Disaster

From California Rock, 1,100 feet above Yosemite Valley, the crown jewel of America’s beloved national parks spreads out beneath you.

The jaw-dropping north face of 8,800-foot Half Dome towers to the east. The silky green ribbon of the Merced River meanders through the valley floor below, astonishingly lush during the spring snow melt. Even cars in the parking lots look fabulous, their roofs and windshields sparkling in the golden sunshine like so many tiny gems.

And then you realize those gems are everywhere — as far as the eye can see — because every single parking space in the valley is full.

On the way down from that vantage point, Upper Yosemite Falls Trail, which was practically empty at 9 a.m., had turned into a human conveyor belt by 11 a.m. Hundreds of people trudged up the steep switchbacks in single file.

People hike the Upper Yosemite Falls trail in Yosemite National Park on Saturday.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

That’s what’s giving parks enthusiasts heartburn this spring.

Even before the summer rush, which begins in earnest in a few days with Memorial Day weekend, California’s most visited national park is seeing enormous crowds. There have been more than 836,000 visits so far in 2026, according to National Park System data — about 100,000 more than this time last year.

The reason, according to parks advocates, is the Trump administration’s decision to abandon a reservation system implemented in 2020 to limit crowds during the COVID-19 pandemic. The system has been used on and off since then to help control the number of visitors and preserve a sense of natural tranquility.

On Saturday, there seemed to be an uneasy balance: The crowds were large but well-managed, with some visitors worried about the months ahead.

On the valley floor, as hundreds of people pressed together to gaze in awe at Lower Yosemite Falls, Jeff Wilson of Folsom said he was having flashbacks to 2023, the last time the park allowed entry without permits.

“It was just absolute bumper-to-bumper traffic all the way around the loop. Zero places to park, cars just circling all day, and people pulling off into just random spots,” Wilson said. “It was an absolute mess.”

People walk to the bottom of Yosemite Falls in Yosemite National Park on Saturday.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

There were echoes of that everywhere on Saturday. Parking lots filled up fast — the lot at Curry Village was full by 8 a.m. — and cars were stashed in every unmarked flat spot their owners thought they could get away with.

Once people found somewhere to leave their cars, they didn’t dare move them. Most relied on the free shuttle that circles the valley floor. The big white buses were jammed to capacity by midday, as were the bus stops, where people often had to wait for several shuttles to pass before one arrived with room.

Still, the lines were reasonable to enter the park and pay the fee — $35 per car for U.S. residents and President Trump’s new $100 per person extra charge for foreigners. That means a family of four from abroad would have to pay $435.

People who arrived very early breezed through the toll booths, and even those who showed up after 9 a.m. said they waited only about 15 to 30 minutes. That was a dramatic improvement over recent weekends, when social media lit up with complaints of hour-and-a-half ordeals.

Traffic flowed slowly but smoothly on the main paved roads around the valley floor. There was the occasional outburst as angry drivers leaned heavily on their horns, filling the peaceful meadow with a sudden blast of urban agita, but in general, things remained calm.

“We thought it would be more crowded,” said Laura Yuen, from the Bay Area. “But it’s actually manageable. We’re on bikes, and people are making room and are courteous.”

Arriving early and stashing the car was key for Yuen and her companion.

“A couple of sights have been crowded — those were the really touristy spots. But other than that, it has been beautiful,” she said. “This is a great time of year to come.”

Whether the good times will last once the high season begins is the question.

People board a shuttle in Yosemite National Park on Saturday.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Since Trump returned to office in 2025 and unleashed Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency on the federal work force, the National Park System has lost nearly a quarter of its employees to layoffs and buyouts, according to the nonprofit National Parks Conservation Assn.

And the Trump administration has proposed about 3,000 more job cuts — roughly another 25% — in the coming year. Trump has also proposed slashing nearly $800 million from the park system’s roughly $3-billion operating budget.

All of which risks tipping the delicate balance into chaos and gridlock, critics warn.

By 2 p.m., a flashing sign at the entrance to Curry Village advised that the parking lot was full and directed people to try their luck elsewhere.

Still, dozens of drivers crept around the lot, hoping to pounce if someone pulled out. It looked like an especially depressing way to spend an afternoon surrounded by some of the most celebrated natural wonders on Earth.

Kunal Khandwala of San José was among those searching for a spot until he gave up and pulled over, blocking a few cars but ready to move if their owners returned and needed to leave.

His friends had hopped out and joined the line at the Curry Village Pizza Deck, waiting to grab some food and go find a quiet spot for a picnic — far from the village.

The situation was “testing,” Khandwala said, but not intolerable if you relaxed and remained patient.

And anything was better than subjecting yourself to the shuttle, he joked.

