This week on Sea Change Radio, we speak to environmental reporter Neel Dhanesha of Heatmap to learn about his new media startup, discuss the landmark climate case Held v. Montana and take a look at the lesser prairie chicken and why the plight of this dancing bird is no laughing matter.

Narrator (00:02): This is Sea Change Radio, covering the shift to sustainability. I'm Alex Wise.

Neel Dhanesha (ND) (00:26): The argument is often the economic one. It's sort of like why does this one species' life matter when there's so much potential money on the line?

Narrator (00:37): This week on Sea Change Radio, we speak to environmental reporter Neel DHANESHA of Heatmap to learn about his new media startup, discuss the landmark climate case held versus Montana, and take a look at the Lesser Prairie Chicken and why the plight of this dancing bird is no laughing matter. I am joined now on Sea Change Radio by Neel Dhanesha. He is a founding staff writer at Heatmap. Neel, welcome back to Sea Change Radio.

Neel Dhanesha (ND) (01:28): Thanks for having me back.

Alex Wise (AW) (01:30): We had you on when you were a reporter for Vox and now you are at Heatmap. Tell our listeners a little bit more about this startup of yours.

Neel Dhanesha (ND) (01:39): Yeah, so Heatmap is the climate news startup. We basically sort of are operating under the idea that climate connects to every part of life, and we really want to help demystify the various ways that climate change affects our readers and how the energy transition will work and how readers can become part of that change

Alex Wise (AW) (02:05):And people can follow you and your colleagues at Heat Map News.

ND (02:10): That's right.

AW (02:11): Let's start at one of your recent pieces that you and your colleagues have been following this Held v. Montana case, which was a pretty interesting climate rights case and they won and that was very encouraging. Why don't you take us back, though, to the genesis of this case before you get us up to speed on what it means moving forward.

ND (02:34): Yeah, so Held v. Montana, it's a case that was brought by a group of youth plaintiffs who are represented by a nonprofit law organization called Children's, sorry, by a nonprofit law firm called Our Children's Trust. And what they did is they sued the state of Montana for violating the state of Montana because they said that the state had violated their state constitutionally mandated right to a healthy and safe environment. And this case is kind of unique because it leaned upon a constitutional vision in Montana State constitution, which guaranteed the citizens of Montana a right to a safe and healthful environment. And that gave them really interesting standing in a way that didn't really exist in previous climate lawsuits. And so this was one of the first of its kind to go to trial in the way that it did. And a couple of weeks ago, the judge ruled in their favor.

AW (03:47): And how did these kids come together? What was the inspiration behind it and who organized this movement?

ND (03:56): So the inspiration behind it was essentially all these people had grown up in Montana and they'd seen how the landscape around them was changing and how their own access to natural resources was diminishing because of climate change and climate impacts. And I don't entirely remember how they came together. I just know that 17, I believe youth plaintiffs came together. They joined forces with our Children's Trust, which is this environmental legal nonprofit and brought this case to court.

AW (04:32): And is this a federal ruling and will it be appealed? Where do we see this case moving and what should the impact be if it holds?

ND (04:42): Right. So this was a case in Montana State Court, which means that it remains within the state's legal system. And what they were doing is they were suing specifically over a piece of legislation that the Montana legislature had passed that essen...