10 ms·

Individuals cannot solve this. I leave trees up, dead or alive. I plant native plants. I remove invasive species. I only keep invasive bushes if they house bird

by bmitc 3y ago

Individuals cannot solve this. I leave trees up, dead or alive. I plant native plants. I remove invasive species. I only keep invasive bushes if they house birds. I don't spray for insects except around the base of my house, I don't kill off chipmunks, voles, squirrels, rabbits, etc. How can this compete with the dozens of neighbors in a half-mile radius that have removed in excess of hundreds of trees, big ones like oak, pine, maple, hickory and up to five feet in diameter, and turn their yards into grass wastelands? I never even see my neighbors use most of their yards. How do you compete against that level of narcissisim and lack of empathy? It is exhausting on me both physically and emotionally. There's no one I can call to get help with my own yard because every landscaper knows nothing about ecology and uses loud and polluting gas-powered machinery. I am to the point where I consider my actions as pissing into the wind and spitting into the ocean. Seeing bees where I hadn't seen them before using native plants that I planted is amazingly fullfilling. But I know that it basically has no greater impact, and it is completely against the tide. Unless governments take action and penalize corporations for the harm they've done and take measures to prevent further harm, we won't be able to stop what's coming.

doublepg23 3y ago
> How do you compete against that level of narcissisim and lack of empathy? I would assume the start is stop labelling your neighbours as narcissists and anti-social.
- thebooktocome 3y ago
  A bon mot, to be sure, but whether or not they are labeled as such makes no difference. The behavior refuses to change in either situation. Plenty of pitiful fools are still trying to keep sod alive in the vicinity of the Mojave.
- bmitc 3y ago
  I didn't say anti-social. And what do you call displacing hundreds of birds, animals, plants, insects by planting literally wastelands made of grass just so that the grass can be looked at? How is that not narcissism, a lack of empathy, and vanity? It's the very definitions of those words. We must first come to terms with what we as humans do and how we interact with and perceive the world. Look up Benjamin Vogt and Douglas Tallamy. They say the same thing. I can't remember who it was, but someone said that it was a disservice to the diversity of life found in deserts to call lawns green deserts.
  - rblatz 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - peterashford 3y ago
      And that was super constructive?
    - bmitc 3y ago
      What would you like to rationally talk about? What did I say that was irrational? You know, I can admit to myself that I am vain and a narcissist in this context. The part that I have left as a lawn, I do like looking at it. It has been a journey for myself to gain empathy for things that are not human and for many things I can't even see, much less communicate with. It takes time and effort, but it also takes accepting the situation and saying "what am I going to do about it?". I do still mow the parts of my property that is a lawn, and I generally realize its general destructiveness and disruptiveness. But I try to address that, and see what I can differently.
    - dang 3y ago
      Yikes - you can't attack other users like this on HN and we ban accounts that do, so please don't. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.
RGamma 3y ago
Yeah, I know that feeling. I know no solution for now. Only waiting until the zeitgeist reaches your neighbors, old or new.
nemo 3y ago
Yeah, the systemic issues driving habitat loss are massive. I have made my yard a refuge for native plants to support insects, birds, and other wildlife, but I see exterminators on my street all the time killing off any insects that appear in neighbor's yards, and that kind of mass scale habitat destruction/loss is going on all around us in so many ways (lawns, roads, industrial farming, et al). I also really enjoy my pollinator garden and rewilded habitat, but people are culturally conditioned to destroy habitat, and unless that changes we're going to keep seeing more and more loss.
- 23B1 3y ago
  Right, which is why you have the opportunity to evangelize what you're doing. Like for example, a two dudes in my hood have swapped their lawns over to micro clover because I did it three years ago; the lawn is packed with wildlife, and it looks great. Wouldn't have happened had they not come over for BBQ one day and asked about it.
  - bmitc 3y ago
    I redid parts of my lawn last fall (first time ever doing so or even having the opportunity). I did about 30% of that new European microclover and 70% various fine fescues. Not sure if I feel it was a success or not, but the clover does make it look like a nice meadow. But the clover and fescue, if I let them grow, it gets so thick that I can't even mow it effectively. Do you just let the microclover fully take over and grow to a certain height before cutting? I have heard it has a memory of where it was cut and stops growing there. I haven't noticed that though. How do you keep other things fron taking over the yard? Thanks!
    - 23B1 3y ago
      It does have a memory of cut height, and I mow it with a reel mower once a week. WRT other things taking over the yard, it's been rainy as hell here past few weeks and so the weeds have deff. sprung up unaccounted for; I just spend a day weeding mechanically, using a weed grabber tool. Both count as my workout. Headphones + podcast = no gym membership required. You'd be interested to know that this month I'll be finishing a huge trellis on the south wall of our house to let vines grow. This will reduce cooling costs and look beautiful (I hope).
wilg 3y ago
I'm a bit confused by this: > Unless governments take action and penalize corporations for the harm they've done and take measures to prevent further harm, we won't be able to stop what's coming. What corporations? It sounds like your neighbors are just individuals? And can you clarify "what's coming"?
- jonathankoren 3y ago