People raft down the Merced River with Yosemite Falls in the background in Yosemite National Park on Saturday.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

“The waits are insane,” he said, pitying people who had only a day in the park and were hoping to hit all of the highlights by bus. “There’s no way. You’re not going to see everything you want if you rely on the shuttle.”

Parks officials were unable to provide the number of visitors who arrived on Saturday, or compare that to the crowds on recent weekends.

But with Memorial Day looming, this weekend felt like the calm before the storm.

Which is why Wilson, the frequent visitor from Folsom, said he is “very, very much pro-reservation. It is a hassle — you have to plan ahead — but it just makes it a better experience for everybody.”

He had also brought his bike, which seemed to be the best way to elude the masses.

“This is my favorite place in the world, no matter what the crowds are like,” he said before pedaling off. “As long as you can get in, come, have a good time, you’ll love it.”

Southern Russia is facing one of the largest environmental disasters in its modern history. In April, repeated Ukrainian strikes on Russian oil infrastructure in Tuapse triggered massive refinery fires and oil spills along the Black Sea coast, including near Sochi. Residents described “black rain” falling from the sky as smoke and petroleum residue spread across the region. Weeks later, wildlife is still dying, beaches remain polluted and volunteers trying to respond say their efforts have often been obstructed. The authorities, meanwhile, have focused less on confronting the scale of the catastrophe than on silencing those speaking out about it. Despite the ongoing environmental damage, officials are already discussing reopening the beaches and launching the tourist season.

The catastrophe raises difficult questions about environmental destruction during wartime. Ukraine, which has experienced countless environmental catastrophes related to Russia’s all-out war, has been among the leading actors advocating for the recognition of ecocide as an international crime, even though the concept has yet to be formally codified in international law. Following the April strikes, however, some environmental activists in Russia and beyond are now also accusing Ukraine of hypocrisy and causing long-term environmental harm through strikes on oil infrastructure. There is a real debate over whether such actions can be justified, even when targeting an aggressor, if their environmental consequences may last for decades.

But focusing exclusively on Ukrainian strikes risks obscuring the deeper structural causes of the disaster. Russia’s oil infrastructure is deeply embedded in its war economy, and environmental damage of this magnitude does not occur in a vacuum. It is shaped by years of deregulation, lack of oversight and the systematic dismantling of environmental protections. These trends have only intensified during the full-scale invasion, as environmental safeguards have increasingly been cancelled in order to sustain the war economy. This includes recent legislative changes affecting the protection of Lake Baikal — a unique ecosystem that contains around 23 percent of the world’s unfrozen freshwater — raising concerns among experts about long-term environmental risks.

For years, environmental organisations in Russia have been labelled “foreign agents” or declared “undesirable”, independent environmental movements have been dismantled and activists forced into exile. The current catastrophe is unfolding in a country where ecological disasters are often silenced rather than addressed.

What is striking in the current situation is not only the scale of the damage but the response of the authorities. Rather than responding with transparency and accountability, Russian officials have largely attempted to silence discussion around the disaster. This recalls earlier patterns, including the initial response to the Chornobyl disaster, where secrecy and delayed disclosure significantly worsened the human and environmental consequences.

In this sense, responsibility does not lie only in the immediate cause of the disaster, but also in the absence of preparedness, regulation and accountability.

This disaster has also triggered an unusual wave of discussion within Russia itself, much of it unfolding online, despite increasing censorship. Volunteers on the ground have reported being obstructed and, in some cases, harassed while trying to rescue wildlife. Journalists attempting to document the situation have faced detention. Even as the catastrophe unfolds, the space to speak about it remains tightly controlled.

Yet the public reaction is telling. Much of it is happening on Instagram, which is banned in Russia, and on other social media platforms, with people still using VPNs to speak out and read real news. Rather than turning primarily into accusations against Ukraine, much of this discussion has been directed at the Russian authorities. The disaster is being used, implicitly and sometimes explicitly, to question the lack of coordination, the absence of transparency and the broader political system that allows such crises to happen.

This is significant. In a country where even calling the war a war is effectively prohibited, environmental catastrophe has become one of the few channels through which criticism can still surface.

The situation also exposes a deeper problem that goes beyond Russia. It highlights a fundamental gap in international law: the lack of effective mechanisms to address large-scale environmental destruction in the context of war.

Recent events illustrate the consequences of this gap. The destruction of the Kakhovka Dam caused massive ecological damage, yet failed to generate sustained legal or political accountability at the international level. Since then, environmental destruction has continued to accompany the war, without clear mechanisms to address it.

More broadly, the issue is being sidelined. The war in Ukraine has become so heavily politicised globally that discussions of its environmental consequences are often reduced, avoided or absorbed into larger geopolitical narratives. From the perspective of an environmental activist from Russia, this creates a deep sense of helplessness. These issues are becoming harder to raise, not because they are less important, but because they are competing with an overwhelming number of global crises.

