Category: Writing

‘Tolly’ finds something really special

I’m indebted to George Monbiot for this article, and ‘Tolly’ as a nickname for Iain Tolhurst.

Many articles from people that I follow online pass through my ‘inbox’.

But there was something special about a recent article by George Monbiot that was published in the Guardian on December 5th and I have great pleasure in republishing it here, with George’s permission.

ooOOoo

Shaking It Up

Posted on 7th December 2025

A eureka moment in the pub could help transform our understanding of the ground beneath our feet.

By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 5th December 2025

It felt like walking up a mountain during a temperature inversion. You struggle through fog so dense you can scarcely see where you’re going. Suddenly, you break through the top of the cloud, and the world is laid out before you. It was that rare and remarkable thing: a eureka moment.
For the past three years, I’d been struggling with a big and frustrating problem. In researching my book Regenesis, I’d been working closely with Iain Tolhurst (Tolly), a pioneering farmer who had pulled off something extraordinary. Almost everywhere, high-yield farming means major environmental harm, due to the amount of fertiliser, pesticides and (sometimes) irrigation water and deep ploughing required. Most farms with apparently small environmental impacts produce low yields. This, in reality, means high impacts, as more land is needed to produce a given amount of food. But Tolly has found the holy grail of agriculture: high and rising yields with minimal environmental harm.

He uses no fertiliser, no animal manure and no pesticides. His techniques, the result of decades of experiment and observation, appear to enrich the crucial relationships between crops and microbes in the soil, through which soil nutrients must pass. It seems that Tolly has, in effect, “trained” his soil bacteria to release nutrients when his crops require them (a process called mineralisation), and lock them up when his crops aren’t growing (immobilisation), ensuring they don’t leach from the soil.

So why the frustration? Well, Tolly has inspired many other growers to attempt the same techniques. Some have succeeded, with excellent results. Others have not. And no one can work out why. It’s likely to have something to do with soil properties. But what?

Not for the first time, I had stumbled into a knowledge gap so wide that humanity could fall through it. Soil is a fantastically complex biological structure, like a coral reef, built and sustained by the creatures that inhabit it. It supplies 99% of our calories. Yet we know less about it than any other identified ecosystem. It’s almost a black box.

Many brilliant scientists have devoted their lives to its study. But there are major barriers. Most soil properties cannot be seen without digging, and if you dig a hole, you damage the structures you’re trying to investigate. As a result, studying even basic properties is cumbersome, time-consuming and either very expensive or simply impossible at scale. To measure the volume of soil in a field, for example, you need to take hundreds of core samples. But as soil depths can vary greatly from one metre to the next, your figure relies on extrapolation. This makes it very hard to tell whether you’re losing soil or gaining it. Measuring bulk density (the amount of soil in a given volume, which shows how compacted it might be), or connected porosity (the tiny catacombs created by lifeforms, a crucial measure of soil health), or soil carbon – at scale – is even harder.

So farmers must guess. Partly because they cannot see exactly what the soil needs, many of their inputs – fertilisers, irrigation, deep ploughing – are wasted. Roughly two-thirds of the nitrogen fertiliser they apply, and between 50% and 80% of their phosphorus, is lost. These lost minerals cause algal blooms in rivers, dead zones at sea, costs for water users and global heating. Huge amounts of irrigation water are also wasted. Farmers sometimes “subsoil” their fields – ploughing that is deep and damaging – because they suspect compaction. The suspicion is often wrong.

Our lack of knowledge also inhibits the development of a new agriculture, which may, as Tolly has done, allow farmers to replace chemical augmentation with biological enhancement.

So when I came to write the book, I made a statement so vague that it reads like an admission of defeat: we needed to spend heavily on “an advanced science of the soil”, and use it to deliver a “greener revolution”. While we know almost nothing about the surface of our own planet, billions are spent on the Mars Rover programme, exploring the barren regolith there. What we needed, I argued, is an Earth Rover programme, mapping the world’s agricultural soils at much finer resolution.

I might as well have written “something must be done!” The necessary technologies simply did not exist. I sank into a stygian gloom.

At the same time, Tarje Nissen-Meyer, then a professor of geophysics at the University of Oxford, was grappling with a different challenge. Seismology is the study of waves passing through a solid medium. Thanks to billions from the oil and gas industry, it has become highly sophisticated. Tarje wanted to use this powerful tool for the opposite purpose – ecological improvement. Already, with colleagues, he had deployed seismology to study elephant behaviour in Kenya. Not only was it highly effective, but his team also discovered it could identify animal species walking through the savannah by their signature footfall.

By luck we were both attached, in different ways, to Wolfson College, Oxford, where we met in February 2022. I saw immediately that he was a thoughtful man – a visionary. I suggested a pint in The Magdalen Arms.

I explained my problem, and we talked about the limits of existing technologies. Was seismology being used to study soil, I asked. He’d never heard of it. “I guess it’s not a suitable technology then?” No, he told me, “soil should be a good medium for seismology. In fact, we need to filter out the soil noise when we look at the rocks.” “So if it’s noise, it could be signal?” “Definitely.”

We stared at each other. Time seemed to stall. Could this really be true?

Over the next three days, Tarje conducted a literature search. Nothing came up. I wrote to Prof Simon Jeffery, an eminent soil scientist at Harper Adams University, whose advice I’d found invaluable when researching the book. I set up a Zoom call. He would surely explain that we were barking up the wrong tree.

Simon is usually a reserved man. But when he had finished questioning Tarje, he became quite animated. “All my life I’ve wanted to ‘see’ into the soil,” he said. “Maybe now we can.” I was introduced to a brilliant operations specialist, Katie Bradford, who helped us build an organisation. We set up a non-profit called the Earth Rover Program, to develop what we call “soilsmology”; to build open-source hardware and software cheap enough to be of use to farmers everywhere; and to create, with farmers, a global, self-improving database. This, we hope, might one day incorporate every soil ecosystem: a kind of Human Genome Project for the soil.

We later found that some scientists had in fact sought to apply seismology to soil, but it had not been developed into a programme, partly because the approaches used were not easily scalable.

My role was mostly fixer, finding money and other help. We received $4m (£3m) in start-up money from the Bezos Earth Fund. This may cause some discomfort, but our experience has been entirely positive: the fund has helped us do exactly what we want. We also got a lot of pro-bono help from the law firm Hogan Lovells.

Tarje, now at the University of Exeter, and Simon began assembling their teams. They would need to develop an ultra-high-frequency variant of seismology. A big obstacle was cost. In 2022, suitable sensors cost $10,000 (£7,500) apiece. They managed to repurpose other kit: Tarje found that a geophone developed by a Slovakian experimental music outfitworked just as well, and cost only $100. Now one of our scientists, Jiayao Meng, is developing a sensor for about $10. In time, we should be able to use the accelerometers in mobile phones, reducing the cost to zero. As for generating seismic waves, we get all the signal we need by hitting a small metal plate with a welder’s hammer.

On its first deployment, our team measured the volume of a peat bog that had been studied by scientists for 50 years. After 45 minutes in the field, they produced a preliminary estimate suggesting that previous measurements were out by 20%. Instead of extrapolating the peat depth from point samples, they could see the wavy line where the peat met the subsoil. The implications for estimating carbon stocks are enormous.