  It's pesticides. It's pollution. This isn't complicated. What's coming? Ecological collapse. That's what happens when you kill all the pollinators, when you kill all base prey animals. None of this is complicated, nor unforseen. We've known this about pollution and pesticides for decades, even longer when it comes to climate change.
- OO000oo 3y ago
  The owning/ruling class is directly responsible for the overwhelming majority of the pollution and environmental destruction on the planet. This is not complicated.
  - papandada 3y ago
    And if you wiped them out, then wouldn't a functionally identical class take their place? There's no us vs. them, them is us.
  - eastbound 3y ago
    The voting class is responsible for always wanting to “save the mother and the orphan” (metaphor, but it’s a “let’s save everyone, allow everyone to prosper, increase wages and let everyone massively live in consumerism” attitude), effectively massively overpopulating the earth, requiring more concrete poured in cities and even more poured concrete in tourism because their home city is unbearable, and all of it requiring, in a word, mass industry. But somehow it’s the industry that’s at fault. But “how do you dare say no to more humans!” is somehow at fault. I get it, we can be 10bn if we all ate crickets, but surprise, food is not even the reason why land gets urbanized and overexploited and polluted. Plus, creating more high-density humans, the kind who never sees any patch of earth, the kind who believes travelling across the world to see Kylie Minogue in a casino and buy some flamboyant clothes, is the best way to get voters who understand and care nothing to nature. Ruling class just executed what you wanted. Guess what, what we want is to leave no human behind, help everyone, and raise them all to high levels of consumerism, whether in the West or in the third world. I really don’t see how the ruling class has any stake in pollution. Every time they try to get us to reduce our lifestyle, we vote them out.
23B1 3y ago
Okay so my original comment was maybe lacking on its own "solutioning" so let me try one out, based on your comment. 1. Set up a bird-friendly/enviro-friendly environment in your yard. You could do this by planting micro-clover instead of grass, building bird houses, adding safe sources of water for birds, planting pollinator-friendly flora. 2. Evangelize. Plan a block party or even a birdwatching 'club'. This doesn't have to be as formal as it sounds; you could just take pictures of birds and evangelize them on a local group, or maybe point out to a few of your neighbors that they have really interesting specimens on their property. 3. Connect with the local Audubon chapter (or equivalent) and give them encouragement or support; help them with their website or social media, invite them to a BBQ, show them that you care and will help out. Obviously I don't know your situation and can't predict all the reasons this might not work – and I'm not suggesting that you have to do all this – I'm really just trying to get your juices flowing, show you that there's ways that you can at the local level that might even benefit you – like getting to know your neighbors, having a beautiful and unique home, or even just making friends!
- bmitc 3y ago
  I basically already do all this though except evangelize, although I do have some plans for that.
  - 23B1 3y ago
    My religious friend takes photos of the natural areas around his town and then donates the (beautiful) photos to local churches to be displayed in their hallways – "God's bounty". He also sells calendars of same to parishioners. Each photo comes with a story about the wildlife in the area and how it interacts with the human world. Is he intentionally psyop'ing an environmental message? He's pretty smart, so maybe. Is it effective? Maybe. But I will tell you this: I have been on more hikes with this guy than I would have normally thanks to the majesty he documents... so it's worked on me!
hparadiz 3y ago
In some areas humans actually increase the biodiversity. My area is mostly desert most of the time. We get our water from the California aqueduct. On my property I have squirrels, rabbits, and chipmunks. I've seen red tailed Hawks and Owls. Cats can't be outdoor here. I've already seen a cat's head discarded on my property. I have so many types of birds here all the time. The open space here has a ton of animals and biodiversity but humans have actually increased the biodiversity. For example the squirrels on my property eat dates off my date trees. Date trees and eastern squirrels aren't native here but they do feed the hawks and owls. Bees are harvesting on my property constantly.
- elmomle 3y ago
  Yes, but that comes at the expense of the biodiversity that existed before the California Aqueduct did. The Central Valley was once a massive seasonal wetland that supported millions if not billions of migratory waterfowl, to say nothing of non-avian biodiversity in the area (which I likewise recall being massive--this is detailed in Cadillac Desert, which I don't have on hand). I don't think that that biodiversity tradeoff is a net positive one.
  - hparadiz 3y ago
    I don't know why you think that. It makes no sense. The viaduct comes from far far north away of the central valley. That water would otherwise not even ever flow through the central valley. Naturally this area doesn't really retain most of its water. It just goes right into the ocean. The central valley lake naturally appears and disappears through no fault of humanity.
- bmitc 3y ago
  > but humans have actually increased the biodiversity If that's even true, I would say that it is exceedingly rare, even on small local levels. And it would be dwarfed by the rest of human activity killing off biodiversity. I have squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits, voles, foxes, raccoons, owls, hawks, several species of birds like woodpeckers, cardinals, nuthatches, etc., bats, coyotes, fisher cats, deer, bees, wasps, moths, butterflies, dragonflies, hummingbirds, and more all on my properly. Some are there every single day, like the chipmunks and bees, and the others are frequent visitors. But even with all that, the diversity is absolutely lower than what this area would have been like just 200 years ago. For example, mountain lions are gone and bobcats are on their way out. Same with bears. And there are several native plant species that are on their way out as well. Also, deserts actually can be teeming with biodiversity. It's just not the biodiversity that we recognize.