This frustration is also visible within parts of the Russian antiwar movement, where there is a growing perception that international actors are more focused on the economic consequences of the conflict than on addressing its deeper causes and risks that go beyond military threats.

Meanwhile, environmental destruction across Russia, a country that spans one-10th of the Earth’s land surface, continues with little international attention. This includes not only wartime damage, but also longstanding patterns tied to extractivism, colonial governance in national republics, and the systematic marginalisation of Indigenous communities. These are not separate issues. They are part of the same underlying problem, one that remains largely unaddressed.

Environmental exploitation in Russia’s regions has long been tied to older imperial patterns of control and dispossession. These same southern regions are also the regions where the Russian Empire committed genocide against the Indigenous Circassian people, exterminating and expelling more than 95 percent of the local population in the late 19th century. And now, what the Russian authorities seem to care about is not the environmental devastation itself, but reopening the beaches so the region can continue generating income.

While Europe is preparing to spend hundreds of billions of euros responding to what it sees as a growing Russian military threat, far less attention is being paid to the political and economic structures sustaining environmental destruction inside Russia itself. From the perspective of an environmental activist and someone finishing a master’s degree in international affairs, there is a striking gap in how the root causes of this crisis are being addressed.

Too little attention is paid to the deeper structures that sustain it: Russia’s colonial governance and extractivist economic model in the regions of Russia. These issues remain underexplored not only in political decision-making but also in academia and media coverage. This gap is particularly visible in the missed opportunities to engage with emerging Russian decolonial movements and Indigenous activists from national republics, who have long been raising precisely these concerns. Their perspectives remain marginal, even though they are essential for understanding both environmental destruction and political instability in the region.

Many international organisations and NGOs have also scaled down or abandoned work related to Russia’s internal environmental and human rights issues, as well as broader regional dynamics in Eastern Europe and Central Asia. As a result, entire areas of expertise are disappearing at the very moment they are most needed. Voices that could contribute to a deeper understanding, and potentially to long-term solutions, are increasingly sidelined or ignored.

And when catastrophe comes, people are left asking how it became possible for oil to fall from the sky.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

As he reaches 100, broadcaster and naturalist Sir David Attenborough has spoken of the changes he has seen in his lifetime – and the horrifying consequences of climate change in the years to come

Legendary broadcaster Sir David Attenborough made a worrying prediction for 2030 – and predicted the state of the planet is likely to get worse after that. The iconic naturalist celebrates his 100th birthday on Friday (May 8) and he has long been heralded as the natural world’s biggest champion.

He has also been vocal about the threats facing the Earth. In 2020, as the world was in lockdown as a precaution against Covid-19, Sir David made what he called a “personal witness statement” about the threat of climate change. Many of the dire predictions he made about the world are beginning to come true.

Back in 2020 he warned that 10 years from that date, with much of the Amazon rainforest becoming a dry desert and the polar icecaps shrinking, the effects of climate change will become truly irreversible – and threaten the extinction of humanity.

As he released his Netflix documentary, A Life on Our Planet, Sir David made a personal appeal to world leaders. He said: “There are short-term problems and long-term problems. Politicians are tempted to deal with short-term problems all the time and neglect long-term problems.

“{Climate change] is not only a long-term problem, it is the biggest problem humanity has ever faced. Please examine it, and please respond.”

The prognosis for the rest of the century looks pretty bleak if Sir David’s predictions are to be believed. He said that if he had been born in 2020, instead of 1926, he would be witness to the full range of climate collapse: “In the 2030s, The Amazon Rainforest, cut down until it can no longer produce enough moisture, degrades into a dry savannah, bringing catastrophic species loss… and altering the global water cycle.

“At the same time, the Arctic becomes ice-free in the summer. Without the white ice cap, less of the sun’s energy is reflected back out to space. And the speed of global warming increases.”

By the 2040s, just 14 years from today, Sir David predicts: “Throughout the north, frozen soils thaw, releasing methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide, accelerating the rate of climate change dramatically.”

Through the 2050s, as today’s schoolchildren reach middle age, the world’s seas will become a sterile desert: “As the ocean continues to heat and becomes more acidic, coral reefs around the world die. Fish populations crash.”

Into the 2080s, mankind truly becomes an endangered species: “Global food production enters a crisis as soils become exhausted by overuse. Pollinating insects disappear… and the weather is more and more unpredictable.”

The stable climate that has endured longer than human civilisation will be lost forever by 2100, Sir David says.

“Our planet becomes four degrees Celsius warmer,” he adds, “Large parts of the earth are uninhabitable. Millions of people rendered homeless. A sixth mass extinction event… is well underway.”

He describes these various tipping-points as “a series of one-way doors,” with each bringing irreversible change.”

