7 ms·

I reference this paper in almost every science-communication talk I give as an ecologist. It was not a new result by any means, we've had a whole range of othe

by veddox 3y ago

I reference this paper in almost every science-communication talk I give as an ecologist. It was not a new result by any means, we've had a whole range of other studies showing the same over the last three decades [1]. But it was still a very important study, simply for the sheer amount of data they collated: analysing 170 species trends across four decades across Europe is quite a feat! Taken together, it really drives home the message that modern agricultural practices are shredding the environment, but also that there is a lot of nuance behind biodiversity declines that we need to look into further, and that offer hope for improvement. [1] e.g. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270919000480 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959270919000480, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45854-0 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-45854-0, https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12585,https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13307 https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12585,https://doi.org/10.1111/c..., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.05.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2011.05.006, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00375.x https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1474-919X.2004.00375.x

toss1 3y ago
Thank you for your work as an ecologist! I was really struck on a recent trip to Minnesota. Flew into the MSP airport, got the rental car and drove out to a smaller city. At first, we thought 'what nice countryside'. Then as the drive went on for hundreds of miles of nothing but plowed fields, with hardly even a shrub-row between fields, it became nightmare-ish — literally wondering "Where could any creature live in this wasteland?", and nevermind the pesticides & herbicides. And then considering that such habitat destruction visible from an airliner can often extend horizon-to-horizon from 36,000 ft altitude, it is horrifying. Industrial farming may be "efficient" by some parameters, but it really is destructive, and also evidently responsible for the obesity epidemic. Something's gotta give.
- _y5hn 3y ago
  Check out the new Netflix documentary series "You are what you eat - A twin experiment". It's quite informative and comprehensive, plus do a few new studies / experiments on identical twins.
  - graphe 3y ago
    Garbage propaganda. I already know their conclusion by the title and it's a documentary style shilling of vegan food. The only interesting thing is how they dress their lies against serious studies.
    - hombre_fatal 3y ago
      This comment is indistinguishable from the one you would write if you simply didn't like the result of the experiment.
      - graphe 3y ago
        You don't need to tell me you're vegan, yours is indistinguishable from someone who likes the propaganda. Merit why it and other fake diet documentaries like super size me are legitimate. They are all grifters and propaganda, from the full carnivore to the full vegetables, most of them are vegan and vegans are commonly known to die of malnutrition.
        sjsdaiuasgdia 3y ago
        > the vegan influencers are commonly known to die of malnutrition. Can you provide some backing for this statement? A quick search shows a ton of news articles about one specific influencer who died last August, but I didn't find much that suggested a trend as you indicate.
        graphe 3y ago
        Sorry let me amend my statement, I am against a diet that promotes malnutrition which is caused by influencers that don't know about nutrition. Deaths are commonly attributed to vegans from this propaganda, and they are common not a trend of influencers but a trend in general. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/vegan-mother-florida-child-starvation-b2155949.html https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/ve... Anyone who promotes this unhealthy propaganda should be treated with suspicion. The mockumentary propaganda was shot in the style of a documentary funded by vegan companies. So surprised by what we saw though fake science.
- epistasis 3y ago
  This sort of farming is not new to the area, and it has been that way since European immigrants settled in Minnesota. This land was nearly all plains, so the trees you see around farm houses are actually European settler additions. There has been a drastic increase in wildlife since I was a child there in the 90s, however. Whatever is happening over all with regulations, it's definitely improving. But I have never, not once, understood the people that think that farming, be it industrial, organic industrial, or artisanal hard-labor small scale, is somehow environmentally positive. A lot of people who don't understand farming think that just buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem. But any form of mono-crop farming destroys the existing ecosystem, organic or round-up drenched. Solar farms are far better for the ecosystem.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    "A lot of people who don't understand farming think that just buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem" Yes it is. Not using industrial pesticides and herbicides is already a huge deal. And not using them actually requires a different approach to mono-crop farming. E.g. planting shrubs to attract birds, who will then help control pests. And in general, smaller fields and more diverse.
    - epistasis 3y ago
      Do you have any studies, review papers, or other evidence of this? There is no increase of organic farming on these fields in Minnesota, yet wildlife is coming back. Other interventions around habitat preservation and restoration, and decreased runoff, seem far more crucial. Even organic farms use fertilizer, the runoff of which is far bigger contributor to ecosystem destruction than pesticides, at least according to everything I have seen. Algeal blooms and water ecosystem destruction are caused by excess nutrients, not from death by pesticides, for example. I would love to see soemthing new that I have not yet been able to find with regards to this evidence!
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        "There is no increase of organic farming on these fields in Minnesota" I was not speaking about Minnesota, but the isolated claim denying that "buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem". Buying organic rises demand for organic farming - and organic farming is better for diversity (do you need papers about this?) - but obviously only where the farms are located and not in the supermarket. And if the land you mean has no organic farming yet still increases wildlife, well, there are of course also many things conventional farming can do different (just using a different or less of herbicide/pesticide can have drastic effects).
- voakbasda 3y ago