We’ve also been able to measure bulk density at a very fine scale; to track soil moisture (as part of a wider team); to start building the AI and machine learning tools we need; and to see the varying impacts of different agricultural crops and treatments. Next we’ll work on measuring connected porosity, soil texture and soil carbon; scaling up to the hectare level and beyond; and on testing the use of phones as seismometers. We now have further funding, from the UBS Optimus Foundation, hubs on three continents and a big international team.

Eventually, we hope, any farmer anywhere, rich or poor, will be able to get an almost instant readout from their soil. As more people use the tools, building the global database, we hope these readouts will translate into immediate useful advice. The tools should also revolutionise soil protection: the EU has issued a soil-monitoring law, but how can it be implemented? Farmers are paid for their contributions “to improve soil health and soil resilience”, but what this means in practice is ticking a box on a subsidy form: there’s no sensible way of checking.

We’re not replacing the great work of other soil scientists but, developing our methods alongside theirs, we believe we can fill part of the massive knowledge gap. As one of the farmers we’re working with, Roddy Hall, remarks, the Earth Rover Program could “take the guesswork out of farming”. One day it might help everyone arrive at that happy point: high yields with low impacts. Seismology promises to shake things up.

http://www.monbiot.com

ooOOoo

George Monbiot puts his finger precisely on the point of his article: “While we know almost nothing about the surface of our own planet, billions are spent on the Mars Rover programme.“

That magical night sky

Or more to the point of this article: Dark Matter.

Along with huge numbers of other people, I have long been interested in the Universe. Thus this article from The Conversation seemed a good one to share with you.

ooOOoo

When darkness shines: How dark stars could illuminate the early universe

NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope has spotted some potential dark star candidates. NASA, ESA, CSA, and STScI

Alexey A. Petrov, University of South Carolina

Scientists working with the James Webb Space Telescope discovered three unusual astronomical objects in early 2025, which may be examples of dark stars. The concept of dark stars has existed for some time and could alter scientists’ understanding of how ordinary stars form. However, their name is somewhat misleading.

“Dark stars” is one of those unfortunate names that, on the surface, does not accurately describe the objects it represents. Dark stars are not exactly stars, and they are certainly not dark.

Still, the name captures the essence of this phenomenon. The “dark” in the name refers not to how bright these objects are, but to the process that makes them shine — driven by a mysterious substance called dark matter. The sheer size of these objects makes it difficult to classify them as stars.

As a physicist, I’ve been fascinated by dark matter, and I’ve been trying to find a way to see its traces using particle accelerators. I’m curious whether dark stars could provide an alternative method to find dark matter.

What makes dark matter dark?

Dark matter, which makes up approximately 27% of the universe but cannot be directly observed, is a key idea behind the phenomenon of dark stars. Astrophysicists have studied this mysterious substance for nearly a century, yet we haven’t seen any direct evidence of it besides its gravitational effects. So, what makes dark matter dark?

A pie chart showing the composition of the universe. The largest proportion is 'dark energy,' at 68%, while dark matter makes up 27% and normal matter 5%. The rest is neutrinos, free hydrogen and helium and heavy elements.
Despite physicists not knowing much about it, dark matter makes up around 27% of the universe. Visual Capitalist/Science Photo Library via Getty Images

Humans primarily observe the universe by detecting electromagnetic waves emitted by or reflected off various objects. For instance, the Moon is visible to the naked eye because it reflects sunlight. Atoms on the Moon’s surface absorb photons – the particles of light – sent from the Sun, causing electrons within atoms to move and send some of that light toward us.

More advanced telescopes detect electromagnetic waves beyond the visible spectrum, such as ultraviolet, infrared or radio waves. They use the same principle: Electrically charged components of atoms react to these electromagnetic waves. But how can they detect a substance – dark matter – that not only has no electric charge but also has no electrically charged components?

Although scientists don’t know the exact nature of dark matter, many models suggest that it is made up of electrically neutral particles – those without an electric charge. This trait makes it impossible to observe dark matter in the same way that we observe ordinary matter.

Dark matter is thought to be made of particles that are their own antiparticles. Antiparticles are the “mirror” versions of particles. They have the same mass but opposite electric charge and other properties. When a particle encounters its antiparticle, the two annihilate each other in a burst of energy.

If dark matter particles are their own antiparticles, they would annihilate upon colliding with each other, potentially releasing large amounts of energy. Scientists predict that this process plays a key role in the formation of dark stars, as long as the density of dark matter particles inside these stars is sufficiently high. The dark matter density determines how often dark matter particles encounter, and annihilate, each other. If the dark matter density inside dark stars is high, they would annihilate frequently.

What makes a dark star shine?

The concept of dark stars stems from a fundamental yet unresolved question in astrophysics: How do stars form? In the widely accepted view, clouds of primordial hydrogen and helium — the chemical elements formed in the first minutes after the Big Bang, approximately 13.8 billion years ago — collapsed under gravity. They heated up and initiated nuclear fusion, which formed heavier elements from the hydrogen and helium. This process led to the formation of the first generation of stars.

Two bright clouds of gas condensing around a small central region
Stars form when clouds of dust collapse inward and condense around a small, bright, dense core. NASA, ESA, CSA, and STScI, J. DePasquale (STScI), CC BY-ND

In the standard view of star formation, dark matter is seen as a passive element that merely exerts a gravitational pull on everything around it, including primordial hydrogen and helium. But what if dark matter had a more active role in the process? That’s exactly the question a group of astrophysicists raised in 2008.

In the dense environment of the early universe, dark matter particles would collide with, and annihilate, each other, releasing energy in the process. This energy could heat the hydrogen and helium gas, preventing it from further collapse and delaying, or even preventing, the typical ignition of nuclear fusion.

The outcome would be a starlike object — but one powered by dark matter heating instead of fusion. Unlike regular stars, these dark stars might live much longer because they would continue to shine as long as they attracted dark matter. This trait would make them distinct from ordinary stars, as their cooler temperature would result in lower emissions of various particles.

Can we observe dark stars?

Several unique characteristics help astronomers identify potential dark stars. First, these objects must be very old. As the universe expands, the frequency of light coming from objects far away from Earth decreases, shifting toward the infrared end of the electromagnetic spectrum, meaning it gets “redshifted.” The oldest objects appear the most redshifted to observers.

Since dark stars form from primordial hydrogen and helium, they are expected to contain little to no heavier elements, such as oxygen. They would be very large and cooler on the surface, yet highly luminous because their size — and the surface area emitting light — compensates for their lower surface brightness.

They are also expected to be enormous, with radii of about tens of astronomical units — a cosmic distance measurement equal to the average distance between Earth and the Sun. Some supermassive dark stars are theorized to reach masses of roughly 10,000 to 10 million times that of the Sun, depending on how much dark matter and hydrogen or helium gas they can accumulate during their growth.

So, have astronomers observed dark stars? Possibly. Data from the James Webb Space Telescope has revealed some very high-redshift objects that seem brighter — and possibly more massive — than what scientists expect of typical early galaxies or stars. These results have led some researchers to propose that dark stars might explain these objects.

