By Claire Elise Thompson for Grist.
Broadcast version by Eric Galatas for Colorado News Connection reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration

When Lois Brink’s kids were in elementary school, she remembers being struck by how uninviting their schoolyard was. She described it as “scorched earth” — little more than a dirt field coated in “I don’t know how many decades of weed retardant” and some aging play equipment. But Brink, a landscape architect and professor at the University of Colorado Denver, didn’t just see a problem. She saw fertile ground for a solution. Over the next dozen years, she helped lead a transformation of nearly 100 elementary school grounds across Denver into more vibrant, greener spaces, dubbed “Learning Landscapes.”

Public schools alone cover about 2 million acres of land in the U.S. Although comprehensive data is hard to come by, the “scorched earth” that Brink witnessed is the norm in many places — according to the Trust for Public Land, around 36 percent of the nation’s public school students attend school in what would be considered a heat island. And as with green spaces writ large, a dearth of schoolyard trees and other vegetation tends to be most common in lower-income areas and Black and brown neighborhoods.

“It really makes sense to think about how those spaces can serve well-being, development, learning, and social cohesion — and also environmental justice and resilience goals that can help a community thrive,” said Priya Cook, director of green schoolyards and communities at Children & Nature Network, one organization working to advance this goal. The org recently published a report looking at how the benefits of green schoolyards translate into economic value, focusing on Denver as a case study and using data from Brink’s work.

Incorporating factors such as school attendance and academic scores, carbon sequestration and rainwater retention, and overall community health and public safety, the report estimated that communities can reap a more than $3 return for every $1 invested in green schoolyards.

In Denver, Learning Landscapes schools saw increases in math and writing scores and overall school performance (a measure combining factors such as academic scores and graduation, dropout, and participation rates). And although this research is not definitive, the study stated that “if green schoolyards can improve student achievement in elementary school, they likely have a positive impact on high school graduation rates.” That in turn cascades into improved employment outcomes, and increased tax revenue. The study also concluded that benefits are amplified if green schoolyards are made available to the public. For instance, previous research has shown that property values increase by as much as 5 percent when the properties are within 500 feet of a park.

For Cook, translating the benefits of greening schoolyards into a monetary value is about more than helping schools think about how to spend their limited budgets – it’s about opening up new avenues of funding. “School districts are notoriously underfunded,” Cook noted. “And this is a strategy that benefits all of society. And so the financing needs to come from organizations in community development, economic development, public health — these sectors that are thinking about the whole child, whole community, society-level outcomes.”

After Brink’s aha moment at her own kids’ school, she decided to get her graduate students at the university involved in designing a better alternative. Realizing the school district didn’t have money to implement their vision, they raised the funds themselves to install a pilot at Bromwell Elementary, the school her kids attended. “Then we realized, when you raise the money for something, the district is much more willing to maybe do things nontraditional and rethink what a schoolyard could look like as a civic space,” Brink said.

That approach got the school district on board for expanding the initiative to other schools. In 2000, Brink formed the Learning Landscape alliance, a public-private partnership with support from the city, local nonprofits, and contractors that were willing to donate pro bono services to keep costs down. Over the next three years, they worked with communities to design and convert 22 schoolyards in Denver’s industrial crescent.

“What we were trying to convince the district of is that each schoolyard needs to be a total transformation,” Brink said. Each project was unique, both in its design and in the process it took to implement it. For instance, Brink recalls at one school, many of the parents happened to work in the landscape industry, so they volunteered their time alongside the contractors, laying irrigation and sod. At another school that primarily served Latino students, Brink said, the team designed raised planters that mimicked Aztec geometry.

In 2003, and then again in 2008, the Denver Public School Board proposed, and citywide voters passed, a ballot measure to set aside funding to expand the conversions throughout the city. “You had a city where 60 percent of the voters didn’t have children. And yet this passed overwhelmingly every time,” Brink said. “It was just really, really great to see that sort of level of engagement.”

All told, between 2000 and 2012, the Learning Landscapes initiative converted every single public elementary school campus in Denver to a green schoolyard, totaling 306 acres.

And all the while, Brink has been collecting data. In December of last year, she prepared a report for Children & Nature Network analyzing some of the key takeaways from Learning Landscapes (that formed the basis of its study on the economic benefits of green schoolyards more broadly). Among other impacts, the report noted a 7 percent reduction in student mobility (the rate at which students transfer in and out of a school), a $1.3 million boost in state funding thanks to increased student enrollment, and 1,284 tons of carbon sequestered each year across all the green schoolyards.

With all the benefits of green schoolyards, for students, communities, and the environment, it may seem like a no-brainer solution. Still, there are barriers to converting every single schoolyard into a green space — a vision that Children & Nature Network hopes to help realize by 2050, Priya Cook said.

Cost is one obvious one. But even more than the actual dollars, Cook said, it’s often the initiative it takes to bring together diverse stakeholders to make a project happen — what Brink and her students did when they scrapped together the resources to implement their vision in Denver, through a combination of volunteer labor, pro bono services, and public and nonprofit dollars.

Ironically, Cook noted, a significant barrier to finding the funding for green schoolyards lies in one of their greatest strengths: They’re a multifaceted solution. “Markets tend to underinvest in strategies that produce broad benefits to society,” she said. For instance, if a school, nonprofit, or other funder wanted to make changes to prioritize students’ mental health, it might invest its limited dollars in counseling programs or other targeted interventions, rather than thinking about something like nature access — even though nature access does improve mental health, in addition to other benefits.