  Worse, the food produced by Big Ag from such practices borders on poison. My wife suffers inflammation when eating most any food from the grocery store, with the exception of raw organic ingredients that we can prepare ourselves. Most people do not react at a noticable level, but she has autoimmune issues that make her sensitive to trace amounts of pesticides, preservatives, cooking oils, and more. After only a few bites, her hands will swell up and prevent her from removing her rings. Sickness follows if she doesn’t take heed. We cannot go out to eat anywhere that uses an inexpensive oil; she reacts to most popular varieties. She cannot even eat simple table sugar beyond a bite or two. Without exception, the common denominators are those ingredients produced at industrial scales.
  - graphe 3y ago
    What do you think are the causes? I heard the us has more mold in their food normally.
  - carlosjobim 3y ago
    I think there's another common denominator as well...
  - wannacboatmovie 3y ago
    Have you tried taking her to a doctor? This sounds like an immense burden and impact on quality of life for which modern medicine has likely already found a solution.
    - toss1 3y ago
      Yeah, no. My wife has some similar autoimmune issues (thankfully less severe than GP), and these have stumped the best doctors in the world that we can find. The trips to Minnesota were to go to Mayo Clinic in Rochester for these issues. Yes it is a burden and impact on quality of life, and No, there is no good solution yet. I wish there would be, but it's not there. And yes, the food supply is poisoned by these monoculture and industrial food practices. While most of us are not poisoned to this degree, all of us are some. We started a garden and my diet has definitely changed, and I notice all kinds of subtle improvements. So, avoiding any kind of processed food, almost anything with a long artificial shelf life (this means using really good olive oil and no shelf mayonnaise or oils found in most products; Omega-3 vs -6), will be to your long-term benefit, and you'll feel better.
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  We need to feed people. Globally 8 billion now and probably a peak at 10 billion. Ultimately there is no magic recipe to ease our pressures on the environment: more people means more resources needed.
  - dylan604 3y ago
    What do you think is going to cause a peak to occur? Will it be a plateau or a decline? If decline, will be be slow or sharp. Sharp as in our attempts to sustain 10 billion people leads to total collapse of the environment causing the planet to be much less habitable? Putting a number seems arbitrary even if you do use the word probably in your statement.
    - mytailorisrich 3y ago
      I am simply using the well-known UN population forecast here...
  - wannacboatmovie 3y ago
    These people have deluded themselves into thinking the guy at the farmers market that shows up with 12 ears of 'organic' corn on the back of his cute old pickup truck is somehow going to feed the world en masse. Organic food is a scam enjoyed by rich people whose emotions are granted more relevancy than practical thinking. It is not sustainable large-scale. People would go hungry and die.
- dylan604 3y ago
  > and also evidently responsible for the obesity epidemic. Where does this connection come from? I've never heard of this linking of industrialized farming to obesity. I've definitely heard of the linking of processed food to obesity, but farming techniques is one that I'm definitely going to need to see some supporting evidence for this claim.
  - toss1 3y ago
    Industrial farming is the required feedstock for industrial food production, which is optimized primarily for shelf life and near-addictiveness. The "you can't eat just one" advert line is a real goal of the food developers. The requirement for long shelf life causes inclusion of unhealthy chemicals,e.g., high amounts of Omega-6 oils (linked to cardio issues, inflammation, etc.) instead of Omega-3s, which should have a far higher ratio vs Omega-6s in a healthy diet.
fiftyfifty 3y ago
In the US there has been significant cutbacks in USDA programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) that paid farmers to keep certain pieces of land fallow and to plant native plants and grasses to provide food and habitat for wildlife. These programs were popular with small farmers and ranchers as it gave them some guaranteed income each year, and allowed them to follow good practices like rotating crops etc. Many of these programs were created after the dust bowl to provided incentives for better land management practices. We've been seeing reduced investments in these kinds of programs over the last couple of decades with the most recent farm bill in 2023 being one of the worse cuts yet: https://www.eenews.net/articles/conservation-cuts-sink-in-as-2023-farm-bill-looms/ https://www.eenews.net/articles/conservation-cuts-sink-in-as...
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  Does utility scale solar drive out native species (I am not a biologist or ecologist)? If not, tying up ag land with 20-30 year solar PPAs while preserving habitat (assuming a favorable layout of equipment) seems like a funding source. 43 million acres of US farmland is used for ethanol production, for example. It's not quite a conservation easement, but agrivoltaics might be a possible path to conserving this land versus development or factory cash crop production. Farmers get the income they need, the impact to the land is minimal (panels, racking, and wires can be stripped at anytime), etc. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/03/10/solarfood-in-ethanol-fields-could-fully-power-the-united-states/ https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/03/10/solarfood-in-ethanol-... "Of the ~92 million acres of corn planted in the US each year, roughly 40 million acres (1.6% of the nation’s land) are primarily used to feed cars and raise the octane of gasoline. If this land were repurposed with solar power, it could provide around three and a half times the electricity needs of the United States, equivalent to nearly eight times the energy that would be needed to power all of the nation’s passenger vehicles were they electrified. However, if we were to transition this 40 million acres are of fuel to solar+food (agrivoltaics) – we could still meet 100% of our electricity needs, and power a nationwide fleet of electric vehicles." https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/agrivoltaics-coming-soon-farm-near-you https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/agrivo... https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/potential-agrivoltaics-us-solar-industry-farmers-and-communities https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/potential-agrivol... https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/agrivoltaics.html https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/agrivolt... https://www.planning.org/blog/9253223/visual-guide-to-agrivoltaics-and-wildlife-friendly-solar/ https://www.planning.org/blog/9253223/visual-guide-to-agrivo... https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2022.932018/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2022.9320... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0364-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0364-5