deepnet 3y ago
The Oasis effect of habitat is valuable and can form part of corridors so insects and birds can migrate and breed. So your actions alone can be valuable. Your may inspire others or be part of a chain of things which inspires them. Your hard won knowledge awaits their questions. You may have to fight HOAs and disaproval. Your battles lay the groundwork for those that follow to succeed - setting precendent and raising issues, sometimes even by losing. Even if others don't follow your practice you may pique their interest - which may change their opinions. Opinions are the mandate by which local officials and politicians act? Many of these good consequences may be invisible to you. Doing good is never useless. The causes of change can be unpredictable and subtle. The future can be radically altered by small effects in the past. Perhaps the life of a native bumble bee that survives by virtue of your planting may be the one that mutates enough so his descendants survive the coming changes. Increase the luck surface for a good future. Stay hopeful.
- bmitc 3y ago
  > You may have to fight HOAs and disapproval. Thank god that I do not have an HOA. Luckily things are different here, although I am very surprised that someone recently was able to cut down literally every tree on the property. (It appears the house was bought by an investor or someone quite wealthy.) I honestly can't imagine the stress that an HOA would bring to my life. Thanks for the kind words! I'm definitely still learning and making lots of mistakes along the way.
roughly 3y ago
I don’t have a solution, but I just wanted to say thank you for doing whatever you can. It’s frustrating as fuck but it’s what we’ve got and it’s the only way I can sleep at night, so thanks for being another person doing the right thing.
- pvaldes 3y ago
  Just do it because you will have a better life. You don't need much more reasons than this. Walking barefoot in the wet grass while sipping your coffee, and smirking at the neighbors that still keep doing it wrong is optional. In most places, the probability of a snake or a racoon hiding in the grass to attack you is negligible. We are loud. They have better things to do and plenty of places to run away.
ChatGTP 3y ago
I've lately wondered if people like us could setup a foundation to buy more land and setup private sanctuaries? What do you think about this? Does anything like that exist currently?
- bmitc 3y ago
  I don't know, but that's an interesting idea. I've thought about looking into what it would take to protect certain trees and native plants on my property. But I have also wondered if that would also make my property unsellable. :(
jjallen 3y ago
Yeah when 99% of people don't care about this sort of issue or are unaware of it and keep cutting trees down it doesn't matter if a few people are doing all they can. I go home to my parents' neighborhood in Florida and more and more of the trees are disappearing in a 100-year-old neighborhood. It's not even new houses being built. These are 50-year old houses. There is 1 house in the entire neighborhood (has to be at least 1,000 houses) that had a "no mow may" sign for the bees and isn't a purely St. Augustine grass yard. This is an upper-income higher education neigborhood too. The culture is changing to be even less tree friendly from what it was a few decades ago. Honestly I don't have hope in general for our future environment. I do not think we will be able to stop what is coming (both temperature-wise and species-wise). Humans are desperate for money and unfortunately making money means making things as easy and convenient as possible to get/buy.
- flagrant_taco 3y ago
  The planet will bounce back one way or another, short of a global nuclear war I don't see how we can do more damage than the asteroid that took out the dinausaurs. Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth.
  - bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
    Right, no one cares about the planet, and rightfully so. The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake.
    - guerrilla 3y ago
      And all the ecosystems and species we depend on*
    - bmitc 3y ago
      > The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake. This is oft repeated, but it fails short of anything meaningful. The planet, as in a rock floating around in space, will be fine, yes. But what about the untold amount of species of plants and animals that are suffering and will continue to suffer in our wake?
sieabahlpark 3y ago
[dead]
EdwardDiego 3y ago
In NZ, there's been successful local endeavours to, for example, plant nectar bearing trees in urban backyards to encourage endemic birds to return, another I know of to bring biodiversity into monoculture vineyard areas to keep the bees healthy, and they've worked because people benefit from them - our nectar feeding birds are also beautiful singers, and the song of the korimako/bellbird and tui are cherished, and the vineyard owners themselves benefit from healthier pollinators. It's where there's no direct benefit, or the species is uncharismaric that it gets tricky. It's a lot harder to motivate people to preserve habitat for a stick insect or mudfish.
arcticbull 3y ago
I think it might have something to do with feral and outdoor cats killing 1.4-3.7 billion birds per year in the US alone. [1] Individuals can do something here I wager, between education and taking responsibility by spaying and neutering. It’s pretty wild to me that cats aren’t mentioned at all in this article since they’re absolutely massacring wild birds. They’re the leading cause of both bird and small mammal deaths in the US. They kill 10% of all US birds every year. I do agree personal responsibility isn’t enough but it can certainly help. [edit] in fact a cursory google shows the population of cats in the US is almost a perfect mirror of the bird population graph in the article since 1970. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/outdoor-cats-kill-between-14-billion-and-37-billion-birds-a-year-study-says/2013/01/31/2504f744-6bbe-11e2-ada0-5ca5fa7ebe79_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/outdo...
