a very hard summer marked by the weather, bans and toxins

As summer approaches, more and more people think of the estuaries of Galicia as a place to spend time. a few weeks of relaxationbetween beaches, good food and a tolerable heat. What is much more difficult (even demoralizing) these months is to think of the Galician estuaries as pantries of seafood. The brotherhoods that work in the area have encountered a perfect storm which has complicated their work and has forced the Xunta to come to his rescue. This reality is already being noticed in the markets. What has happened? These are not good times for the shellfish harvesters who dedicate themselves to combing the Galician estuaries in search of clams or cockles, nor are they good times for the fishermen who they catch fresh octopus or companies that operate mussel trays. The most curious thing is that it is not due to a single factor, but to a sum of conditions, a challenging scenario for the union that The Confidential recently summarized (with a good eye) like the particular “Via Crucis of Galician shellfish.” Toxins, bans and storms seem to have joined forces to complicate life for the sector. looking back. To understand the situation that the union is going through, you have to go back at least a few years, to 2023when the heavens rained down (literally) the shellfish harvesters’ business. In 2023, the sector first encountered an unusual heat wave that was followed, in autumn, by a succession of intense rainfall that they wreaked havoc among bivalve populations. In 2025 things seemed to improve, but the outlook became complicated again at the beginning of this year. “Last year there were signs of recovery with a significant pre-commercial stock that could not withstand the impact of the train of eight consecutive storms that hit our coast between January and February of this year,” they explain from the Consellería do Mar de Galicia. The logic is simple: it rains heavily, the flow of the rivers increases, the reservoirs open their floodgates and all that mass of fresh water ends up flowing suddenly into the estuaries, affecting, among other things, the salinity of the seabed and affecting its fauna. And that impacts catastrophically in the work of those dedicated to collecting cockles, clams or razor clams. Is it that serious? Yes. Both for its consequences on marine fauna and for its economic and social implications. In fact, in 2023, faced with a similar scenario, it was already warned that the high mortality rate of shellfish was leading thousands of families to a “very distressing situation” and an “uncertain future.” For reference, in March the biologist Liliana Solís shared with elDiario the results of the first sampling carried out on the banks of the Muros and Noia estuaries after the storms at the beginning of 2026: in the case of the cockle the mortality was 89%, in the case of the japonica clam 66%, in the slimy clam 96% and 31% in the fine clam. “Pesca de Galicia” graph showing the records of bivalves in the fish markets. The quantity is reflected in blue, in kilos. The golden line shows the price, in €/kg. “The worst crisis”. Shortly after, in April, The Voice of Galicia did a review through the different sandy areas of the community that he headed with an eloquent headline: “Galician estuaries: I check one by one in the face of the worst shellfish crisis.” Their analysis indicated that the most affected areas were those of Arousa, Vigo and Muros-Noia, although the outlook was not very encouraging in the estuaries of Pontevedra or A Coruña either. The ‘photo’ has chiaroscuros (in Vigo and Baiona, clam captures from boats alleviated the decline in shellfish harvesting on foot), but in general it shows a complicated panorama. So much so, that the Xunta has already made a move. This same week the Minister of the Sea, Marta Villaverde, explained in the Parliament of Galicia the measures deployed to “reverse the effects of the storms on the shellfish banks.” Its “central piece,” he defended, is a plan of almost 23 million euros to regenerate sandy beaches and support families in the union. Shellfish harvesters who participate in recovery tasks actually receive compensation of up to 700 euros per month. Do we have data? Yes. The Pesca de Galicia platform, which basically works with “first sale” data in the fish markets, shows a noticeable fall in bivalves during the first months of the year. For example, if in April 2025 it registered 238,544 kilos, in the same month of this year there were only 147,730. Something similar happens with crustaceans. This same week Vigo Lighthouse revealed that until May, 788 tons of mollusks valued at 9.7 million have been shipped in the markets, which translates into falls of 29 and 26%, respectively, and the worst start to the year so far this century. The ‘prick’ of the japonica clam, cockle and fine clam stands out above all, with declines that are around or even exceed 50%. The economic balance for the sector is compensated, in part, by the increase in the price of certain species, which in the face of a shortage have seen their price was shot in wholesale channels. Something more than storms. We said it at the beginning of the report: the big problem in the sector is that does not deal with a single challenge. The adverse weather of 2026 may not have made it easy for Galician shellfish harvesters, but that is not the only headache for the sector. In May the markets saw how it was activated a ban for the fresh octopus that will continue for another month, until july. All with the aim of recovering a species that has also gone through low hours in the estuaries of Galicia and meets increasing competition arrival from other regions. If that were not enough, add the “red tide”which has forced the closure of some 3,400 punts of mussels, the pressure exerted on prices by merchandise arriving … Read more