Artist's impression of the James Webb telescope, which has a hexagonal mirror made up of smaller hexagons, and sits on a rhombus-shaped spacecraft.
The James Webb Space Telescope, shown in this illustration, detects light coming from objects in the universe. Northrup Grumman/NASA

In particular, a recent study analyzing James Webb Space Telescope data identified three candidates consistent with supermassive dark star models. Researchers looked at how much helium these objects contained to identify them. Since it is dark matter annihilation that heats up those dark stars, rather than nuclear fusion turning helium into heavier elements, dark stars should have more helium.

The researchers highlight that one of these objects indeed exhibited a potential “smoking gun” helium absorption signature: a far higher helium abundance than one would expect in typical early galaxies.

Dark stars may explain early black holes

What happens when a dark star runs out of dark matter? It depends on the size of the dark star. For the lightest dark stars, the depletion of dark matter would mean gravity compresses the remaining hydrogen, igniting nuclear fusion. In this case, the dark star would eventually become an ordinary star, so some stars may have begun as dark stars.

Supermassive dark stars are even more intriguing. At the end of their lifespan, a dead supermassive dark star would collapse directly into a black hole. This black hole could start the formation of a supermassive black hole, like the kind astronomers observe at the centers of galaxies, including our own Milky Way.

Dark stars might also explain how supermassive black holes formed in the early universe. They could shed light on some unique black holes observed by astronomers. For example, a black hole in the galaxy UHZ-1 has a mass approaching 10 million solar masses, and is very old – it formed just 500 million years after the Big Bang. Traditional models struggle to explain how such massive black holes could form so quickly.

The idea of dark stars is not universally accepted. These dark star candidates might still turn out just to be unusual galaxies. Some astrophysicists argue that matter accretion — a process in which massive objects pull in surrounding matter — alone can produce massive stars, and that studies using observations from the James Webb telescope cannot distinguish between massive ordinary stars and less dense, cooler dark stars.

Researchers emphasize that they will need more observational data and theoretical advancements to solve this mystery.

Alexey A. Petrov, Professor of physics and astronomy, University of South Carolina

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ooOOoo

Alexey Petrov says at the end of the article that more observations are required before we humans know all the answers. I have no doubt that in time we will have the answers.

Cambridge University and our brains.

Scientists have identified five ages of the human brain.

“Neuroscientists at the University of Cambridge have identified five “major epochs” of brain structure over the course of a human life, as our brains rewire to support different ways of thinking while we grow, mature, and ultimately decline.”

So wrote Fred Lewsey. Fred is the Communications Manager (Research) and is Responsible for: School of the Humanities and Social Sciences. (And I took this from this site.) He went on to report that: Four major turning points around ages nine, 32, 66 and 83 create five broad eras of neural wiring over the average human lifespan.

Being in my early 80’s I was most interested in that last turning point. This is the information about that era:

The last turning point comes around age 83, and the final brain structure epoch is entered. While data is limited for this era, the defining feature is a shift from global to local, as whole brain connectivity declines even further, with increased reliance on certain regions.     

“Looking back, many of us feel our lives have been characterised by different phases. It turns out that brains also go through these eras,” added senior author Prof Duncan Astle, Professor of Neuroinformatics at Cambridge.

“Many neurodevelopmental, mental health and neurological conditions are linked to the way the brain is wired. Indeed, differences in brain wiring predict difficulties with attention, language, memory, and a whole host of different behaviours”

“Understanding that the brain’s structural journey is not a question of steady progression, but rather one of a few major turning points, will help us identify when and how its wiring is vulnerable to disruption.”

The research was supported by the Medical Research Council, Gates Foundation and Templeton World Charitable Foundation. The full report may be read here: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2505656-your-brain-undergoes-four-dramatic-periods-of-change-from-age-0-to-90

Finally, here is an image of this amazing organ that we humans have.

Photo by BUDDHI Kumar SHRESTHA on Unsplash

The DNA of dogs.

What is revealed in most dogs’ genes.

On November 24th this year, The Conversation published an article that spoke of the ancient closeness, as in genetically, of wolves and dogs.

I share it with you. It is a fascinating read.

ooOOoo

Thousands of genomes reveal the wild wolf genes in most dogs’ DNA.

Modern wolves and dogs both descend from an ancient wolf population that lived alongside woolly mammoths and cave bears. Iza Lyson/500px Prime via Getty Images

Audrey T. Lin, Smithsonian Institution and Logan Kistler, Smithsonian Institution

Dogs were the first of any species that people domesticated, and they have been a constant part of human life for millennia. Domesticated species are the plants and animals that have evolved to live alongside humans, providing nearly all of our food and numerous other benefits. Dogs provide protection, hunting assistance, companionship, transportation and even wool for weaving blankets.

Dogs evolved from gray wolves, but scientists debate exactly where, when and how many times dogs were domesticated. Ancient DNA evidence suggests that domestication happened twice, in eastern and western Eurasia, before the groups eventually mixed. That blended population was the ancestor of all dogs living today.

Molecular clock analysis of the DNA from hundreds of modern and ancient dogs suggests they were domesticated between around 20,000 and 22,000 years ago, when large ice sheets covered much of Eurasia and North America. The first dog identified in the archaeological record is a 14,000-year-old pup found in Bonn-Oberkassel, Germany, but it can be difficult to tell based on bones whether an animal was an early domestic dog or a wild wolf.

Despite the shared history of dogs and wolves, scientists have long thought these two species rarely mated and gave birth to hybrid offspring. As an evolutionary biologist and a molecular anthropologist who study domestic plants and animals, we wanted to take a new look at whether dog-wolf hybridization has really been all that uncommon.

Little interbreeding in the wild

Dogs are not exactly descended from modern wolves. Rather, dogs and wolves living today both derive from a shared ancient wolf population that lived alongside woolly mammoths and cave bears.

In most domesticated species, there are often clear, documented patterns of gene flow between the animals that live alongside humans and their wild counterparts. Where wild and domesticated animals’ habitats overlap, they can breed with each other to produce hybrid offspring. In these cases, the genes from wild animals are folded into the genetic variation of the domesticated population.

For example, pigs were domesticated in the Near East over 10,000 years ago. But when early farmers brought them to Europe, they hybridized so frequently with local wild boar that almost all of their Near Eastern DNA was replaced. Similar patterns can be seen in the endangered wild Anatolian and Cypriot mouflon that researchers have found to have high proportions of domestic sheep DNA in their genomes. It’s more common than not to find evidence of wild and domesticated animals interbreeding through time and sharing genetic material.

That wolves and dogs wouldn’t show that typical pattern is surprising, since they live in overlapping ranges and can freely interbreed.

Dog and wolf behavior are completely different, though, with wolves generally organized around a family pack structure and dogs reliant on humans. When hybridization does occur, it tends to be when human activities – such as habitat encroachment and hunting – disrupt pack dynamics, leading female wolves to strike out on their own and breed with male dogs. People intentionally bred a few “wolf dog” hybrid types in the 20th century, but these are considered the exception.

a wolfish looking dog lies on the ground behind a metal fence
Luna Belle, a resident of the Wolf Sanctuary of Pennsylvania, which is home to both wolves and wolf dogs. Audrey Lin.