- idleproc 3y ago
  I agree that cats kill a lot of birds and something needs to be done about this. However, when you also have articles stating that migratory fish and insect populations have declined by 75% over the last 50 years [1,2] (which clearly isn't caused by outdoor cats) it would seem to me there are larger forces at work. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/migratory-river-fish-populations-plunge-76-in-past-50-years https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/migrator... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/the-insect-apocalypse-our-world-will-grind-to-a-halt-without-them https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/the-inse...
  - b112 3y ago
    I agree that cats kill a lot of birds and something needs to be done about this. Outside of birds, cats kill rodents. I live in rural Quebec, near farms, a massive nature preserve, and a national park larger than small US states. When I first moved here, I had no cat, and several other neighbours were new to the area. Old houses, not fresh builds, just changeover of owners... they too with no cats. The first year I was here, I became aware of the problem, and started to lay traps. And I caught 100+ mice, sometimes several per day for months, all inside my house. Once Spring arrived, I tried to find entrances, and did! I blocked them, but anyone that knows rodents, and owns wood houses, that won't help if you have an out of control, local colony, and once the winter comes, do they ever want in! I spent 3+ years with traps, sometimes reducing the population a bit, but each winter more than 50 mice. Then a neightbour got a siamese cat. I now catch a mouse or two a year. If you look at mouse breeding and brood numbers, and you live in a area with loads of food in the summer (near farms, nature), you need something like cats. It's not an option, it just isn't. There's a reason farmers have loads of semi-wild cats in their barns. And both the mice they catch, and the cats that catch them, are invasive. And with the hantavirus often touted as 50% lethal, you do NOT want the moral responsibility of trap and release, nor do you want mice in your house. At all. And yes, it is in the local population.
kshmir 3y ago
[flagged]
devnulll 3y ago
> There's no one I can call to get help with my own yard because every landscaper knows nothing about ecology and uses loud and polluting gas-powered machinery. For my own yard, in Washington State, I've interacted with a half dozen arborists and landscapers. Every one of them has been an expert in local species, has had concrete suggestions about what to plant and how to maintain, and is generally very excited to engage on the problem at the homeowner level.
soundsgoodtome 3y ago
Right, but that won’t happen until things become sufficiently painful enough (for the masses or corporate profits or both). Not ideal, but that’s the world we live in.
llbeansandrice 3y ago
Consider local master gardeners. There are ones at our local community college and they’re incredibly helpful
throwaway290 3y ago
No, individuals is the only way this works. Individuals started it and they can stop it. But ideally in addition to doing things yourself and being an example you should also try to convince and encourage others to do it by raising awareness, supporting legislation, not using suppliers and not working for companies that violate those rules etc.
giantg2 3y ago
"Unless governments take action and penalize corporations for the harm they've done and take measures to prevent further harm," What would those measures look like?
- paulmd 3y ago
  Not OP but I’d assume something analogous to the tobacco lawsuits but for ecological damage caused by marketing of products generally known to be harmful to healthy natural ecosystems that trap users in a cycle of additional product use (once nature reacts to the apocalypse by starting additional pioneer plant growth in that are). Actually that metaphor works rather well…
jmartrican 3y ago
You say individuals cannot solve this, then go on to show how the problem is with individuals turning their yards into grass wastelands. Well if its individuals causing the problem, wouldn't it mean that individuals can solve it? Seems like your comment is contradicting itself.
- blueprint 3y ago
  no, they are referring to how difficult it is to awaken or change individuals.
blueprint 3y ago
I completely sympathize with you. Seriously. But I'm not sure the cause is simply narcissism - to my eyes the real root cause is abject ignorance. If they were to realize, like you, they would be unable to behave the way they do
mcsniff 3y ago
> How can this compete with the dozens of neighbors in a half-mile radius that have removed in excess of hundreds of trees, big ones like oak, pine, maple, hickory and up to five feet in diameter, and turn their yards into grass wastelands? I never even see my neighbors use most of their yards. How do you compete against that level of narcissisim and lack of empathy? Moving might be an option. There are places where this doesn't happen and while you might have other problems, you probably won't have those problems.
- otde 3y ago
  I don't think the issue is whether GP lives next to neighbors with these kind of lawns, but more that the relative proportion of bird-hostile yards is outpacing any individual attempt to counterbalance. Moving only solves the problem if the only thing you care about is the extent to which you, personally, are forced to see one of the causes of this population drop in your daily life. It doesn't address the problem itself, which is kind of also GP's point.
Aerbil313 3y ago
No person can solve this. Techno-optimist HN won’t believe me now, but we’re living through the Collapse of the civilization right now. Ukraine, banks, covid, climate change and all else are merely symptoms of human population overshoot. See https://medium.com/@CollapseSurvival/overshoot-why-its-already-too-late-to-save-civilization-e834cb4ec694 https://medium.com/@CollapseSurvival/overshoot-why-its-alrea...

