Latest news with #SanFrancisco-based
San Francisco Chronicle
2 hours ago
- General
- San Francisco Chronicle
‘Prepare to be blown away': New national monument near Santa Cruz to open with trails for hiking, biking
Almost a decade ago, former President Barack Obama recognized a 'spectacular' stretch of coastal mountains and prairie near the Santa Cruz County community of Davenport with the prestigious designation of national monument. The public, however, was never allowed in. That will change this summer. After years of unexpected delays preparing the site for visitors, the Bureau of Land Management has scheduled the opening of the 5,800-acre Cotoni-Coast Dairies monument for the afternoon of Aug. 15, a Friday. About a 15-minute drive north of the city of Santa Cruz on Highway 1, the onetime ranch and adjacent lands will debut with its northern reaches opened for hiking, biking and sightseeing. This includes nine of 27 miles of planned multi-use trails. The public will be able to access the full range of landscapes that the site is celebrated for, from broad marine terraces overlooking the Pacific Ocean to steep slopes spanning oak-dotted ridges, stream-lined canyons and redwood forest. Salmon and steelhead swim in the creeks, and jackrabbits, foxes and mountain lions roam the hills. 'When I get out there, I just feel like the place gives me a big hug,' said Zachary Ormsby, Central Coast field manager for the Bureau of Land Management. 'Visitors are going to feel that, too.' The site's name pays homage to both the native Ohlone people, specifically a subgroup called the Cotoni, and its early 1900s history as a Swiss dairy farm. The opening of the national monument to the public marks the end of a decades-long fight to keep the lands free of development. Sitting in the shadow of Davenport's shuttered cement plant, the site was spared from being absorbed by the factory. It also escaped unrelated proposals for oil drilling and a nuclear power plant. Protection came in the late 1990s after plans emerged for the area's bluffs to be lined with luxury estates. The San Francisco-based Trust for Public Land and Save the Redwoods League, among others, raised money to coordinate a roughly $45 million acquisition before any homes were built. About 500 of the original 7,000 acres that were purchased for conservation were conveyed to California State Parks while another portion was retained for agriculture. But the bulk of the property remained idle until a long-term caretaker could be secured. In 2014, 5,843 acres were transferred to the Bureau of Land Management. Shortly after that, the environmental community launched a campaign to upgrade the federal site to a national monument, a status that brings greater safeguards for natural and historical features as well as a higher public profile for the area. 'We see the property as having these superlative conservation and recreation values,' said Sara Barth, executive director of the Sempervirens Fund, the Los Altos-based land trust that helped lead the effort to make the lands a monument. 'It's larger than some of the other protected areas in the region. It's also more ecologically distinct. It has a rich history to it, too.' In January 2017, as one of Obama's final acts in office, the former president designated the federal site part of the California Coastal National Monument. Cotoni-Coast Dairies became the biggest onshore property within the existing monument, which includes a handful of distinguished spots along the Pacific. The Bureau of Land Management had hoped to open Cotoni-Coast Dairies years ago, but concerns about potential crowds caused delay. Neighboring communities worried there was too little parking and too few toilets, while scientists and conservation groups wanted to make sure that sensitive habitat, areas for wildlife and historical points would be preserved. Federal officials worked to address the issues. They've partnered with outside organizations to begin restoring watersheds for endangered coho salmon. Indigenous groups have surveyed culturally important plants on the property. Plans to rebuild an old 'cheese barn' are in the works. Perhaps most visible, the Santa Cruz Mountains Trail Stewardship and its many volunteers have taken the lead on constructing the monument's growing trail network, having recently completed three interconnecting 3-mile loops. The trails will be accessible from a new parking lot just north of Davenport near the junction of Warrenella and Cement Plant roads. Beyond serving hikers and bicyclists, parts of the multi-use trail system are designed for people using adaptive bikes accommodating mobility issues. The Bureau of Land Management hopes to open a second lot south of Davenport, with more trails, in the next few years. More details on the Aug. 15 opening will be provided closer to the date on the Bureau of Land Management's website for the monument. 'We've all been driving by this place for years and years and years,' said Matt De Young, executive director of the Trail Stewardship. 'Prepare to be blown away.'
