil terminal at Kharg Island, in the Persian Gulf off the coast of mainland Iran, on Feb. 25, 2026. President Trump publicly mused about ordering the Marines to take control of Kharg Island during the first phase of the war, but ultimately abandoned those plans for fear of high U.S. casualties. PLANET LABS

    Last week, in retaliation for attacks on tankers, President Donald Trump ordered airstrikes on dozens of targets in Iran, including coastal radars, anti-ship missile launchers and a fleet of small Iranian attack boats.

    After a short lull, the United States hit 140 military targets in the first of three consecutive days of heavy bombing this week.

    U.S. forces carried out new rounds of attacks on Iran throughout Tuesday and resumed a naval blockade of Iranian ports, a strategy that showed some success in the earlier phase.

    The strikes are intended to open the waterway to shipping. The purpose of the naval blockade is to put economic pressure on Iran by choking off its trade and to flex U.S. military might.

    Trump was quick to declare success.

    “The Strait of Hormuz is open to ALL Ship traffic except for Iran — and that is because of their lying, violent, malicious leadership, which is taking them down the path of TOTAL DESTRUCTION,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Tuesday morning.

    But exactly what the U.S. military will do to enforce the blockade, and how far it will go to exert control of the strait, is not clear.

    A key question is whether Trump will consider an operation to take the strait’s Kharg Island, a key export hub for Iran’s oil.

    Trump publicly mused about ordering the Marines to take control of the island during the first phase of the war, but ultimately abandoned those plans for fear of high U.S. casualties.

    Such an operation would be a far bigger escalation than Trump has undertaken so far. But it would be difficult, and lives could be lost in either taking or holding the island.

    The United States continues to have a fearsome arsenal in the region, including two aircraft carriers, and dozens of carrier- and land-based attack and surveillance planes.

    “There are currently more than 20 U.S. Navy warships and hundreds of military aircraft operating across the Middle East,” Central Command said in a statement announcing the resumption of the blockade. “American forces remain vigilant, lethal, and ready.”

    In the strikes last week, U.S. forces hit more than 170 Iranian military targets. In three consecutive days of heavy bombing this week, the United States has hit 140 military targets.

    Analysts said the Trump administration was sending a pointed message to the government in Tehran that the United States was willing to broaden its mission again and hit sites that have both military and civilian uses.

    But senior U.S. officials said the real focus of the current phase is undoubtedly the strait.

    President Donald Trump during a meeting with Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi of Iraq in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, on Tuesday, July 14, 2026. The latest phase of the U.S. military campaign in Iran has a new focus, but not necessarily a clearer strategy. Doug Mills

    The U.S. military has hit some targets far from the strait, but they are also connected to the central mission. For example, U.S. forces last week appeared to hit a railway bridge in northeastern Iran more than 700 miles from the strait. Online video verified by The New York Times showed several people inspecting a crater at the site.

    Capt. Tim Hawkins, a spokesperson for Central Command, said in a phone interview that those targets included Iranian military logistics infrastructure targets that enabled Iran to direct weapons, munitions and other military supplies to the most contested area of the conflict.

    So far, Trump had not ordered resumption of an all-out conflict, in part because that could prompt Iran to target not only U.S. military bases in Gulf countries like Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, but also energy infrastructure in those nations.

    Attacks on those facilities could send oil and natural gas prices skyrocketing even higher.

    Senior officials said the goal of the new military campaign is to force Iran to allow tankers and other commercial cargo ships to pass freely through the strait, and ultimately to return to the bargaining table to resume nascent talks on more difficult, long-term issues like the fate of Iran’s highly enriched uranium.

    Administration officials acknowledge that the military strategy is not without risks. Iran has shown it has an asymmetric advantage. Iranian forces do not have to hit every ship passing through the strait, or sink any of them. They only have to cause enough damage and issue enough threats to scare shipping companies and insurers.

    This week, Iranian missiles struck two crude oil carriers that were transiting the southern part of the strait. The attack killed an Indian crew member. Another tanker, carrying liquefied natural gas, was also hit and caught fire near the Omani coast.

    Senior U.S. officials said time remains on the American side as Iran’s economy collapses.

    During the uneasy peace, Iran was able to get many of its tankers out, and to empty storage tanks that were overflowing with oil.

    The resumed blockade will cause that oil to back up once more, and the money Iran has made from its oil exports will begin to dry up.

    But the real question is: Can Iran’s hard-line leadership outlast Trump’s anxiety over rising oil prices?

    This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

  • Dark sky defenders raise alarm along the border of West Texas

    Dark sky defenders raise alarm along the border of West Texas

    Welcome to Terlingua, a ghost town in West Texas, where the dogs roam free, parking spots are suggestions, and the night skies feel infinite.

    Full moons are bright enough to read by, and on the darkest nights, the Milky Way casts shadows of local flora on the desert floor.

    But with a border wall slated to rise, some residents wonder: How long will the natural darkness last?