Tiny but detectable wolf ancestry

To investigate how much gene flow there really has been between dogs and wolves after domestication, we analyzed 2,693 previously published genomes, making use of massive publicly available datasets.

These included 146 ancient dogs and wolves covering about 100,000 years. We also looked at 1,872 modern dogs, including golden retrievers, Chihuahuas, malamutes, basenjis and other well-known breeds, plus more unusual breeds from around the world such as the Caucasian ovcharka and Swedish vallhund.

Finally, we included genomes from about 300 “village dogs.” These are not pets but are free-living animals that are dependent on their close association with human environments.

We traced the evolutionary histories of all of these canids by looking at maternal lineages via their mitochondrial genomes and paternal lineages via their Y chromosomes. We used highly sensitive computational methods to dive into the dogs’ and wolves’ nuclear genomes – that is, the genetic material contained in their cells’ nuclei.

We found the presence of wild wolf genes in most dog genomes and the presence of dog genes in about half of wild wolf genomes. The sign of the wolf was small but it was there, in the form of tiny, almost imperceptible chunks of continuous wolf DNA in dogs’ chromosomes. About two-thirds of breed dogs in our sample had wolf genes from crossbreeding that took place roughly 800 generations ago, on average.

While our results showed that larger, working dogs – such as sled dogs and large guardian dogs that protect livestock – generally have more wolf ancestry, the patterns aren’t universal. Some massive breeds such as the St. Bernard completely lack wolf DNA, but the tiny Chihuahua retains detectable wolf ancestry at 0.2% of its genome. Terriers and scent hounds typically fall at the low end of the spectrum for wolf genes.

a dog curled up on the sidewalk in a town
A street – or free-ranging – dog in Tbilisi, Georgia. Alexkom000/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY

We were surprised that every single village dog we tested had pieces of wolf DNA in their genomes. Why would this be the case? Village dogs are free-living animals that make up about half the world’s dogs. Their lives can be tough, with short life expectancy and high infant mortality. Village dogs are also associated with pathogenic diseases, including rabies and canine distemper, making them a public health concern.

More often than predicted by chance, the stretches of wolf DNA we found in village dog genomes contained genes related to olfactory receptors. We imagine that olfactory abilities influenced by wolf genes may have helped these free-living dogs survive in harsh, volatile environments.

The intertwining of dogs and wolves

Because dogs evolved from wolves, all of dogs’ DNA is originally wolf DNA. So when we’re talking about the small pieces of wolf DNA in dog genomes, we’re not referring to that original wolf gene pool that’s been kicking around over the past 20,000 years, but rather evidence for dogs and wolves continuing to interbreed much later in time.

A wolf-dog hybrid with one of each kind of parent would carry 50% dog and 50% wolf DNA. If that hybrid then lived and mated with dogs, its offspring would be 25% wolf, and so on, until we see only small snippets of wolf DNA present.

The situation is similar to one in human genomes: Neanderthals and humans share a common ancestor around half a million years ago. However, Neanderthals and our species, Homo sapiens, also overlapped and interbred in Eurasia as recently as a few thousand generations ago, shortly before Neanderthals disappeared. Scientists can spot the small pieces of Neanderthal DNA in most living humans in the same way we can see wolf genes within most dogs.

two small tan dogs walking on pavement on a double lead leash
Even tiny Chihuahuas contain a little wolf within their doggy DNA. Westend61 via Getty Images

Our study updates the previously held belief that hybridization between dogs and wolves is rare; interactions between these two species do have visible genetic traces. Hybridization with free-roaming dogs is considered a threat to conservation efforts of endangered wolves, including Iberian, Italian and Himalayan wolves. However, there also is evidence that dog-wolf mixing might confer genetic advantages to wolves as they adapt to environments that are increasingly shaped by humans.

Though dogs evolved as human companions, wolves have served as their genetic lifeline. When dogs encountered evolutionary challenges such as how to survive harsh climates, scavenge for food in the streets or guard livestock, it appears they’ve been able to tap into wolf ancestry as part of their evolutionary survival kit.

Audrey T. Lin, Research Associate in Anthropology, Smithsonian Institution and Logan Kistler, Curator of Archaeobotany and Archaeogenomics, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ooOOoo

Well thanks to Audrey Lin and Logan Kistler for this very interesting study. So even modern dogs have visible traces of wolf in their DNA. It is yet another example of the ability of modern science to discover facts that were unknown a few decades ago.

A worldwide myth.

An incredible fact, as in the truth, that almost nobody will accept.

Until the 22nd November, 2025, that is last Saturday, I believed this lie. A lie that spoke of the dangers, the hazards, the imminent end of the world as I believed it; as in Climate Change!

Very few of you will change your minds, of that I’m sure.

Nonetheless, I am going to republish a long article that was sent to me by my buddy, Dan Gomez.

ooOOoo

Latest Science Further Exposes Lies About Rising Seas

By Vijay Jayaraj

It’s all too predictable: A jet-setting celebrity or politician wades ceremoniously into hip-deep surf for a carefully choreographed photo op, while proclaiming that human-driven sea-level rise will soon swallow an island nation. Of course, the water is deeper than the video’s pseudoscience, which is as shallow as the theatrics.

The scientific truth is simple: Sea levels are rising, but the rate of rise has not accelerated. A new peer-reviewed study confirms what many other studies have already shown – that the steady rise of oceans is a centuries-long process, not a runaway crisis triggered by modern emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2).

For the past 12,000 years, during our current warm epoch known as the Holocene, sea levels have risen and fallen dramatically. For instance, during the 600-year Little Ice Age, which ended in the mid-19th century, sea levels dropped quite significantly.

The natural warming that began in the late 1600s got to a point around 1800 where loss of glacial ice in the summer began to exceed winter accumulation and glaciers began to shrink and seas to rise. By 1850, full-on glacial retreat was underway.

Thus, the current period of gradual sea-level increase began between 1800-1860, preceding any significant anthropogenic CO2 emissions by many decades. The U.S. Department of Energy’s 2025 critical review on carbon dioxide and climate change confirms this historical perspective.

“There is no good, sufficient or convincing evidence that global sea level rise is accelerating –there is only hypothesis and speculation. Computation is not evidence and unless the results can be practically viewed and measured in the physical world, such results must not be presented as such,” notes Kip Hansen, researcher and former U.S. Coast Guard captain.

New Study Confirms No Crisis

While activists speak of “global sea-level rise,” the ocean’s surface does not behave like water in a bathtub. Regional currents, land movements, and local hydrology all influence relative sea level. This is why local tide gauge data is important. As Hansen warns, “Only actually measured, validated raw data can be trusted. … You have to understand exactly what’s been measured and how.”

In addition, local tide-gauge data cannot be extrapolated to represent global sea level. This is because the geographic coverage of suitable locations for gauges is often poor, with the majority concentrated in the Northern Hemisphere. Latin America and Africa are severely under-represented in the global dataset.  Hansen says, “The global tide gauge record is quantitatively problematic, but individual records can be shown as qualitative evidence for a lack of sea-level rise acceleration.”

A new 2025 study provides confirmation. Published in the Journal of Marine Science and Engineering, the study systematically dismantles the narrative of accelerating sea-level rise. It analyzed empirically derived long-term rates from datasets of sufficient length – at least 60 years – and incorporated long-term tide signals from suitable locations.