Express Tribune
3 hours ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
US appeals court rules Trump retains control of California National Guard
demonstrator raises his hand holding flowers as members of the National Guard stand in formation outside a federal building during the No Kings protest against U.S. President Donald Trump's policies, in Los Angeles, California, U.S., June 14, 2025. Photo; REUTERS/ Listen to article A US appeals court let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles. Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on US soil and inflamed political tension in the country's second most populous city. On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on US District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding that his administration probably complied with the requirement to coordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Trump's directive. "And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage," it wrote in its opinion. Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and US Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Breyer, it said. In a post on X after the decision, Newsom vowed to pursue his challenge. This fight doesn't end here. — Gavin Newsom (@GavinNewsom) June 20, 2025 "The president is not a king and is not above the law," he said. "We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of US military soldiers against our citizens." Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social. "This is a great decision for our country and we will continue to protect and defend law-abiding Americans," he said. "This is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done." Breyer's ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Trump's action brought by Newsom. Breyer ruled that Trump violated a US law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor. It also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not exist. Breyer ordered Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Newsom. Hours after Breyer acted, the 9th Circuit panel had put the judge's move on hold temporarily. Amid protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Newsom's wishes. Trump also ordered 700 US Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilization. At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities' vehicles, used trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalized property, frustrating law enforcement. The Justice Department has said once the president determines that an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument. The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had imposed. In its June 9 lawsuit California said Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and US laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including US Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former President Joe Biden.
Hindustan Times
6 hours ago
- Business
- Hindustan Times
Midjourney lets you generate AI video from still images with V1 for free: Here's how
Midjourney has entered the AI video generation space with the launch of its first video model, V1. This new tool marks a shift from image creation to video animation, as the San Francisco-based company now allows users to turn still images into short video clips. The feature is currently only accessible via the web and is free for all users on the platform. However, a monthly subscription of at least $10 is required to access fast video generation. With Midjourney V1, users can upload either their own images or select from AI-generated images produced by Midjourney's own AI system. To begin, users need to select the 'Animate' option, which can produce four five-second video clips from a single image. Each clip can be extended by up to four seconds, for a maximum total of 20 seconds. However, it remains uncertain if these videos will include sound features at this stage. Also read: India's digital job scene to expand in 2025 with rise in AI and data-driven roles There are two available modes for animation: Automatic and Manual. The Automatic mode offers motion suggestions, which guide how the image could move. Meanwhile, Manual mode gives users the ability to control movement through detailed prompts, which allows them to influence how the scene develops over time. Also read: India's digital job scene to expand in 2025 with rise in AI and data-driven roles Users can also choose between two camera movement styles. The low-motion style keeps the camera mostly stationary, with limited movement. In contrast, the high-motion style introduces more dynamic movement, where both the camera and the subject display motion throughout the clip. A post shared by HT Tech (@hindustantimestech) Midjourney has made this tool available to all account tiers, including free users. However, video generation consumes significantly more resources. According to the company, creating a video clip uses eight times more GPU time than generating a still image. Midjourney CEO David Holz noted that this method is more affordable than previous market offerings and expects continued improvement in the tool's performance and cost-efficiency. Also read: Samsung Galaxy S25 review: Flagship features in a handful package Users can create videos in two operational modes: fast mode and relax mode. Fast mode uses a fixed GPU time allotment provided each month, where one minute of GPU time generates an image, and eight minutes are required for a video. Once users exhaust their GPU time, they cannot create additional content until the quota resets. On the other hand, 'Relax Mode' is currently only available to Pro-tier subscribers and above and allows for unlimited video generation. However, there are longer wait times, with video prompts potentially taking up to 10 minutes to complete.