“We have to think differently to pick multi-solving interventions,” Cook said.

Still, she’s hopeful that the growing body of research on green schoolyards will continue to bring more stakeholders to the fold.

“I think there’s absolutely more hunger for it,” she said, “and people do it in really ingenious ways. Some places have multimillion dollar investments in a single site, and some places find small grants and they do a lot of surface installations that change kids’ experience every day.”


Claire Elise Thompson wrote this article for Grist.


get more stories like this via email

Supporters of public lands will gather in Santa Fe next week to oppose pending legislation that would sell off millions of acres in 11 Western states, including New Mexico.

The Monday afternoon rally is scheduled during this year's Western Governors' Association annual meeting. The event includes U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, who backs the legislation - while New Mexico's entire congressional delegation opposes the land-sale provision.

"As written, the bill would put more than 100 million acres of public land up for sale," said Kate Groetziner, communications manager for the Center for Western Priorities, "and it would actually mandate the sale of at least 2 million acres."

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, has long advocated for public land sales, arguing only "underused" parcels would be considered. But data from the Wilderness Society show more than 250 million acres could qualify - roughly equivalent to the land mass of California, New York and Texas combined. Only Montana would be excluded from the sales, after Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., carved out an exemption.

The second Trump administration renewed the effort to sell public lands to boost oil and gas production, increase logging and mining, and accommodate data centers for artificial intelligence and computer networks. That messaging was expanded in March, when Burgum announced a task force to explore building "affordable" homes on Western public lands to ease the nation's housing shortage.

Groetzinger said the way it's written now, the bill is a giveaway to private developers and the ultra-wealthy who could build luxury homes near U.S. forest land.

"Some of the lands that will be most at risk are those close to Western towns and cities, the lands where people like to get out after work and recreate," she said. "Another concern we have is that there's no affordability requirement; the text of the bill does not include any requirements that the housing be affordable."

The Interior Department is also considering reversing protections for more than 300,000 acres surrounding New Mexico's historic Chaco Canyon, according to a letter sent to tribal governments last month. The reversal would open the lands under mineral leasing laws.


get more stories like this via email

International tourists visiting U.S. national parks may pay more at the gate starting next year.

Advocates have called it a "common-sense policy" that could raise needed revenue for maintenance. In its 2026 "Budget in Brief," the U.S. Department of the Interior has included a surcharge for the 14 million foreigners who visit America's national parks annually.

A 2023 report from the Property and Environment Research Center found a $25 surcharge would just about double fee revenue to the National Park Service, adding $330 million to its coffers.

Tate Watkins, research fellow at the center, said the revenue could go a long way.

"With a relatively small increase in fees for visitors from abroad, you could raise a really significant amount of revenue that many parks really, really need," Watkins pointed out. "Especially the ones that are bigger, attract more visitors and have seen booms in visitation over recent years."

Watkins noted routine maintenance at Yellowstone, the nation's oldest park, costs about $43 million annually, while the park has a maintenance backlog totaling $1.5 billion. The Interior budget comes as the U.S. Senate's reconciliation bill proposes moves which could hinder park operations, including pulling $267 million in remaining Inflation Reduction Act funding earmarked for the Park Service.

Watkins stressed current park fees make up a small slice of travel budgets for those visiting from outside the country, usually less than 3%.

"When you think of the types of visitors who are able to pay multi-thousands of dollars for a big, often bucket-list trip to some of the incredible sites that we have at our national parks, most wouldn't blink at paying a little bit more, or even potentially a decent amount more," Watkins asserted.

According to the report, it is common practice around the world to charge international visitors more. Torres del Paine National Park in Chilean Patagonia, for example, charges foreigners $55, almost four times the citizens' rate of $14.


get more stories like this via email

California took a big step Tuesday toward the goal of conserving 30% of land and waters by 2030. The Ocean Protection Council adopted a roadmap to decide which protected waters will count toward the goal.

"We're now at 21.9% of coastal waters conserved," said Michael Esgro, the council's senior biodiversity program manager and tribal liaison, "so more than three-quarters of the way to our 30 by 30 goal, here at the halfway point of the initiative. We have another almost 300,000 acres to conserve by 2030."

The Council refined the roadmap over the past year in a series of public workshops and consultations with tribes. The next meeting in September will delve further into the specific criteria for evaluating improvements in biodiversity in protected waters.

Rebecca Schwartz Lesberg, president of a conservation consulting firm, Coastal Policy Solutions, said advocates are pleased that the final draft of the roadmap zeroes in on threats specific to estuaries, where the rivers meet the sea.

"On the open coast, we're worried more about things like fishing and oil and gas extraction and impacts from shipping," she said. "In bays and estuaries, we're more concerned with impairments to water quality from urban runoff and lack of space for marsh migration under sea-level rise."

At Tuesday's hearing, tribal leaders praised the state and tribal cooperation that resulted in the new federal Chumash Heritage National Marine Sanctuary. However, Violet Sage Walker, chair of the Northern Chumash Tribal Council, said the sanctuary needs more state support if it is to be counted in the 30 x 30 initiative, citing cuts at the federal level.

"I am concerned as national leadership has removed so much of the funding," she said, "so much of the staff and potentially co-management directives from marine sanctuaries and all protected areas."

The roadmap allows for some commercial fishing within the marine sanctuary. Council staff will report back on biodiversity in those waters over the next year.

Support for this reporting was provided by The Pew Charitable Trusts.


get more stories like this via email