As he muses on his long life, Sir David warren that someone born today who lives as long as he has will see almost unimaginable change: “Within the span of the next lifetime, the security and stability of the Holocene, our Garden of Eden… will be lost.”

Average global temperatures have risen by more than 1C since the 1850s. Since 2015, every successive year has brought record high temperatures – causing heatwaves, floods, droughts, and fires as well as irrevocable habitat loss for many species.

Sir David thinks that humanity is the species most under threat. He said: “I used to think this was about saving the planet, and now I realise it’s not …nature will always look after itself. It’s about saving us.”

He was one of the first to sound the alarm about humanity’s impact on the environment. In 1937, the total human population was around 2.3billion. Carbon in the atmosphere was measured at 280 parts per million, and 66% of the planet remained unspoiled wilderness: “Everywhere you’d go, there was wilderness. Sparkling coastal seas. Vast forests. Immense grasslands. You could fly for hours over the untouched wilderness,” Sir David said.

Sir David was one of the first to sound the alarm about humanity’s impact on the environment. In 1937, the total human population was around 2.3billion. Carbon in the atmosphere was measured at 280 parts per million, and 66% of the planet remained unspoiled wilderness: “Everywhere you’d go, there was wilderness. Sparkling coastal seas. Vast forests. Immense grasslands. You could fly for hours over the untouched wilderness,” Sir David said.

By 1960, less than 30 years later, the change was already measurable. The global population was now three billion, atmospheric carbon was measured at 315 parts per million, and the remaining wilderness had shrunk to 62%.

Fast forward to 1997, the population had more than doubled to almost six billion, carbon in the atmosphere had increased to 360 parts per million, and much more wilderness had been lost – now down to 46%.

“The global air temperature had been relatively stable till the ’90s,” Sir David said. “But it now appeared this was only because the ocean was absorbing much of the excess heat, masking our impact. It was the first indication to me that the earth was beginning to lose its balance.”

Unsustainable logging, overfishing, and above all the reckless use of fossil fuels was pushing the planet to a tipping point, he warned: “The average global temperature today is one degree Celsius warmer than it was when I was born,” he said in A Life on Our Planet,” speed of change that exceeds any in the last 10,000 years. Summer sea ice in the Arctic has reduced by 40% in 40 years.”

The wildlife that has been Sir David’s lifelong interest has been pushed to the margins: “Half of the fertile land on earth is now farmland. 70% of the mass of birds on this planet are domestic birds. The vast majority, chickens.

“We account for over one-third of the weight of mammals on earth. A further 60% are the animals we raise to eat. The rest, from mice to whales, make up just 4%.”

Despite the bleak outlook, Sir David says all hope is not lost. One is to stabilise population growth and another is to switch to renewable energy.

JACK Whitehall’s countryside wedding to Roxy Horner over the weekend may have appeared to be oozing class, but the comedian says he actually had a wardrobe disaster during the ceremony.

In fact, the dad-of-one, 37, says he was left with his “a** hanging out” at the end of the aisle.

Jack ripped his luxe Tom Ford suit when picking up their two-year-old daughter during the ceremony.

“I squatted down to pick up Elsie and my trousers split, my whole a** was hanging out,” he told Vogue.

Luckily, the comedian had a back-up suit and later changed into one by menswear brand Dunhill.

Meanwhile, his bride also donned two outfits during the day, but hers were both by choice.

moving on

Kelly Osbourne cuts final ties with Slipknot’s Sid Wilson after ending engagement

love split

Hilary Duff’s sister splits from fiance after 12 years amid feud with pop star

Roxy donned two stunning wedding dresses from designer boutique Galia Lahav, changing between the ceremony and reception.

She added a lengthy veil and pulled her blonde tresses into an up do, with two strands framing her face.

Roxy and Jack’s wedding took place in the grounds of £12million stately home Euridge Manor, near Chippenham, Wilts.

The Georgian-style property is owned by Kate Middleton’s former boss, Jigsaw tycoon John Robinson.

Jack and Roxy shared the details of their big day with Vogue, explaining how Elsie was one of the model’s three flower girls.

They also had a whopping eight bridesmaids, with Jack’s brother, Barnaby, serving as Best Man.

After Jack predicted a “brutal” best man speech from his brother during a chat with The Sun earlier this year, due to his own ‘below the belt’ speech at his sibling’s nuptials, Barnaby didn’t hold back.

“He threw me under the bus, because that’s what I’d done to him,” confirmed Jack in his post-wedding chat.

Celebrity guests included TV pals James Corden and Jamie Redknapp, who Jack worked with on Sky’s A League of Their Own.

Guests were asked to turn off their phones during the ceremony and were put on a social media blackout.

The newlywed pair are now headed to Venice for a stunning Italian honeymoon.