The startling conclusion: Approximately 95% of monitoring locations show no statistically significant acceleration of sea-level rise. It was found that the steady rate of sea-level rise – averaging around 1 to 2 millimeters per year globally – mirrors patterns observed over the past 150 years.

The study suggests that projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which often predicts rates as high as 3 to 4 millimeters per year by 2100, overestimate the annual rise by approximately 2 millimeters.

This discrepancy is not trivial. It translates into billions of dollars in misguided infrastructure investments and adaptation policies, which assume a far worse scenario than what the data support. Because we now know that local, non-climatic phenomena are a plausible cause of the accelerated sea level rise measured locally.

Rather than pursuing economically destructive initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions on the basis of questionable projections and erroneous climate science, money and time should be invested in supporting coastal communities with accurate data for practical planning to adapt to local sea level rise.

Successful adaptation strategies have existed for centuries in regions prone to flooding and sea-level variations. The Netherlands is an excellent example of how engineering solutions can protect coastal populations even living below sea level.

Rising seas are real but not a crisis. What we have is a manageable, predictable phenomenon to which societies have adapted for centuries. To inflate it into an existential threat is to mislead, misallocate, and ultimately harm the communities that policymakers claim to protect.

This commentary was first published by PJ Media on September 10, 2025.

Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO₂ Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India.

ooOOoo

I shall be returning to this important topic soon. Probably by republishing that 2025 Study referred to in the above article.

I hope that you read this post.

Thank you, Dan.

We humans are still evolving.

An article in The Conversation caught my eye.

We must never forget that evolution is always happening.

So without any more from me here is that article.

ooOOoo

If evolution is real, then why isn’t it happening now? An anthropologist explains that humans actually are still evolving

Inuit people such as these Greenlanders have evolved to be able to eat fatty foods with a low risk of getting heart disease. Olivier Morin/AFP via Getty Images

Michael A. Little, Binghamton University, State University of New York

If evolution is real, then why is it not happening now? – Dee, Memphis, Tennessee

Many people believe that we humans have conquered nature through the wonders of civilization and technology. Some also believe that because we are different from other creatures, we have complete control over our destiny and have no need to evolve. Even though lots of people believe this, it’s not true.

Like other living creatures, humans have been shaped by evolution. Over time, we have developed – and continue to develop – the traits that help us survive and flourish in the environments where we live.

I’m an anthropologist. I study how humans adapt to different environments. Adaptation is an important part of evolution. Adaptations are traits that give someone an advantage in their environment. People with those traits are more likely to survive and pass those traits on to their children. Over many generations, those traits become widespread in the population.

The role of culture

We humans have two hands that help us skillfully use tools and other objects. We are able to walk and run on two legs, which frees our hands for these skilled tasks. And we have large brains that let us reason, create ideas and live successfully with other people in social groups.

All of these traits have helped humans develop culture. Culture includes all of our ideas and beliefs and our abilities to plan and think about the present and the future. It also includes our ability to change our environment, for example by making tools and growing food.

Although we humans have changed our environment in many ways during the past few thousand years, we are still changed by evolution. We have not stopped evolving, but we are evolving right now in different ways than our ancient ancestors. Our environments are often changed by our culture.

We usually think of an environment as the weather, plants and animals in a place. But environments include the foods we eat and the infectious diseases we are exposed to.

A very important part of the environment is the climate and what kinds of conditions we can live in. Our culture helps us change our exposure to the climate. For example, we build houses and put furnaces and air conditioners in them. But culture doesn’t fully protect us from extremes of heat, cold and the sun’s rays.

a man runs after one of several goats in a dry, dusty landscape
The Turkana people in Kenya have evolved to survive with less water than other people, which helps them live in a desert environment. Tony Karumba/AFP via Getty Images

Here are some examples of how humans have evolved over the past 10,000 years and how we are continuing to evolve today.

The power of the sun’s rays

While the sun’s rays are important for life on our planet, ultraviolet rays can damage human skin. Those of us with pale skin are in danger of serious sunburn and equally dangerous kinds of skin cancer. In contrast, those of us with a lot of skin pigment, called melanin, have some protection against damaging ultraviolet rays from sunshine.

People in the tropics with dark skin are more likely to thrive under frequent bright sunlight. Yet, when ancient humans moved to cloudy, cooler places, the dark skin was not needed. Dark skin in cloudy places blocked the production of vitamin D in the skin, which is necessary for normal bone growth in children and adults.

The amount of melanin pigment in our skin is controlled by our genes. So in this way, human evolution is driven by the environment – sunny or cloudy – in different parts of the world.

The food that we eat

Ten thousand years ago, our human ancestors began to tame or domesticate animals such as cattle and goats to eat their meat. Then about 2,000 years later, they learned how to milk cows and goats for this rich food. Unfortunately, like most other mammals at that time, human adults back then could not digest milk without feeling ill. Yet a few people were able to digest milk because they had genes that let them do so.

Milk was such an important source of food in these societies that the people who could digest milk were better able to survive and have many children. So the genes that allowed them to digest milk increased in the population until nearly everyone could drink milk as adults.

This process, which occurred and spread thousands of years ago, is an example of what is called cultural and biological co-evolution. It was the cultural practice of milking animals that led to these genetic or biological changes.

Other people, such as the Inuit in Greenland, have genes that enable them to digest fats without suffering from heart diseases. The Turkana people herd livestock in Kenya in a very dry part of Africa. They have a gene that allows them to go for long periods without drinking much water. This practice would cause kidney damage in other people because the kidney regulates water in your body.

These examples show how the remarkable diversity of foods that people eat around the world can affect evolution.

gray scale microscope image of numerous blobs
These bacteria caused a devastating pandemic nearly 700 years ago that led humans to evolve resistance to them.
Image Point FR/NIH/NIAID/BSIP/Universal Images Group via Getty Images

Diseases that threaten us

Like all living creatures, humans have been exposed to many infectious diseases. During the 14th century a deadly disease called the bubonic plague struck and spread rapidly throughout Europe and Asia. It killed about one-third of the population in Europe. Many of those who survived had a specific gene that gave them resistance against the disease. Those people and their descendants were better able to survive epidemics that followed for several centuries.

Some diseases have struck quite recently. COVID-19, for instance, swept the globe in 2020. Vaccinations saved many lives. Some people have a natural resistance to the virus based on their genes. It may be that evolution increases this resistance in the population and helps humans fight future virus epidemics.

As human beings, we are exposed to a variety of changing environments. And so evolution in many human populations continues across generations, including right now.

Michael A. Little, Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Anthropology, Binghamton University, State University of New York

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ooOOoo

This was published for the Curious Kids section of The Conversation.

However, I believe this is relevant for those adults as well who are interested in the subject. I’m in my 80’s and find this deeply interesting.

Death – it comes to all of us!

Irrespective of our believe.

There are only two days in our lives when we live for less than twenty-four hours: the day we are born and the day when we die!

I was born in November, 1944 and that makes me eighty-one. I was born as a result of an affair between my mother and my father. The family genes favour girls over boys, as in seven girls for every boy, and the son is normally the first born. My mother lost her first child, it was a boy. Then my mother had a second baby. Surprise, surprise, it was another son – me!!