Straits Times
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Straits Times
US court lets Trump keep control of California National Guard for now
FILE PHOTO: A demonstrator raises his hand holding flowers as members of the National Guard stand in formation outside a federal building during the No Kings protest against U.S. President Donald Trump's policies, in Los Angeles, California, U.S., June 14, 2025. REUTERS/Daniel Cole/File Photo US court lets Trump keep control of California National Guard for now WASHINGTON - A U.S. appeals court let Donald Trump retain control on Thursday of California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests in Los Angeles. Trump's decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on U.S. soil and inflamed political tension in the country's second most-populous city. On Thursday, a three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended its pause on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Trump had unlawfully called the National Guard into federal service. Trump probably acted within his authority, the panel said, adding that his administration probably complied with the requirement to coordinate with Governor Gavin Newsom, and even if it did not, he had no authority to veto Trump's directive. "And although we hold that the president likely has authority to federalize the National Guard, nothing in our decision addresses the nature of the activities in which the federalized National Guard may engage," it wrote in its opinion. Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and U.S. Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement, it added. The governor could raise those issues at a court hearing on Friday in front of Breyer, it said. In a post on X after the decision, Newsom vowed to pursue his challenge. "The president is not a king and is not above the law," he said. "We will press forward with our challenge to President Trump's authoritarian use of U.s. military soldiers against our citizens." Trump hailed the decision in a post on Truth Social. "This is a great decision for our country and we will continue to protect and defend law-abiding Americans," he said. "This is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should state and local police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done." Breyer's ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Trump's action brought by Newsom. Breyer ruled that Trump violated a U.S. law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor. It also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not exist. Breyer ordered Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Newsom. Hours after Breyer acted, the 9th Circuit panel had put the judge's move on hold protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against Newsom's wishes. Trump also ordered 700 U.S. Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps mobilization. At a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the troops. The law sets out three conditions by which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's laws. The appeals court said the final condition had probably been met because protesters hurled items at immigration authorities' vehicles, used trash dumpster as battering rams, threw Molotov cocktails and vandalized property, frustrating law enforcement. The Justice Department has said once the president determines that an emergency exists that warrants the use of the National Guard, no court or state governor can review that decision. The appeals court rejected that argument. The protests in Los Angeles ran for more than a week before they ebbed, leading Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had imposed. In its June 9 lawsuit California said Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and U.S. laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law enforcement. The Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers. The 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former President Joe Biden. REUTERS Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.
Time of India
9 hours ago
- Politics
- Time of India
US court lets Trump keep control of National Guard troops deployed to Los Angeles
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel A U.S. appeals court let Donald Trump on Thursday retain control over California's National Guard while the state's Democratic governor proceeds with a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Republican president's use of the troops to quell protests and unrest in Los Angeles.A three-judge panel of the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals extended a pause it placed on U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer's June 12 ruling that Trump had called the National Guard into federal service ruling was issued in a lawsuit against Trump's action brought by Governor Gavin Newsom Breyer ruled that Trump violated the U.S. law governing a president's ability to take control of a state's National Guard by failing to coordinate with the governor, and also found that the conditions set out under the statute to allow this move, such as a rebellion against federal authority, did not ordered Trump to return control of California's National Guard to Newsom. Hours after Breyer acted, the 9th Circuit panel put the judge's move on hold protests and turmoil in Los Angeles over Trump's immigration raids, the president on June 7 took control of California's National Guard and deployed 4,000 troops against the wishes of Newsom. Trump also ordered 700 U.S. Marines to the city after sending in the National Guard. Breyer has not yet ruled on the legality of the Marine Corps a court hearing on Tuesday on whether to extend the pause on Breyer's decision, members of the 9th Circuit panel questioned lawyers for California and the Trump administration on what role, if any, courts should have in reviewing Trump's authority to deploy the law sets out three conditions under which a president can federalize state National Guard forces, including an invasion, a "rebellion or danger of a rebellion" against the government or a situation in which the U.S. government is unable with regular forces to execute the country's Justice Department has said that once the president determines that an emergency that warrants the use of the National Guard exists, no court or state governor can review that decision to send troops into Los Angeles prompted a national debate about the use of the military on U.S. soil and inflamed political tensions in the second most-populous U.S. protests in Los Angeles lasted for more than a week, but subsequently ebbed, leading Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass to lift a curfew she had argued in its June 9 lawsuit that Trump's deployment of the National Guard and the Marines violated the state's sovereignty and U.S. laws that forbid federal troops from participating in civilian law lawsuit stated the situation in Los Angeles was nothing like a "rebellion." The protests involved sporadic acts of violence that state and local law enforcement were capable of handling without military involvement, according to the Trump administration has denied that troops are engaging in law enforcement, saying that they are instead protecting federal buildings and personnel, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 9th Circuit panel is comprised of two judges appointed by Trump during his first term and one appointee of Democratic former President Joe Biden.