    Unfettered access to the cosmos is an integral part of the landscape in Terlingua and across the Big Bend region of West Texas. It has fostered a community of dark sky defenders, who regularly ward off threats like too-bright store signs and intrusive car headlights.

    Now they’re facing something far greater: the construction of President Donald Trump’s border wall, which residents across the Big Bend fear will bring bright lighting along land that is currently untouched.

    Lighting has already been installed along stretches of the border in Arizona and farther east in Texas. “That technology is there, and it is literally a flip of a switch away,” said Billy Bartko, the director of Terlingua’s Far Flung Outdoor Center, “which is what we’re all afraid of.”

    For residents along the border, it’s about more than just seeing the stars. The natural darkness symbolizes a lack of development, a rural way of life.

    According to David Keller, an archaeologist and Big Bend historian, dark-sky maintenance protects the natural country of the place. “That’s why I’m here, and that’s why most people who live here are here,” he said. “It’s a national treasure. It’s too important to lose.”

    The preservation of the Big Bend’s dark skies results from laws enacted as far back as 1975, originally to support astronomy at the region’s McDonald Observatory. In 2012, Big Bend National Park was formally certified as the region’s first dark sky site, followed by a state park and a wildlife area.

    Today, those places live inside the largest dark sky reserve on Earth, established in 2022 and spanning more than 9 million acres across the U.S.-Mexico border.

    “What that timeline shows you is how long dark sky preservation and conservation has been in the minds of the people managing resources here,” said Amber Harrison, who lives in Terlingua and is a leader of the region’s dark sky protections. Any lighting that comes with the wall, she added, could cause the region to lose its dark sky status.

    If widespread enough, the illumination could affect science observations at McDonald, according to Stephen Hummel, who coordinates the observatory’s dark sky outreach. But others are more concerned about what it will do to the character of the land.

    “Most of us aren’t worried about if we’re going to be able to haul out our telescopes and see Jupiter tonight,” said Keller, a leader of a local coalition called No Big Bend Wall. “It’s an umbrella for other things.”

    The loss could also disrupt a budding economic avenue. Stargazing was the second-most reported activity in the region, according to a tourism survey conducted in 2022.

    Cosmic attractions in Big Bend have grown over the last few years, especially in Terlingua.

    Visitors can camp out in stargazing pods off the highway and participate in astrophotography workshops through the town’s outdoor center.

    A group of locals are digging an amphitheater, part of the new Terlingua Star Park, to begin hosting star parties this fall.

    Universe enthusiasts abroad can even ship their telescopes to the park’s remote observatory, which opened this month.

    Illumination from the wall could abruptly end those business ventures. “If they light this thing up, it’ll kill the tourism dollar,” Bartko said. Referring to the industrial appearance of the wall, he added, “Who goes to prison for vacation?”

    Apprehension about the wall in Big Bend surfaced earlier this year. Shifting information about what is being built where has caused more unease from residents, who say the region’s harsh terrain makes a physical barrier unnecessary.

    In a statement to the New York Times, a spokesperson for U.S. Customs and Border Protection said that the wall would include “a mix of lighting based on location and operational needs” and that not all parts would be illuminated. They added that lighting would be avoided in remote areas in favor of “other operationally superior methods,” like infrared illuminators.

    The latest version of a map on the CBP website shows roughly 165 miles of wall planned for construction along the Big Bend border, adjacent to several small towns and up to the edge of Big Bend Ranch State Park. According to the map, detection technology and patrol roads will be used in lieu of a wall along the border closest to Terlingua and next to the state and national parks.

    But in an area that is dark, flat, and open, light can carry for miles. On a clear night, Terlinguans can already spot the artificial glow from Presidio, about 50 miles away, on the western horizon. Preparation for wall construction near Presidio began in June, and locals have already complained about lighting that is out of compliance with dark sky practices.

    Dark sky advocates also worry about temporary worker housing, road upgrades, and nearby surveillance stations. “It’s not just the lighting associated with the wall; it’s the lighting associated with all the auxiliary things that are going to be coming with it,” Harrison said. “The impacts are potentially immediate.”

    On an evening in April, the sun dipped low in the vast sky over Terlingua. A black dog with a blue Christmas light around her neck (to be seen at night, the owner explained) sauntered toward a saloon called the Starlight Theatre.

    As the town plunged into darkness, clouds spoiled any view of the stars. But that did not stop Terlinguans from appreciating the natural darkness of night.

    “It’s very important to us,” said Adrienne Evans, one of two sisters shutting up shop at Milky Way Treats, an ice cream truck papered with flyers about the border wall. “We don’t have porch lights.”

    The pair explained that Big Bend residents — even those who voted for Trump — were energized and united against the wall because of a desire to keep the place wild.

    Valerie Stanley, the sister who owns the ice cream truck, moved from Houston to Terlingua in 2020. “Being able to look up and see the Milky Way, it just kind of shifted my life,” she said. “Now I’m living a different life with all this beauty that I never really knew was here.”

    This article originally appeared in the New York Times.