I say this as an introduction to a post on The Conversation.

ooOOoo

Americans are unprepared for the expensive and complex process of aging – a geriatrician explains how they can start planning

It’s important for older adults to plan for their care as they age. Maskot/Maskot via Getty Images

Kahli Zietlow, University of Michigan

Hollywood legend Gene Hackman and his wife, Betsy Arakawa, were found dead in their home in February 2025. Hackman had been living with Alzheimer’s and depended on Arakawa as his full-time caregiver.

Disturbingly, postmortem data suggests that Arakawa died of complications from pulmonary Hantavirus several days before her husband passed. The discordant times of death point to a grim scenario: Hackman was left alone and helpless, trapped in his home after his wife’s death.

The couple’s story, while shocking, is not unique. It serves as a warning for our rapidly aging society. The U.S. population is aging, but most Americans are not adequately planning to meet the needs of older adulthood.

As a geriatric physician and medical educator, I care for older adults in both inpatient and outpatient settings. My research and clinical work focus on dementia and surrogate decision-making.

In my experience, regardless of race, education or socioeconomic status, there are some universal challenges that all people face with aging and there are steps everyone can take to prepare.

Aging is inevitable but unpredictable

Aging is an unpredictable, highly individualized process that varies depending on a person’s genetics, medical history, cognitive status and socioeconomic factors.

The majority of older Americans report a strong sense of purpose and self-worth. Many maintain a positive view of their overall health well into their 70s and 80s.

But at some point, the body starts to slow down. Older adults experience gradual sensory impairment, loss of muscle mass and changes in their memory. Chronic diseases are more likely with advancing age.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 46% of adults over age 75 live with at least one physical disability, and this proportion grows with age. Even those without major health issues may find that routine tasks like yard work, housekeeping and home repairs become insurmountable as they enter their 80s and 90s.

Some may find that subtle changes in memory make it difficult to manage household finances or keep track of their medications. Others may find that vision loss and slowed reaction time make it harder to safely drive. Still others may struggle with basic activities needed to live independently, such as bathing or using a toilet. All of these changes threaten older adults’ ability to remain independent.

The costs of aging

Nearly 70% of older Americans will require long-term care in their lifetime, whether through paid, in-home help or residence in an assisted living facility or nursing home.

But long-term care is expensive. In 2021, the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program reported that the average hourly rate for in-home care was US$27. An assisted living apartment averaged $4,800 per month, and a nursing home bed cost nearly double that, at a rate of $276 per day.

Many Americans may be shocked to discover that these costs are not covered by Medicare or other traditional medical insurance. Long-term care insurance covers the cost of long-term care, such as in-home care or nursing home placement. However, what is covered varies from plan to plan. Currently, only a small minority of Americans have long-term care insurance due to high premiums and complex activation rules.

I am not aware of any high-quality, peer-reviewed studies that have demonstrated the cost effectiveness of long-term care insurance. Yet, for many Americans, paying for care out of pocket is simply not an option.

Medicaid can provide financial support for long-term care but only for older adults with very low income and minimal assets – criteria most Americans don’t meet until they have nearly exhausted their savings.

Those receiving Medicaid to cover the costs of long-term care have essentially no funds for anything other than medical care, room and board. And proposed federal financial cuts may further erode the limited support services available. In Michigan, for example, Medicaid-covered nursing home residents keep only $60 per month for personal needs. If individuals receive monthly income greater than $60 – for instance, from Social Security or a pension – the extra money would go toward the cost of nursing home care.

Those who don’t qualify for Medicaid or cannot afford private care often rely on family and friends for unpaid assistance, but not everyone has such support systems.

A nurse helps an older man shave.
Older adults may end up needing help with day-to-day personal care. Klaus Vedfelt/DigitalVision via Getty Images

Planning for the care you want

Beyond financial planning, older adults can make an advance directive. This is a set of legal documents that outlines preferences for medical care and asset management if a person becomes incapacitated. However, only about 25% of Americans over 50 have completed such documentation.

Without medical and financial powers of attorney in place, state laws determine who makes critical decisions, which may or may not align with a person’s wishes. For instance, an estranged child may have more legal authority over an incapacitated parent than their long-term but unmarried partner. Seniors without clear advocates risk being placed under court-appointed guardianship – a restrictive and often irreversible process.

In addition to completing advance directives, it is important that older adults talk about their wishes with their loved ones. Conversations about disability, serious illness and loss of independence can be difficult, but these discussions allow your loved ones to advocate for you in the event of a health crisis.

Who’s going to care for you?

Finding a caregiver is an important step in making arrangements for aging. If you are planning to rely on family or friends for some care, it helps to discuss this with them ahead of time and to have contingency plans in place. As the Hackman case demonstrates, if a caregiver is suddenly incapacitated, the older adult may be left in immediate danger.

Caregivers experience higher rates of stress, depression and physical illness compared with their peers. This is often exacerbated by financial strain and a lack of support. It helps if the people you will be relying on have expectations in place about their role.

For instance, some people may prefer placement in a facility rather than relying on a loved one if they can no longer use the bathroom independently. Others may wish to remain in their homes as long as this is a feasible option.

Connecting with available resources

There are local and federal initiatives designed to help aging adults find and get the help they need. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services recently launched the GUIDE Model to improve care and quality of life for both those suffering from dementia and their caregivers.

This program connects caregivers with local resources and provides a 24-hour support line for crises. While GUIDE, which stands for Guiding an Improved Dementia Experience, is currently in the pilot stage, it is slowly expanding, and I am hopeful that it will eventually expand to provide enhanced coverage for those suffering from dementia nationwide.

The Program for All-Inclusive Care of the Elderly helps dual-eligible Medicare and Medicaid recipients remain at home as they age. This program provides comprehensive services including medical care, a day center and home health services.

Area agencies on aging are regionally located and can connect older adults with local resources, based on availability and income, such as meals, transportation and home modifications that help maintain independence.

Unfortunately, all of these programs and others that support older adults are threatened by recent federal budget cuts. The tax breaks and spending cuts bill, which was signed into law in July 2025, will result in progressive reductions to Medicaid funding over the next 10 years. These cuts will decrease the number of individuals eligible for Medicaid and negatively affect how nursing homes are reimbursed.

The government funding bill passed on Nov. 13 extends current Medicare funding through Jan. 30, 2026, at which point Medicare funding may be reduced.

Even as the future of these programs remains uncertain, it’s important for older adults and their caregivers to be intentional in making plans and to familiarize themselves with the resources available to them.

Kahli Zietlow, Physician and Clinical Associate Professor of Geriatrics & Internal Medicine, University of Michigan

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ooOOoo

This article is a wakeup call for me, because I have no plan in place.

While I think about death more frequently than I used to, the fact that I don’t have plan is naive: I must get myself to a stage where I have a plan, and soon! I guess I am not the only person in their 80s without a plan!

Connections across the miles

This world of blogging opens up incredible connections!

Recently I had a ‘Like’ from someone that I hadn’t come across before. As is my response to such events, I went across to their blog site to thank them by adding a ‘Like’ to their blog site. Then I found it was about street dogs and I started reading their posts. I was blown away by the integrity of the author and he was blogging from Kabul!

