3 ms·

> There are many places where there is no light Less light might be more accurate. Even out in the middle of nowhere the horizon can be quite noticeably illumi

> There are many places where there is no light Less light might be more accurate. Even out in the middle of nowhere the horizon can be quite noticeably illuminated by far-off settlements. And the countryside itself can be just as bad for light pollution. It's kind of funny, I was just having a conversation about the local grain elevator's excessive use of lights. It is in the countryside, but appears as bright as a small city. Speaking of grain elevators, agricultural cropping is often blamed for insect decline. I see several comments stating that even within this discussion. Yet only 10% of the earth is arable. 90% of the earth is untouched in that way. I'm not entirely sure that "the insects can thrive somewhere else" is a tenable argument.

tarsinge 7y ago
> Yet only 10% of the earth is arable. 90% of the earth is untouched in that way. I don’t know the numbers but my guess that 90% is mostly unsuitable to insects in the first place. Also the problem is that in a lot of western countries the countryside that could host insects is mostly agricultural land. Try looking at the number of wild flowers you see in the country (spoiler: it’s depressing, because wild prairies are becoming very rare).
- randomdata 7y ago
  To add to that, as cities benefit from close proximity to food and often came to be a city because they acted as ports for food distribution, cities tend to spring up on what was arable land, further destroying insect habitats and bringing that light pollution to the areas (possibly) best suited for insects. Although I'm not sure I entirely agree with your premise. As a Canadian, the lands on the Canadian Shield (a rock formation that spans across most of Canada's north) are famous for their dense insect population. The rock does not make agriculture viable there at all, but it is a great place to be an insect.

tarsinge 7y ago

> Yet only 10% of the earth is arable. 90% of the earth is untouched in that way. I don’t know the numbers but my guess that 90% is mostly unsuitable to insects in the first place. Also the problem is that in a lot of western countries the countryside that could host insects is mostly agricultural land. Try looking at the number of wild flowers you see in the country (spoiler: it’s depressing, because wild prairies are becoming very rare).

randomdata 7y ago
To add to that, as cities benefit from close proximity to food and often came to be a city because they acted as ports for food distribution, cities tend to spring up on what was arable land, further destroying insect habitats and bringing that light pollution to the areas (possibly) best suited for insects. Although I'm not sure I entirely agree with your premise. As a Canadian, the lands on the Canadian Shield (a rock formation that spans across most of Canada's north) are famous for their dense insect population. The rock does not make agriculture viable there at all, but it is a great place to be an insect.