by veddox 3y ago

toss1 3y ago

Thank you for your work as an ecologist! I was really struck on a recent trip to Minnesota. Flew into the MSP airport, got the rental car and drove out to a smaller city. At first, we thought 'what nice countryside'. Then as the drive went on for hundreds of miles of nothing but plowed fields, with hardly even a shrub-row between fields, it became nightmare-ish — literally wondering "Where could any creature live in this wasteland?", and nevermind the pesticides & herbicides. And then considering that such habitat destruction visible from an airliner can often extend horizon-to-horizon from 36,000 ft altitude, it is horrifying. Industrial farming may be "efficient" by some parameters, but it really is destructive, and also evidently responsible for the obesity epidemic. Something's gotta give.

_y5hn 3y ago
Check out the new Netflix documentary series "You are what you eat - A twin experiment". It's quite informative and comprehensive, plus do a few new studies / experiments on identical twins.
- graphe 3y ago
  Garbage propaganda. I already know their conclusion by the title and it's a documentary style shilling of vegan food. The only interesting thing is how they dress their lies against serious studies.
  - hombre_fatal 3y ago
    This comment is indistinguishable from the one you would write if you simply didn't like the result of the experiment.
    - graphe 3y ago
      You don't need to tell me you're vegan, yours is indistinguishable from someone who likes the propaganda. Merit why it and other fake diet documentaries like super size me are legitimate. They are all grifters and propaganda, from the full carnivore to the full vegetables, most of them are vegan and vegans are commonly known to die of malnutrition.
      - sjsdaiuasgdia 3y ago
        > the vegan influencers are commonly known to die of malnutrition. Can you provide some backing for this statement? A quick search shows a ton of news articles about one specific influencer who died last August, but I didn't find much that suggested a trend as you indicate.
        graphe 3y ago
        Sorry let me amend my statement, I am against a diet that promotes malnutrition which is caused by influencers that don't know about nutrition. Deaths are commonly attributed to vegans from this propaganda, and they are common not a trend of influencers but a trend in general. https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/vegan-mother-florida-child-starvation-b2155949.html https://www.the-independent.com/news/world/americas/crime/ve... Anyone who promotes this unhealthy propaganda should be treated with suspicion. The mockumentary propaganda was shot in the style of a documentary funded by vegan companies. So surprised by what we saw though fake science.
epistasis 3y ago
This sort of farming is not new to the area, and it has been that way since European immigrants settled in Minnesota. This land was nearly all plains, so the trees you see around farm houses are actually European settler additions. There has been a drastic increase in wildlife since I was a child there in the 90s, however. Whatever is happening over all with regulations, it's definitely improving. But I have never, not once, understood the people that think that farming, be it industrial, organic industrial, or artisanal hard-labor small scale, is somehow environmentally positive. A lot of people who don't understand farming think that just buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem. But any form of mono-crop farming destroys the existing ecosystem, organic or round-up drenched. Solar farms are far better for the ecosystem.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  "A lot of people who don't understand farming think that just buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem" Yes it is. Not using industrial pesticides and herbicides is already a huge deal. And not using them actually requires a different approach to mono-crop farming. E.g. planting shrubs to attract birds, who will then help control pests. And in general, smaller fields and more diverse.
  - epistasis 3y ago
    Do you have any studies, review papers, or other evidence of this? There is no increase of organic farming on these fields in Minnesota, yet wildlife is coming back. Other interventions around habitat preservation and restoration, and decreased runoff, seem far more crucial. Even organic farms use fertilizer, the runoff of which is far bigger contributor to ecosystem destruction than pesticides, at least according to everything I have seen. Algeal blooms and water ecosystem destruction are caused by excess nutrients, not from death by pesticides, for example. I would love to see soemthing new that I have not yet been able to find with regards to this evidence!