  • Scientists probe sharp drop in Chesapeake Bay’s crab population

    Scientists probe sharp drop in Chesapeake Bay’s crab population

    A new report on the Chesapeake Bay’s signature blue crab has documented a steep, long-term decline in the crustacean’s population, raising concerns among environmental groups about the future of one of the region’s most important species.

    Scientists aren’t sure exactly what’s behind the drop. The total number of blue crabs can fluctuate sharply, with population estimates varying by tens of millions — or even hundreds of millions — within just a few years. But experts said they’re concerned by what they’re seeing.

    “It’s clear the bay’s most iconic species is under immense stress,” according to the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, which was not involved in the assessment but whose scientists closely monitor its results.

    There are numerous ways to gauge crab “abundance,” the term researchers use to denote the overall population or that of different subgroups, such as juveniles. Michael Wilberg, the assessment’s lead author, cited one overarching finding: In 2011, the bay had about 1.3 billion crabs. By 2023, that dropped to about 825 million, he said.

    Habitat loss, especially the reduction of underwater grasses that shelter young crabs, may be playing a role, experts said. Changes in currents, winds and storms, pollution and runoff, and low oxygen “dead zones” caused by algae blooms, may all also contribute, experts said.

    “They’re a short-lived species and the biggest thing we’re seeing is a decline in the number of young crabs entering the population,” said Chris Moore, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Virginia executive director. “That long-term trend of fewer young ones is very concerning.”

    Healthy blue crabs are vital to the bay’s ecosystem. They eat worms, clams, and smaller crabs, and are prey for fish, great blue herons and sea turtles. Blue crabs also generate $50 million to $80 million annually for Maryland’s and Virginia’s commercial crabbing industries, experts said.

    The assessment is conducted roughly every 10 to 15 years, depending on funding, with the help of environmental research and marine science centers and fishery agencies in Maryland and Virginia. It evaluates the species’ overall health and sustainability, including predator impacts, habitat, mortality rates, harvest levels, and the number of spawning females, and serves as a guide for fishery managers.

    The vast number of crabs in the bay in the early 1990s was driven down by overharvesting, experts said. Tighter limits on crabbing helped stabilize the population, but it has since dropped. While some years have seen increases — 2026 was one of them, according to a long-running annual government survey — totals remain far below historic highs.

    “We’re still not where we want to be because we’ve been so low,” Wilberg said.

    The 290-page assessment helps give a more in-depth sense of what is happening to blue crabs over a longer period than the annual surveys and other reports done by agencies. Moore called it a “guiding light of how we manage the species.”

    “We’re seeing a pretty consistent decline in mature female crabs that looks remarkably similar to what we saw in the 1990s,” said Thomas Miller, professor of fisheries science at the University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science. He’s concerned the numbers will stay low.

    The dearth of juvenile crabs, scientists and watermen said, is especially troubling because of the species’ short and unpredictable life cycle. Blue crabs live only about three to four years. Females release their offspring near the mouth of the Chesapeake, where it meets the Atlantic Ocean.

    After hatching, larvae — barely the size of a pinhead — drift in the ocean before returning on tides and currents, settling in underwater grass beds in the bay. If they don’t return to the bay, they’re essentially lost at sea.

    According to the assessment, the invasive blue catfish, which preys on blue crabs, was responsible for reducing the juvenile crab population by an estimated 8% in 2023.

    The number of female crabs has also dropped pretty consistently over the last decade, Miller said. He believes one reason is the females have had to compete with blue catfish for clams — and they really need the food. “They carry the energetic cost of bearing the next generation,” he said.

    Crab-eating consumers, Miller said, may see a slight increase this year in crab prices at markets and restaurants but they won’t be exorbitant.

    Watermen pointed to another possible factor: last year’s cold weather.

    “We had a hard winter and we had a number of crabs die because of the cold,” said Robert T. Brown, a third-generation waterman in the St. Clements Island area of Maryland who has served as president of the Maryland Watermen’s Association for 13 years. “That happens. They don’t bury down far enough.”

    Because blue crab populations swing dramatically, state fish and wildlife officials tightly regulate how many crabs can be harvested.

    Brown said many watermen are frustrated by what they see as overregulation and are worried about the high costs of entering the industry, making it difficult to attract a younger generation.

    “People who used to crab aren’t crabbing anymore because they’re in the graveyard,” Brown said. When he began in the mid-1960s, the average age of a waterman was in the early 30s. Now, he said, it’s in the upper 60s.

    “You better have $150,000 in your pocket to get started in this business and not expect to get your money back for two or three years,” Brown said. “There’s no vacation with pay, no 401(k) plans and you start at 3:30 or 4 o’clock in the morning.”

    This year’s season, which runs roughly from April through November, “hasn’t been great,” Brown said.

    But he hopes for better.

    “If you look in a crystal ball and try to predict it’s going to be a great year, it ends up being poor,” he said. But when “they’re saying it’s going to be one of the worst seasons we ever had, then it seems like we have crabs fall out of the sky.”