I am only going to republish three of the stories today but will be coming back with more.

Panagah Amn

A humanitarian project in Kabul dedicated to building a safe shelter for stray and injured animals.

The shelter is in its early stages, and with your support, we can bring it to life. 

Our goal is to provide food, medical care, and protection.

Panagah Amn is a small but passionate initiative dedicated to helping stray and injured animals in Kabul, Afghanistan. Our shelter was born from a deep sense of compassion and responsibility toward the many dogs and cats suffering in the streets without food, medical care, or shelter.

We welcome support from individuals and organizations who share our vision. Together, we can build a safer world for all living beings.

Staying with their website, I want to share these pictures with you.

He Died Waiting for Kindness

He had no name…
Perhaps because no one had ever paused for even a moment to ask him:
“What is your name, silent little angel?”
The cold of the night had settled over the road, and the car lights passed one after another beside his blood‑stained body…
No one slowed down.
No one turned their head to see his pain.
As if he were invisible — like a dry leaf pushed aside by the wind.
But he was not invisible…
He felt the pain, he felt the fear, and with every fading breath, he swallowed the loneliness.
His body lay on the gravel, his eyes half‑open, as if he was still waiting…
Waiting for someone who, just once, would look at him with kindness.
When I arrived, the blood was still fresh…
If I had reached just 20 minutes earlier, maybe…
Maybe I could have saved him.
Maybe I could have whispered:
“You are not alone… I am here.”
But it was too late.
He had already chosen to leave the pain of this earth and return to the sky…
To the arms of the angels — where no cars would ever drive past his heart again.
No one was even willing to lift his tiny body from the road…
As if he had no worth.
As if a life filled with silence and waiting meant nothing.
But to me, he mattered.
I lifted him from the road…
Not as a stray dog, but as a soul who deserved to be farewelled with dignity.
I buried him…
With shaking hands, yet with a heart that wanted — at least once — for someone to be kind to him.
In that moment, he taught me something…
Despite his wounds, despite his pain, his eyes were still full of kindness.
His gaze seemed to say:
“I wish everyone were like you…”
But the truth is:
I wish everyone were like him non‑judgmental, gentle, with a heart that remained free of hatred, even in the final breath.

 If this story touched your heart… please don’t stay silent.
For him, it’s already too late…
But there are still hundreds of “him” breathing on our streets,
and each one needs just one kind human for their life to change.
Please…

 Be the voice of these silent angels.

oooo

I wish everyone was like you.

 It was Friday… As every week, I set out with an 8-kilogram bag of food to visit those whom the world has forgotten, yet I have never been able to forget them…
From afar, the scene I saw made my heart tremble. Little puppies ran toward me with excitement and hope, so happy as if the entire world had become kind to them with just this one meal. Some were so hungry they could barely run, yet with shining eyes, they looked at me, as if saying: “You came… today we are saved.”
Amid all the sounds, joy, and excitement, my eyes fell on one—a gaze silent yet screaming a thousand cries…
A dog, thin, wounded, and trembling… standing in the middle of the road, afraid, yet hopeful. Fear kept him from approaching… as if he had come close to kindness many times before, only to be met with stones, kicks, and cruelty. And he had every right to be afraid… truly.
As I stepped closer, I saw something no animal lover ever forgets: his ears were gone… both torn off. The scars on his head were still visible… and his leg was injured, probably struck by stones multiple times. Yet… despite all this pain, despite all the suffering… he was still calm. He didn’t bark, growl, or attack… he just looked.
He had been hurt by humans… yet he still had hope in them.
I gently placed the food on the ground. He took a step back… fearful, hesitant. Then, with utmost caution, he came forward, took a bite, and stepped back again, as if saying: “Forgive me… I’m not used to someone treating me kindly.”
I wished I could approach, clean his wounds, and show him that not all humans are cruel. But he ran away… not from me, but from memories that resembled “me.”
But that gaze… that final look that still lingers in my heart like a dagger… eyes full of tears, untold words, gratitude, and fear… as if saying: “Thank you… for a meal. Maybe today is not my last day.”
As he walked away, his legs trembled… not only from hunger, but from life… from loneliness… from being forgotten.
On my way back, this question kept turning in my mind like a painful melody:
Until when? Until when must voiceless animals suffer from human cruelty? Until when will every meal be their only hope for survival? Until when will we just watch?
In Kabul, there are hundreds of animals like him. Some die from hunger, some from stones thrown by children and adults, and some like him… with wounds never healed, yet when they see a morsel of food, gratitude shines in their eyes.
I am alone… but my dream is big.
I want to build a shelter: a place where no animal dies from hunger, cold, disease, or violence. A place where they can learn once more that humans can be kind.
But this is impossible without your support. We need a sponsor, a foreign donor, or a compassionate organization to take the first step. Perhaps you know someone… perhaps your introduction could save a life.
If you can help, collaborate, or want to get in touch with us, please contact us via the email on our website. You can be the hope for an animal’s tomorrow… with a subscription, a referral, or a small step of support.
Sometimes, saving the world is impossible… but saving “a world” for one animal is possible. And perhaps today, it is our turn to change the world for one of them.

oooo

 ooOOoo

Dogs are so precious. What some humans do is beyond Jean and me, and, thankfully many thousands of other people.

But that doesn’t alter the fact that stray street dogs exist.

I won’t pontificate but the message is clear.

Thank you, Dr. Mateullah Abrahemi.

Let me copy some more text about the founder:

Dr. Mateullah Abrahemi, the founder of Panagai Amn in Kabul, is a committed and compassionate advocate for stray animals, especially street dogs. With a deep belief in the right to life and welfare of these vulnerable beings, he strives to provide them with a safe shelter, food, medical care, and kindness.

His efforts are not limited to dreams and ideas; rather, he takes practical, well-planned steps to improve the living conditions of these animals. With valuable experience in animal care, Dr. Abrahemi has now launched the Panagai Amn project, aiming to expand his efforts into a comprehensive support center.

He meticulously handles financial and logistical planning, designs a multilingual website via WordPress, manages resources, produces video content, and builds international communication bridges to attract more support for the cause.

Throughout this challenging journey, when many of his requests for assistance from organizations remained unanswered or were met with rejection,

As previously mentioned, I am going to share these images on, I hope, a weekly basis.

Thank you, Mateullah.

What if we die before our pets?

We love our dogs and can never envisage being without one.

So what happens to them after the last one of us die?

I have just turned 81 and, although I am fit, think more seriously about this matter than I used to. Jean has no children and my son and daughter, from a previous marriage, are living in the U.K.

So an article from The Conversation caught my eye and I wanted to share it with you.

ooOOoo

Diane Keaton’s $5M pet trust would be over the top if reports prove true – here’s how to ensure your beloved pet is safe after you are gone

Allison Anna Tait, University of Richmond

Diane Keaton loved her dog, Reggie.

The award-winning actor, director and real estate entrepreneur frequently posted photos and video clips of the golden retriever on her social media accounts. After she died on Oct. 11, 2025, at 79, some news outlets reported that she left US$5 million of her estimated $100 million estate to her dog.

