Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

journals.plos.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 454 posts

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#281

Post by stevekemp »

freeflight wrote: post #46
avip wrote: post #3

Yes. This is a case of hard data confirming what we already know. As in - few types of butterflies I used to like, and see yearly as a kid - are gone. I see them now once in 5 years, if lucky. I bring my kids to look because it's a first time for them. On the other hand, some types of beetles, ants, flies, mosquitoes, even wasps - are just new. They were not here 20-30 years ago. Now, what are the consequences of all…

> On the other hand, some types of beetles, ants, flies, mosquitoes, even wasps - are just new. Afaik most of these are usually invasives species, displacing local populations, which is happening in the weirdest ways and places. In Germany, our local ladybug species are on the verge of going extinct because an imported Asian ladybug species emits some kind of spores killing them, and the Asian ones generally being st…

>that leaves the red squirrels with no food supplies to get through the winter and so they starve.

Things with squirrels are a bit more complex. While the two species do fight over the same resource, the main reason for the decline of red squirrels is disease.

The grey squirrels carry squirrel-pox, which can be fatal to the reds. That's always the explanation I've heard cited for the decline in red squirrels in the UK at least:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squirrel_parapoxvirus

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#282

Post by WillReplyfFood »

mschuster91 wrote: post #122
javajosh wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My understanding is that there is a give and take between meadows and forests that occurs on multi-year cycle. Meadows grow when there is too much water, and trees grow when the water recedes. You can see this in the Yosemite Valley really clearly. Perhaps this is a sign that the freshwater in the ground is going away.

> Perhaps this is a sign that the freshwater in the ground is going away. Now look what Nestle/other food giants, but also slaughterhouses and animal farms, do: they use groundwater with private wells, and they extract more water than can be replenished... boom.

I wonder if sabotaging such private wells, by conrecte blocking parts of the aquifying layer would constitute as self-defense.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#283

Post by jopsen »

elchief wrote: post #242
carbonmachine wrote: post #75

Being an earth dwelling human, this seems pretty bad. Aside from buying ammo or survival rations, what's something proactive that I can do? Is there an organization that is trying to rid the world of pesticides (assuming that's the cause)? If I opt to call my representatives, what am I calling in support of/against? Over the last year, reading the news had made me more passive and worried. I want to dedicate a slice…

This is what I've done in the last two years: - Moved closer to work to minimize driving - Take the train downtown (on nights out) - Bike to work on occasion (it's a huge freaking hill) - Bought programmable thermostats, LED bulbs, vent louvres. Dropped electric use 20% - Eat organic (helps my IBS), cook at home, buy in bulk, freeze - Started composting and recycling more. My city has good programs for such - Ask for…

- Bring a backpack to the grocery store,

Note, though this won't scale, you need to take political action to make a real change.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#284

Post by titzer »

giardini wrote: post #239

This study appears to be an alarmist rehash of what was previously discussed on HN: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14323533 Here's one of the original papers: https://www.farmlandbirds.net/sites/default/files/Orbrioch%2... The 75% decline number appears to be from two data points from a 220-acre plot. From that paper: "What follows is a description of measured Insect-Biomasses from samples collected in the Orbr…

> So alarmists are extrapolating from two data points (years 1989 and 2013) for a 220-hectare plot of German farmland to the entire world.

Actually the study is couched in a lot of careful caveats and they _don't_ extrapolate to the rest of the world. I didn't see any extrapolation. And, if you read the actual article that you linked above, a decline of 2/3 from 1970 was measured in Scotland. That's corroborating evidence that ought to be carefully considered.

> Actually they're not even measuring that, they're measuring the weight of dead bugs' soaked in 70-80% alcohol.

Are you f'in serious? You don't even trust them to be able to properly factor out the weight of alcohol? That's not being critical, that's just disbelief.

> I could go on and on about controls in statistical experiments but I think you get the idea.

I think it's easy to throw out such statements on HN but I think you get the idea.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#285

Post by titzer »

deelowe wrote: post #196
musage wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First off, stinging insects hardly make up 100% of the biomass of a meadow, so if it's full of stinging insects, it's a bowl filled with stinging insects, not a meadow. Secondly, http://www.countrylovers.co.uk/hort/wildgrdn.htm > Where 'attracts insects' is mentioned you can assume that birds will also be consequently be attracted https://www.kingsseeds.co.nz/Kings+Seeds+Blog/x_post/Plants-... > But what if we are tr…

Just so we're clear here, you're whole argument here is that people shouldn't mow the lawn b/c it causes stinging insects, but at the same time doesn't cause stinging insects? What is your point exactly?

> Just so we're clear here, you're whole argument here is that people shouldn't mow the lawn b/c it causes stinging insects, but at the same time doesn't cause stinging insects? What is your point exactly?

Well if you read the link, I believe the point was that some plants attract stinging insects and others repel them. Also, stings. You'll live.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#286

Post by titzer »

deelowe wrote: post #126
mikestew wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Enjoy” a meadow full of stinging insects?

And ticks.

Put a small amount of tick repellant _on yourself_ and check yourself for ticks after being out. Contrast that defensive strategy with an offensive strategy, which seems to be a tick apocalypse.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#287

Post by jopsen »

wazoox wrote: post #245
michaelkeenan wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you make that a specific prediction, I might like to bet against it, if you're interested.

Well, let's see, 80% of insects, 60% of birds, 75% of fish have disappeared in 30 years (a blink of an eye). Climate change is already bringing famine and chaos around the world. We have absolutely no credible alternative to fossil fuels. The financial system is in complete disarray. Economists proved GDP is strictly tied to energy consumption (that seems obvious) therefore, they indirectly proved that GDP growth is…

2020 is 3 years away, Trump's tax cuts might give an unrecoverable financial crash by 2020.

But I'm not sure that's the end of civilization.. in terms of energy the EU goal is 20% renewable by 2020. Some countries are already at 40% of electricity.

There is a lot of work to do, but it's not game over yet.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#288

Post by keymone »

rb666 wrote: post #271

And in the meantime here we are, spending 200 kWh in energy per Bitcoin transaction. Planet is doomed :(

why would you single out bitcoin? did you do any calculations as to how much material and human resources are spent^Wwasted maintaining fiat systems around the world? there are whole industries around designing, printing, securing and transporting money. banks, financial institutions, government institutions. all of that would be 90% obsolete if we switched to cryptocurrencies.

bitcoin is literally drop in the bucket.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#289

Post by moultano »

titzer wrote: post #279

It's not only a consequence of direct habitat destruction, but also the use of pesticides. According to https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2946087/ , more than a billion pounds of pesticides are used on lawns in the US every year. There is little regulation there. All of those pesticides are designed to kill bugs . Why are we now surprised that bugs are disappearing? We are sterilizing the planet. According…

Per acre doesn't seem like the right metric.

Re: 75% decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas

#290

Post by keymone »

this thread is full of doom and gloom.

is there really no non-apocalyptic perspective on this? consider: any other "apex" predator in history never stopped to research and ponder on effects of him demolishing the ecosystem.

the fact that this makes rounds in media and grabs attention and creates social pressure gives at least a glimmer of hope that something will be done about it.

if it's not too late.

Post reply on HN