The US bans Chinese drones and turns DJI into the new Huawei. It’s an absolutely crazy idea.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) of the United States has decided ban all drones and critical components of these vehicles that have been manufactured in foreign countries. In addition to this, he has vetoed any team of communication and video surveillance from the largest Chinese manufacturers, and there is one name above all others: DJI. It’s another shot in the foot for the Trump administration. what has happened. Does almost a decade that some government officials in the US were asking for a veto on drones manufactured by Chinese companies, and that veto is now official. The FCC decision It will prevent this body from authorizing drones or critical drone components, something that is essential to be able to import them into the United States. The measure clearly affects DJI, which becomes the new Huaweialthough there is another firm, Autel, that will also be greatly impacted by the decision. Both come to form part of the so-called “covered list”. The reason is the usual one: to protect national security. It only affects (for now) future drones. The existing drones They will not be affected for the moment by the veto and their users will be able to continue using them. Stores that had models in their inventory and warehouses will be able to sell them normally, as the FCC’s action focuses specifically on future models. Thus, the decision is not retroactive, but that could change in the future and affect many models. What DJI says. Those responsible for DJI indicate in The Wall Street Journal that the company is prepared to be audited and highlights that independent analyzes have indicated that its products are completely safe. “DJI’s data security concerns are not based on evidence and instead reflect protectionism, contrary to the principles of an open market.” Drone pilots cry out to the sky. There are nearly half a million certified drone pilots in the United States, and in this segment between 70 and 90% of commercial drones used by local governments and hobbyists come from DJI. The measure therefore has an enormous impact on this entire industry in the United States. Many of these pilots are collecting drones and components to mitigate the impact of the measure. bad future. Greg Reverdiau, co-founder of the Pilot Institute in Arizona, conducted a survey in which 8,000 pilots participated. 43% indicated that the veto would be “extremely negative” and “potentially a cause of business closure”, and nearly 85% said they could stay in business for up to two years due to the prospect of not being able to access future DJI equipment and components. As this expert said, “People don’t buy DJI drones because it’s Chinese, they buy it because it’s available, very affordable, and capable.” DJI has no competition. And less, American. Eric Ebert, owner of a construction firm and user of these drones, explained the problem. “I’m American through and through. I drive a Chebrolet truck. But American drones can’t compete.” Ebert has a team of seven drone pilots who monitor wind turbine and solar panel installations. These weeks they have not stopped hoarding DJI drones and components “knowing what was going to come our way in 2026.” Protectionism…One of the companies that will benefit from the measure is Brinc Drones, a Seattle firm that sells them to more than 700 state agencies. Blake Resnick, its founder, explained that “it is impossible to compete with DJI unless you are subsidized by the state.” …and rear doors. In November XTI Aerospace, which makes helicopters, acquired a DJI distributor called Drone Nerds and also Anzu Robotics, which makes drones by licensing technology from DJI. As part of the agreement, the drone component manufacturing firm Unusual Machines invested 25 million. Guess who is a shareholder and board member of Unusual Machines: Donald Trump Jr, President Trump’s son. Image | jonas In Xataka | China conquered us with its cheap drones. Now the price of their pieces is skyrocketing for a reason that is not coincidental.

Supreme Court upholds law that bans TikTok in the US unless it changes ownership. How will it be applied?

Today, the US Supreme Court unanimously confirmed the federal law that bans the social network TikTok starting next Sunday, January 19, unless it is sold by its parent company based in China.. The measure maintains that the risk to national security raised by its ties to China outweighs concerns about limiting the freedom of expression of the application and its 170 million users in the United States. The decision came in the context of a unusual political upheaval by President-elect Donald Trump – who promised he could negotiate a solution – and the outgoing administration of Joe Biden, who has indicated that he will not apply the law starting Sunday, his last full day in office. White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre issued a statement saying that “TikTok should continue to be available to Americans,” but that national security issues should be addressed. “Given the mere fact that it is time, this administration recognizes that actions to implement the law must simply fall to the next administration, which takes office on Monday,” he added. How does this affect current users? The bipartisan law requires that ByteDance, owner of TikTok based in China, will divest the company on Sunday, a day before Trump takes office. If no sales occur, the platform used by millions of Americans will theoretically be banned. A sale does not seem imminent And while experts have said the app won’t disappear from existing users’ phones once the law goes into effect on Jan. 19, new users won’t be able to download it and updates won’t be available. That will eventually render the app inoperative, said the Department of Justice In court documents, he highlighted Associated Press. In a rapidly changing situation, It is unclear what will happen on Sunday with TikTok in the United States, as there are signs that Trump could try to keep the app available. The Biden administration has also signaled that it will not take any enforcement action on Sunday. The Justice Department had raised two key issues in defending the ban: that the Chinese government could exercise control over content that users see to influence public opinion, and that could collect sensitive data over millions of American users. In today’s ruling, the court acknowledged that national security reasons affected its analysis of whether there was a violation of freedom of expression under the First Amendment of the Constitutionand the judges focused on the issue of data collection. The high court concluded that the reasons for enacting the law are “decidedly content-agnostic” and have nothing to do with restricting certain speech. “TikTok’s scale and its susceptibility to control by foreign adversaries, coupled with the vast swaths of sensitive data the platform collects, justify differential treatment to address the government’s national security concerns,” the supreme ruling said. “The challenged provisions promote an important governmental interest unrelated to the suppression of free speech and do not substantially burden free speech more than is necessary to promote that interest,” the court added. “The anti-TikTok sentiment that led Congress to pass the law, driven by concerns about the level of control the Chinese government has over the company, has quickly dissipated in some quarters,” he said. NBC News.

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.