I’m a law professor who teaches about wills, trusts and other forms of inheritance law. Every semester, I teach my students how they can help clients provide for their pets after death. Because they, like many Americans, love their pets and want to know how to take care of them, this topic always piques their interest. https://www.youtube.com/embed/FYJGCvpJIV0?wmode=transparent&start=0 Diane Keaton was very open about her devotion to her dog, Reggie.

Writing pets into a will

An estimated 66% of all U.S. households include at least one pet. Many Americans consider their cats, dogs, tortoises or other animals to be part of their family, and their spending on those nonhuman relatives is immense. In 2024, they paid a total of about $152 billion for goods and services to feed and otherwise support their pets.

Taking good care of your pets can go beyond buying them treats and sweaters. It can include leaving clear directions to ensure their needs are met once you’re gone. There are several ways that you can do this.

The first is through your will. You can’t give your pet money directly in your will, because the law says that pets are property, like your books or your dishes.

You can, however, leave a bequest, the technical term for a gift to a person or a cause listed in a will, to someone who will be the animal’s caretaker. That bequest can include directions that the money be spent meeting the pet’s needs.

It’s worth it to also name an alternate or contingent caretaker in case the first person you name does not want to or cannot take on that responsibility, or they die before you or the animals you’ve provided for in the will.

Choupette’s life of luxury

German fashion designer, photographer and creative director Karl Lagerfeld, who died in 2019 at 85, was someone who made the mistake of leaving money directly to his fluffy Birman cat, Choupette. It worked out for Choupette, though.

The cat was, according to several reports, still alive in 2025 and eating meals out of the porcelain bowls that Lagerfeld bought for her. Choupette is cared for at great expense and in the utmost luxury by Françoise Caçote, the designer’s former housekeeper. The cat even had a 13th birthday party at Versailles.

Another pet owner who did right by her pet was the comedian, producer and red carpet interviewer Joan Rivers.

Rivers had two rescue dogs in Manhattan and two more dogs in California when she died in 2014 at age 81. Rivers had made provisions for their care in her will.

A petite woman holding a tiny dog stands next to three men on a TV set.
The late Joan Rivers, right, seen on the set of her short-lived talk show in 1987, planned ahead for her dogs’ care. Bettmann via Getty Images

Creating pet trusts

If you’d like an arrangement that’s more secure than a will, then you might want to opt for a pet trust, another celebrity favorite. These kinds of trusts were not possible until the 1990s, because pets were not considered true beneficiaries – meaning they couldn’t sue the trustee.

But in the 1990s, states began to change their rules to allow for pet trusts. Today, pet trusts are valid in the whole country, although the rules vary slightly from state to state.

To establish a pet trust, you or a lawyer must draw up a trust document that names two important people: a trustee and a caretaker. The trustee is the person who will manage the money you leave in trust. They will make distributions to the caretaker that you select.

You must also specify how the money is to be spent meeting the animal’s needs and who would get any money that could be left in the trust when the pet dies. Typically, these trusts take effect at the owner’s death, just like other provisions in a will.

Drafting a pet trust can be free, if you use an online template and get no legal guidance. The same thing might cost around $100 if you use an online service such as Legal Zoom that provides directions. More commonly, however, pet trusts are part of a broader estate plan, and costs range depending on how complicated your estate is.

When the rich go overboard

One of the most over-the-top pet trusts came from Leona Helmsley, the New York hotel and real estate mogul known widely as the “Queen of Mean.” She was famous for her pettiness and tough management style and for landing in prison for tax evasion.

When Helmsley died in 2007, she left her dog, a Maltese named Trouble who had reportedly bitten members of her staff, a $12 million trust fund. Most of Helmsley’s estate went to the Helmsley Charitable Trust, but she made individual gifts to several relatives, and the gift to Trouble was larger than any of those.

The grandchildren, upset that Trouble got more money than they did, took the case to court, where the probate judge was less than impressed by Trouble’s luxury lifestyle and knocked down the amount in trust to $2 million. The other $10 million flowed back to her family’s foundation, where the bulk of the estate went in the first place.

Lesson learned: Your dog can have a trust fund, but don’t go overboard.

Bequests for pets can be challenged – in which case it’s up to courts to determines how much they think is reasonable for the pet’s need. In Helmsley’s case, $12 million was found to be excessive. And maybe with good reason. Trouble still had a nice life with fewer millions. The dog died in December 2010 after several years in Sarasota, Florida, at a Helmsley-owned hotel.

Other pet owners who aren’t celebrities have used pet trusts as well, such as Bill Dorris, a Nashville businessman without any human heirs. He left his dog, Lulu, $5 million.

Pet-loving celebrities who loved all the pets

Finally, there’s a lesson to be learned from British fashion designer and icon Alexander McQueen, who was worth £16 million ($21 million) when he died in 2010 at the age of 40. McQueen left £50,000 ($66,000) in a trust for his two bull terriers so that they would be well cared for during the remainder of their lives.

McQueen also included a bequest of £100,000 ($132,000) to the Battersea Dogs and Cats Home in his will to help fund the care of some of the millions of other animals out there that need the basics of food and shelter.

Animal shelters, in the U.K., the United States and other countries, help rescue and protect animals, and these animals need more help than the Choupettes and Troubles of the world.

So, my advice is that you go ahead and create a pet trust for your cat. But don’t forget to give some money in your will – and ideally while you’re alive – to help the vast majority of the millions of companion animals who need new homes every year. None of them have trust funds.

What becomes of Reggie, Keaton’s golden retriever, and her estate remains to be seen. Keaton, who starred in hit movies such as “Annie Hall,” “Reds” and “The First Wives Club,” isn’t the first celebrity to leave millions of dollars to a pet. And it’s unlikely that she will be the last.

Allison Anna Tait, Professor of Law, University of Richmond

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

ooOOoo

Amending our Will to create a pet trust seems like a very good idea! And making sure there is money for the trust as well.

Bela’s Bright Ideas

Bela writes her poem on Pulse.

Bela writes frequently and publishes her poetry online.

Recently she published a poem, Do You Need Time?

I am delighted to share the poem with you all. Here is the link to Pulse.

ooOOoo

Do you need time?

I’m not sure I need time —
at least not as it’s commonly considered.
It’s simply what we’re given, like it or not,
for as long as we draw breath:
a new sunrise, a fading sunset,
and the spaces in between,
where we live out an unknown number of days
on this breathing planet.

Time to ponder or to provide,
to nurture, to rest,
depending on the moment
and the hands we’re dealt.

There is time for mountains to rise,
for seas to tumble rhythmically on distant shores.
Time for ground creatures to burrow in before winter,
for hawks to circle rivers and fields, searching —
always searching — for what sustains them.
Time for trees to grow or go dormant,
for planets to whirl their patient orbits —
there is time.

How we humans engage time is another matter.
We guard it, chase it, curse it,
as though it had power over us.
But time simply is.
Rushing or hoarding has never bought us
one more minute in an hour
or one more day in a year.

Perhaps all that’s left
is to flow with it — scheduled or not —
to find our own rhythm
within its turning frame.
We can wrangle with it until the end,
but still, it will roll on.

And maybe that’s mercy:
that time needs nothing from us
but our willingness to live inside it —
fully, gratefully,
while we can.

Pololu sunrise ~ 2016, bj

ooOOoo

May everyone find their own rhythm.