by bmitc 3y ago

doublepg23 3y ago

> How do you compete against that level of narcissisim and lack of empathy? I would assume the start is stop labelling your neighbours as narcissists and anti-social.

thebooktocome 3y ago
A bon mot, to be sure, but whether or not they are labeled as such makes no difference. The behavior refuses to change in either situation. Plenty of pitiful fools are still trying to keep sod alive in the vicinity of the Mojave.
bmitc 3y ago
I didn't say anti-social. And what do you call displacing hundreds of birds, animals, plants, insects by planting literally wastelands made of grass just so that the grass can be looked at? How is that not narcissism, a lack of empathy, and vanity? It's the very definitions of those words. We must first come to terms with what we as humans do and how we interact with and perceive the world. Look up Benjamin Vogt and Douglas Tallamy. They say the same thing. I can't remember who it was, but someone said that it was a disservice to the diversity of life found in deserts to call lawns green deserts.
- rblatz 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - peterashford 3y ago
    And that was super constructive?
  - bmitc 3y ago
    What would you like to rationally talk about? What did I say that was irrational? You know, I can admit to myself that I am vain and a narcissist in this context. The part that I have left as a lawn, I do like looking at it. It has been a journey for myself to gain empathy for things that are not human and for many things I can't even see, much less communicate with. It takes time and effort, but it also takes accepting the situation and saying "what am I going to do about it?". I do still mow the parts of my property that is a lawn, and I generally realize its general destructiveness and disruptiveness. But I try to address that, and see what I can differently.
  - dang 3y ago
    Yikes - you can't attack other users like this on HN and we ban accounts that do, so please don't. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and taking the intended spirit of the site more to heart, we'd be grateful.

RGamma 3y ago

Yeah, I know that feeling. I know no solution for now. Only waiting until the zeitgeist reaches your neighbors, old or new.

nemo 3y ago

Yeah, the systemic issues driving habitat loss are massive. I have made my yard a refuge for native plants to support insects, birds, and other wildlife, but I see exterminators on my street all the time killing off any insects that appear in neighbor's yards, and that kind of mass scale habitat destruction/loss is going on all around us in so many ways (lawns, roads, industrial farming, et al). I also really enjoy my pollinator garden and rewilded habitat, but people are culturally conditioned to destroy habitat, and unless that changes we're going to keep seeing more and more loss.

23B1 3y ago
Right, which is why you have the opportunity to evangelize what you're doing. Like for example, a two dudes in my hood have swapped their lawns over to micro clover because I did it three years ago; the lawn is packed with wildlife, and it looks great. Wouldn't have happened had they not come over for BBQ one day and asked about it.
- bmitc 3y ago
  I redid parts of my lawn last fall (first time ever doing so or even having the opportunity). I did about 30% of that new European microclover and 70% various fine fescues. Not sure if I feel it was a success or not, but the clover does make it look like a nice meadow. But the clover and fescue, if I let them grow, it gets so thick that I can't even mow it effectively. Do you just let the microclover fully take over and grow to a certain height before cutting? I have heard it has a memory of where it was cut and stops growing there. I haven't noticed that though. How do you keep other things fron taking over the yard? Thanks!
  - 23B1 3y ago
    It does have a memory of cut height, and I mow it with a reel mower once a week. WRT other things taking over the yard, it's been rainy as hell here past few weeks and so the weeds have deff. sprung up unaccounted for; I just spend a day weeding mechanically, using a weed grabber tool. Both count as my workout. Headphones + podcast = no gym membership required. You'd be interested to know that this month I'll be finishing a huge trellis on the south wall of our house to let vines grow. This will reduce cooling costs and look beautiful (I hope).

wilg 3y ago

I'm a bit confused by this: > Unless governments take action and penalize corporations for the harm they've done and take measures to prevent further harm, we won't be able to stop what's coming. What corporations? It sounds like your neighbors are just individuals? And can you clarify "what's coming"?