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      "There is no increase of organic farming on these fields in Minnesota" I was not speaking about Minnesota, but the isolated claim denying that "buying organic produce is somehow healthy for the ecosystem". Buying organic rises demand for organic farming - and organic farming is better for diversity (do you need papers about this?) - but obviously only where the farms are located and not in the supermarket. And if the land you mean has no organic farming yet still increases wildlife, well, there are of course also many things conventional farming can do different (just using a different or less of herbicide/pesticide can have drastic effects).
voakbasda 3y ago
Worse, the food produced by Big Ag from such practices borders on poison. My wife suffers inflammation when eating most any food from the grocery store, with the exception of raw organic ingredients that we can prepare ourselves. Most people do not react at a noticable level, but she has autoimmune issues that make her sensitive to trace amounts of pesticides, preservatives, cooking oils, and more. After only a few bites, her hands will swell up and prevent her from removing her rings. Sickness follows if she doesn’t take heed. We cannot go out to eat anywhere that uses an inexpensive oil; she reacts to most popular varieties. She cannot even eat simple table sugar beyond a bite or two. Without exception, the common denominators are those ingredients produced at industrial scales.
- graphe 3y ago
  What do you think are the causes? I heard the us has more mold in their food normally.
- carlosjobim 3y ago
  I think there's another common denominator as well...
- wannacboatmovie 3y ago
  Have you tried taking her to a doctor? This sounds like an immense burden and impact on quality of life for which modern medicine has likely already found a solution.
  - toss1 3y ago
    Yeah, no. My wife has some similar autoimmune issues (thankfully less severe than GP), and these have stumped the best doctors in the world that we can find. The trips to Minnesota were to go to Mayo Clinic in Rochester for these issues. Yes it is a burden and impact on quality of life, and No, there is no good solution yet. I wish there would be, but it's not there. And yes, the food supply is poisoned by these monoculture and industrial food practices. While most of us are not poisoned to this degree, all of us are some. We started a garden and my diet has definitely changed, and I notice all kinds of subtle improvements. So, avoiding any kind of processed food, almost anything with a long artificial shelf life (this means using really good olive oil and no shelf mayonnaise or oils found in most products; Omega-3 vs -6), will be to your long-term benefit, and you'll feel better.
mytailorisrich 3y ago
We need to feed people. Globally 8 billion now and probably a peak at 10 billion. Ultimately there is no magic recipe to ease our pressures on the environment: more people means more resources needed.
- dylan604 3y ago
  What do you think is going to cause a peak to occur? Will it be a plateau or a decline? If decline, will be be slow or sharp. Sharp as in our attempts to sustain 10 billion people leads to total collapse of the environment causing the planet to be much less habitable? Putting a number seems arbitrary even if you do use the word probably in your statement.
  - mytailorisrich 3y ago
    I am simply using the well-known UN population forecast here...
- wannacboatmovie 3y ago
  These people have deluded themselves into thinking the guy at the farmers market that shows up with 12 ears of 'organic' corn on the back of his cute old pickup truck is somehow going to feed the world en masse. Organic food is a scam enjoyed by rich people whose emotions are granted more relevancy than practical thinking. It is not sustainable large-scale. People would go hungry and die.
dylan604 3y ago
> and also evidently responsible for the obesity epidemic. Where does this connection come from? I've never heard of this linking of industrialized farming to obesity. I've definitely heard of the linking of processed food to obesity, but farming techniques is one that I'm definitely going to need to see some supporting evidence for this claim.
- toss1 3y ago
  Industrial farming is the required feedstock for industrial food production, which is optimized primarily for shelf life and near-addictiveness. The "you can't eat just one" advert line is a real goal of the food developers. The requirement for long shelf life causes inclusion of unhealthy chemicals,e.g., high amounts of Omega-6 oils (linked to cardio issues, inflammation, etc.) instead of Omega-3s, which should have a far higher ratio vs Omega-6s in a healthy diet.

