6 ms·
>These human forces are transforming complex ecosystems into something more akin to biological strip malls >Time and again, the van passed housing developments
by scoofy 4y ago
>These human forces are transforming complex ecosystems into something more akin to biological strip malls
>Time and again, the van passed housing developments, national banks, cattle fields, golf courses, strip malls.
>powerful global forces also turn the world's biodiversity into a metaphorical McDonald’s
Sigh... I'm a nerd who's already written about how golf courses can be utilized to help prevent the extinction of the Migratory Monarch Butterfly:
https://golfcoursewiki.substack.com/p/golf-for-non-golfers-golf-courses https://golfcoursewiki.substack.com/p/golf-for-non-golfers-g...
This mindless blaming of development, as such, is a common refrain from cliche californian 'environmentalists' many of whom have done so much more harm than good in the last 50 years by blocking urbanization. California has so much sprawl it's absurd. We need to be honest about how blocking urban development, but allowing suburbia to stretch from San Diego to Palm Desert to SLO with everything in between is the source of these issues.
I have advocated for some time that golf courses have the exact potential to be a refuge for native urban pollinators exactly because they are large urban green spaces with extremely low humans/sqft. We need courses to step up and prioritize native vegetation off the fairways and work with local universities to set up apiaries. Many, many golf courses don't use any pesticides. The use of pesticides is just vanity for creating course conditions that are surreal and unnecessary.
The problem is that we're turning everything suburban in California. Repeal Prop 13. Stop the land hoarding along the coast, and start disincentivizing suburbia.
There is no solution to there are too many humans. All the solutions I heard from 'enviornmentalists' here are basically that other people shouldn't exist. We need a way for people to live in tight urban environments, yes, with national banks, cattle fields, golf courses, strip malls, and mcdonalds, but leaving more of the country side to stay wild.
- notatoad 4y agoi agree with everything you're saying except "there's too many humans". there's plenty of space for all the people, if we could only live a bit more densely.
- hutzlibu 4y agoIsn't that exactly what the person above said? "We need a way for people to live in tight urban environments, yes, with national banks, cattle fields, golf courses, strip malls, and mcdonalds, but leaving more of the country side to stay wild. " Personally I would disagree though. You can have humans and wild nature in coexistence (up to a certain point). I don't know about the US, but here in germany there is a strong trend to abandon the concept of sterile lawns and have more wild in between. I really like it, even though it is just a start. The bigger threat to wildlife are monocultures. I rather have more diverse fields with less or no pesticides and less yield, than the ecological deserts of conventional agriculture.