jonathankoren 3y ago
It's pesticides. It's pollution. This isn't complicated. What's coming? Ecological collapse. That's what happens when you kill all the pollinators, when you kill all base prey animals. None of this is complicated, nor unforseen. We've known this about pollution and pesticides for decades, even longer when it comes to climate change.
OO000oo 3y ago
The owning/ruling class is directly responsible for the overwhelming majority of the pollution and environmental destruction on the planet. This is not complicated.
- papandada 3y ago
  And if you wiped them out, then wouldn't a functionally identical class take their place? There's no us vs. them, them is us.
- eastbound 3y ago
  The voting class is responsible for always wanting to “save the mother and the orphan” (metaphor, but it’s a “let’s save everyone, allow everyone to prosper, increase wages and let everyone massively live in consumerism” attitude), effectively massively overpopulating the earth, requiring more concrete poured in cities and even more poured concrete in tourism because their home city is unbearable, and all of it requiring, in a word, mass industry. But somehow it’s the industry that’s at fault. But “how do you dare say no to more humans!” is somehow at fault. I get it, we can be 10bn if we all ate crickets, but surprise, food is not even the reason why land gets urbanized and overexploited and polluted. Plus, creating more high-density humans, the kind who never sees any patch of earth, the kind who believes travelling across the world to see Kylie Minogue in a casino and buy some flamboyant clothes, is the best way to get voters who understand and care nothing to nature. Ruling class just executed what you wanted. Guess what, what we want is to leave no human behind, help everyone, and raise them all to high levels of consumerism, whether in the West or in the third world. I really don’t see how the ruling class has any stake in pollution. Every time they try to get us to reduce our lifestyle, we vote them out.

23B1 3y ago

Okay so my original comment was maybe lacking on its own "solutioning" so let me try one out, based on your comment. 1. Set up a bird-friendly/enviro-friendly environment in your yard. You could do this by planting micro-clover instead of grass, building bird houses, adding safe sources of water for birds, planting pollinator-friendly flora. 2. Evangelize. Plan a block party or even a birdwatching 'club'. This doesn't have to be as formal as it sounds; you could just take pictures of birds and evangelize them on a local group, or maybe point out to a few of your neighbors that they have really interesting specimens on their property. 3. Connect with the local Audubon chapter (or equivalent) and give them encouragement or support; help them with their website or social media, invite them to a BBQ, show them that you care and will help out. Obviously I don't know your situation and can't predict all the reasons this might not work – and I'm not suggesting that you have to do all this – I'm really just trying to get your juices flowing, show you that there's ways that you can at the local level that might even benefit you – like getting to know your neighbors, having a beautiful and unique home, or even just making friends!

bmitc 3y ago
I basically already do all this though except evangelize, although I do have some plans for that.
- 23B1 3y ago
  My religious friend takes photos of the natural areas around his town and then donates the (beautiful) photos to local churches to be displayed in their hallways – "God's bounty". He also sells calendars of same to parishioners. Each photo comes with a story about the wildlife in the area and how it interacts with the human world. Is he intentionally psyop'ing an environmental message? He's pretty smart, so maybe. Is it effective? Maybe. But I will tell you this: I have been on more hikes with this guy than I would have normally thanks to the majesty he documents... so it's worked on me!

hparadiz 3y ago

In some areas humans actually increase the biodiversity. My area is mostly desert most of the time. We get our water from the California aqueduct. On my property I have squirrels, rabbits, and chipmunks. I've seen red tailed Hawks and Owls. Cats can't be outdoor here. I've already seen a cat's head discarded on my property. I have so many types of birds here all the time. The open space here has a ton of animals and biodiversity but humans have actually increased the biodiversity. For example the squirrels on my property eat dates off my date trees. Date trees and eastern squirrels aren't native here but they do feed the hawks and owls. Bees are harvesting on my property constantly.

elmomle 3y ago
Yes, but that comes at the expense of the biodiversity that existed before the California Aqueduct did. The Central Valley was once a massive seasonal wetland that supported millions if not billions of migratory waterfowl, to say nothing of non-avian biodiversity in the area (which I likewise recall being massive--this is detailed in Cadillac Desert, which I don't have on hand). I don't think that that biodiversity tradeoff is a net positive one.
- hparadiz 3y ago
  I don't know why you think that. It makes no sense. The viaduct comes from far far north away of the central valley. That water would otherwise not even ever flow through the central valley. Naturally this area doesn't really retain most of its water. It just goes right into the ocean. The central valley lake naturally appears and disappears through no fault of humanity.
bmitc 3y ago
> but humans have actually increased the biodiversity If that's even true, I would say that it is exceedingly rare, even on small local levels. And it would be dwarfed by the rest of human activity killing off biodiversity. I have squirrels, chipmunks, rabbits, voles, foxes, raccoons, owls, hawks, several species of birds like woodpeckers, cardinals, nuthatches, etc., bats, coyotes, fisher cats, deer, bees, wasps, moths, butterflies, dragonflies, hummingbirds, and more all on my properly. Some are there every single day, like the chipmunks and bees, and the others are frequent visitors. But even with all that, the diversity is absolutely lower than what this area would have been like just 200 years ago. For example, mountain lions are gone and bobcats are on their way out. Same with bears. And there are several native plant species that are on their way out as well. Also, deserts actually can be teeming with biodiversity. It's just not the biodiversity that we recognize.