fiftyfifty 3y ago

In the US there has been significant cutbacks in USDA programs like the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) that paid farmers to keep certain pieces of land fallow and to plant native plants and grasses to provide food and habitat for wildlife. These programs were popular with small farmers and ranchers as it gave them some guaranteed income each year, and allowed them to follow good practices like rotating crops etc. Many of these programs were created after the dust bowl to provided incentives for better land management practices. We've been seeing reduced investments in these kinds of programs over the last couple of decades with the most recent farm bill in 2023 being one of the worse cuts yet: https://www.eenews.net/articles/conservation-cuts-sink-in-as-2023-farm-bill-looms/ https://www.eenews.net/articles/conservation-cuts-sink-in-as...

toomuchtodo 3y ago
Does utility scale solar drive out native species (I am not a biologist or ecologist)? If not, tying up ag land with 20-30 year solar PPAs while preserving habitat (assuming a favorable layout of equipment) seems like a funding source. 43 million acres of US farmland is used for ethanol production, for example. It's not quite a conservation easement, but agrivoltaics might be a possible path to conserving this land versus development or factory cash crop production. Farmers get the income they need, the impact to the land is minimal (panels, racking, and wires can be stripped at anytime), etc. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/03/10/solarfood-in-ethanol-fields-could-fully-power-the-united-states/ https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/03/10/solarfood-in-ethanol-... "Of the ~92 million acres of corn planted in the US each year, roughly 40 million acres (1.6% of the nation’s land) are primarily used to feed cars and raise the octane of gasoline. If this land were repurposed with solar power, it could provide around three and a half times the electricity needs of the United States, equivalent to nearly eight times the energy that would be needed to power all of the nation’s passenger vehicles were they electrified. However, if we were to transition this 40 million acres are of fuel to solar+food (agrivoltaics) – we could still meet 100% of our electricity needs, and power a nationwide fleet of electric vehicles." https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/agrivoltaics-coming-soon-farm-near-you https://www.climatehubs.usda.gov/hubs/northeast/topic/agrivo... https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/potential-agrivoltaics-us-solar-industry-farmers-and-communities https://www.energy.gov/eere/solar/articles/potential-agrivol... https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/agrivoltaics.html https://www.nrel.gov/solar/market-research-analysis/agrivolt... https://www.planning.org/blog/9253223/visual-guide-to-agrivoltaics-and-wildlife-friendly-solar/ https://www.planning.org/blog/9253223/visual-guide-to-agrivo... https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2022.932018/full https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2022.9320... https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0364-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-019-0364-5