deepnet 3y ago

The Oasis effect of habitat is valuable and can form part of corridors so insects and birds can migrate and breed. So your actions alone can be valuable. Your may inspire others or be part of a chain of things which inspires them. Your hard won knowledge awaits their questions. You may have to fight HOAs and disaproval. Your battles lay the groundwork for those that follow to succeed - setting precendent and raising issues, sometimes even by losing. Even if others don't follow your practice you may pique their interest - which may change their opinions. Opinions are the mandate by which local officials and politicians act? Many of these good consequences may be invisible to you. Doing good is never useless. The causes of change can be unpredictable and subtle. The future can be radically altered by small effects in the past. Perhaps the life of a native bumble bee that survives by virtue of your planting may be the one that mutates enough so his descendants survive the coming changes. Increase the luck surface for a good future. Stay hopeful.

bmitc 3y ago
> You may have to fight HOAs and disapproval. Thank god that I do not have an HOA. Luckily things are different here, although I am very surprised that someone recently was able to cut down literally every tree on the property. (It appears the house was bought by an investor or someone quite wealthy.) I honestly can't imagine the stress that an HOA would bring to my life. Thanks for the kind words! I'm definitely still learning and making lots of mistakes along the way.

roughly 3y ago

I don’t have a solution, but I just wanted to say thank you for doing whatever you can. It’s frustrating as fuck but it’s what we’ve got and it’s the only way I can sleep at night, so thanks for being another person doing the right thing.

pvaldes 3y ago
Just do it because you will have a better life. You don't need much more reasons than this. Walking barefoot in the wet grass while sipping your coffee, and smirking at the neighbors that still keep doing it wrong is optional. In most places, the probability of a snake or a racoon hiding in the grass to attack you is negligible. We are loud. They have better things to do and plenty of places to run away.

ChatGTP 3y ago

I've lately wondered if people like us could setup a foundation to buy more land and setup private sanctuaries? What do you think about this? Does anything like that exist currently?

bmitc 3y ago
I don't know, but that's an interesting idea. I've thought about looking into what it would take to protect certain trees and native plants on my property. But I have also wondered if that would also make my property unsellable. :(

jjallen 3y ago

Yeah when 99% of people don't care about this sort of issue or are unaware of it and keep cutting trees down it doesn't matter if a few people are doing all they can. I go home to my parents' neighborhood in Florida and more and more of the trees are disappearing in a 100-year-old neighborhood. It's not even new houses being built. These are 50-year old houses. There is 1 house in the entire neighborhood (has to be at least 1,000 houses) that had a "no mow may" sign for the bees and isn't a purely St. Augustine grass yard. This is an upper-income higher education neigborhood too. The culture is changing to be even less tree friendly from what it was a few decades ago. Honestly I don't have hope in general for our future environment. I do not think we will be able to stop what is coming (both temperature-wise and species-wise). Humans are desperate for money and unfortunately making money means making things as easy and convenient as possible to get/buy.

flagrant_taco 3y ago
The planet will bounce back one way or another, short of a global nuclear war I don't see how we can do more damage than the asteroid that took out the dinausaurs. Humans just may not be here to enjoy it if we can't get out of the way and stop consuming natural resources for the sake Of GDP growth.
- bobbylarrybobby 3y ago
  Right, no one cares about the planet, and rightfully so. The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake.
  - guerrilla 3y ago
    And all the ecosystems and species we depend on*
  - bmitc 3y ago
    > The planet will be fine. It's humankind that's at stake. This is oft repeated, but it fails short of anything meaningful. The planet, as in a rock floating around in space, will be fine, yes. But what about the untold amount of species of plants and animals that are suffering and will continue to suffer in our wake?

sieabahlpark 3y ago

[dead]

EdwardDiego 3y ago

In NZ, there's been successful local endeavours to, for example, plant nectar bearing trees in urban backyards to encourage endemic birds to return, another I know of to bring biodiversity into monoculture vineyard areas to keep the bees healthy, and they've worked because people benefit from them - our nectar feeding birds are also beautiful singers, and the song of the korimako/bellbird and tui are cherished, and the vineyard owners themselves benefit from healthier pollinators. It's where there's no direct benefit, or the species is uncharismaric that it gets tricky. It's a lot harder to motivate people to preserve habitat for a stick insect or mudfish.

arcticbull 3y ago

I think it might have something to do with feral and outdoor cats killing 1.4-3.7 billion birds per year in the US alone. [1] Individuals can do something here I wager, between education and taking responsibility by spaying and neutering. It’s pretty wild to me that cats aren’t mentioned at all in this article since they’re absolutely massacring wild birds. They’re the leading cause of both bird and small mammal deaths in the US. They kill 10% of all US birds every year. I do agree personal responsibility isn’t enough but it can certainly help. [edit] in fact a cursory google shows the population of cats in the US is almost a perfect mirror of the bird population graph in the article since 1970. [1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/outdoor-cats-kill-between-14-billion-and-37-billion-birds-a-year-study-says/2013/01/31/2504f744-6bbe-11e2-ada0-5ca5fa7ebe79_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/outdo...

idleproc 3y ago
I agree that cats kill a lot of birds and something needs to be done about this. However, when you also have articles stating that migratory fish and insect populations have declined by 75% over the last 50 years [1,2] (which clearly isn't caused by outdoor cats) it would seem to me there are larger forces at work. [1] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/migratory-river-fish-populations-plunge-76-in-past-50-years https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/jul/27/migrator... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/the-insect-apocalypse-our-world-will-grind-to-a-halt-without-them https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jul/25/the-inse...
- b112 3y ago
  I agree that cats kill a lot of birds and something needs to be done about this. Outside of birds, cats kill rodents. I live in rural Quebec, near farms, a massive nature preserve, and a national park larger than small US states. When I first moved here, I had no cat, and several other neighbours were new to the area. Old houses, not fresh builds, just changeover of owners... they too with no cats. The first year I was here, I became aware of the problem, and started to lay traps. And I caught 100+ mice, sometimes several per day for months, all inside my house. Once Spring arrived, I tried to find entrances, and did! I blocked them, but anyone that knows rodents, and owns wood houses, that won't help if you have an out of control, local colony, and once the winter comes, do they ever want in! I spent 3+ years with traps, sometimes reducing the population a bit, but each winter more than 50 mice. Then a neightbour got a siamese cat. I now catch a mouse or two a year. If you look at mouse breeding and brood numbers, and you live in a area with loads of food in the summer (near farms, nature), you need something like cats. It's not an option, it just isn't. There's a reason farmers have loads of semi-wild cats in their barns. And both the mice they catch, and the cats that catch them, are invasive. And with the hantavirus often touted as 50% lethal, you do NOT want the moral responsibility of trap and release, nor do you want mice in your house. At all. And yes, it is in the local population.

kshmir 3y ago

[flagged]

devnulll 3y ago

> There's no one I can call to get help with my own yard because every landscaper knows nothing about ecology and uses loud and polluting gas-powered machinery. For my own yard, in Washington State, I've interacted with a half dozen arborists and landscapers. Every one of them has been an expert in local species, has had concrete suggestions about what to plant and how to maintain, and is generally very excited to engage on the problem at the homeowner level.

soundsgoodtome 3y ago

Right, but that won’t happen until things become sufficiently painful enough (for the masses or corporate profits or both). Not ideal, but that’s the world we live in.

llbeansandrice 3y ago

Consider local master gardeners. There are ones at our local community college and they’re incredibly helpful

throwaway290 3y ago

No, individuals is the only way this works. Individuals started it and they can stop it. But ideally in addition to doing things yourself and being an example you should also try to convince and encourage others to do it by raising awareness, supporting legislation, not using suppliers and not working for companies that violate those rules etc.

giantg2 3y ago

"Unless governments take action and penalize corporations for the harm they've done and take measures to prevent further harm," What would those measures look like?

paulmd 3y ago
Not OP but I’d assume something analogous to the tobacco lawsuits but for ecological damage caused by marketing of products generally known to be harmful to healthy natural ecosystems that trap users in a cycle of additional product use (once nature reacts to the apocalypse by starting additional pioneer plant growth in that are). Actually that metaphor works rather well…

jmartrican 3y ago

You say individuals cannot solve this, then go on to show how the problem is with individuals turning their yards into grass wastelands. Well if its individuals causing the problem, wouldn't it mean that individuals can solve it? Seems like your comment is contradicting itself.

blueprint 3y ago
no, they are referring to how difficult it is to awaken or change individuals.

blueprint 3y ago

I completely sympathize with you. Seriously. But I'm not sure the cause is simply narcissism - to my eyes the real root cause is abject ignorance. If they were to realize, like you, they would be unable to behave the way they do

mcsniff 3y ago

> How can this compete with the dozens of neighbors in a half-mile radius that have removed in excess of hundreds of trees, big ones like oak, pine, maple, hickory and up to five feet in diameter, and turn their yards into grass wastelands? I never even see my neighbors use most of their yards. How do you compete against that level of narcissisim and lack of empathy? Moving might be an option. There are places where this doesn't happen and while you might have other problems, you probably won't have those problems.

otde 3y ago
I don't think the issue is whether GP lives next to neighbors with these kind of lawns, but more that the relative proportion of bird-hostile yards is outpacing any individual attempt to counterbalance. Moving only solves the problem if the only thing you care about is the extent to which you, personally, are forced to see one of the causes of this population drop in your daily life. It doesn't address the problem itself, which is kind of also GP's point.

Aerbil313 3y ago

No person can solve this. Techno-optimist HN won’t believe me now, but we’re living through the Collapse of the civilization right now. Ukraine, banks, covid, climate change and all else are merely symptoms of human population overshoot. See https://medium.com/@CollapseSurvival/overshoot-why-its-already-too-late-to-save-civilization-e834cb4ec694 https://medium.com/@CollapseSurvival/overshoot-why-its-alrea...