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

A third of North America’s birds have vanished

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 901 posts

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#221

Post by godelski »

paulcole wrote: post #155
godelski wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> viable solutions proposed that can be implemented bottom-up Don't have outdoor cats: https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/ From the cited source: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 > We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality. Our findings sugge…

There’s a bunch of statistics that just sound like nonsense and get repeated on the internet constantly. On the Mt. Rushmore of this list is the cats killing billions of birds a year. Another one is how efficient dishwashers are compared to hand washing dishes.

Well the cat number is cited from a paper and it does pass the sniff test. There's 45 million cats in America so that's 29 - 89 birds/cat/yr. That's not an unreasonable number, even taking into account a power distribution (I would buy that there's cats out there killing several birds a week, as I've seen this with my own eyes). The higher number probably over counts domestic cats though, but that's not too meaningful to my point given how these cats come to existence. Sure, publication doesn't mean absolutely correct, but there's nothing very suspicious about this one that I'm seeing at least. But I didn't do a deep dive either.

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#222

Post by EvanAnderson »

Sai_ wrote: post #211
EvanAnderson wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How would they know what the views of their constituents are? The number of representatives in the US House needs to be expanded. The proportion of citizens to representatives is way out of whack. Having more representatives with smaller districts would allow representatives to better know and support their district’s interests and views.

Is that realistic? Even organizing a team lunch for ten involves a lot of customer discovery and tradeoffs and here too, the loudest voices (analogous to committed voters or lobbyists) usually win. Even if the final ratio of representatives to voters is 1:10, you have only moved the problem upstream to this giant body of 33 million representatives who now need to agree on a policy. Simply voting Yes/No could lead to…

I think an expansion is logistically realistic and in the interests of voters. It’s also not in the interests of the established “ruling class” so it’ll never happen.

I found the arguments made by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences to be compelling: https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/enlarging-the-house/...

I tend to find the entire Our Common Purpose report[0] the Academy issued in 2020 to be pretty reasonable and in line with what I think the public interest is.

[0] https://www.amacad.org/ourcommonpurpose/report

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#223

Post by ribosometronome »

indus wrote: post #218

I’m super optimistic about this situation. But nature is the most powerful breeder. We will see newer species being born, more adapted to the current conditions.

We? No, we will die having left the world a worse place, knowing that we were too selfish to not be the sixth great extinction event. The world will take millennia to recover assuming we stop altering it underneath other species.

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#224

Post by deepnet »

bmitc wrote: post #114
23B1 wrote: post #35

One thing I dislike the most about these problems – and the information/media/activism around them – is the "solutioning". Yes, we should recycle and reduce carbon emissions and learn to live in a more integrated fashion with earth. But the problem is so diffuse and requires substantive work against powerful forces (government, business, apathy). What I'd like to see more of, when presented with these sorts of proble…

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…

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.

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#225

Post by ribosometronome »

paulcole wrote: post #155
godelski wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> viable solutions proposed that can be implemented bottom-up Don't have outdoor cats: https://abcbirds.org/program/cats-indoors/cats-and-birds/ From the cited source: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms2380 > We estimate that free-ranging domestic cats kill 1.3–4.0 billion birds and 6.3–22.3 billion mammals annually. Un-owned cats, as opposed to owned pets, cause the majority of this mortality. Our findings sugge…

There’s a bunch of statistics that just sound like nonsense and get repeated on the internet constantly. On the Mt. Rushmore of this list is the cats killing billions of birds a year. Another one is how efficient dishwashers are compared to hand washing dishes.

Repeated? They've cited their source. Why take issue with it like it's a whispered rumor rather than a paper with specificity you can disagree with?

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#226

Post by zadokshi »

pcthrowaway wrote: post #193
gerad wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve been reading Harari’s “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” recently. The book makes the point that the history of Homo Sapiens coincides with mass extinction - humankind has been disrupting and destroying habitats since it rapidly expanded out of Africa 300k years ago. Even before the agricultural revolution. It happens time and again throughout various geographies and histories, Homo Sapiens arrive somewhere…

> If people (particularly women) are educated and empowered enough, then it seems to drive down birth rates Good luck selling that line when people like Musk are on record saying that it's better for the planet and for humanity to have more kids

I don’t know if Musk said exactly this. But what I find interesting is that people would rather evoke the name of Elon for some political point winning than to actually discuss the merits of the idea itself.

it’s more confusing to me given the fact that Musk literally commercialized and made viable the idea of a car that has a true chance to reduce pollution.

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#228

Post by roughly »

bmitc wrote: post #114
23B1 wrote: post #35

One thing I dislike the most about these problems – and the information/media/activism around them – is the "solutioning". Yes, we should recycle and reduce carbon emissions and learn to live in a more integrated fashion with earth. But the problem is so diffuse and requires substantive work against powerful forces (government, business, apathy). What I'd like to see more of, when presented with these sorts of proble…

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…

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.

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#229

Post by coryrc »

tnias23 wrote: post #132

Like almost every other goddamn problem we face, the solution is boring as hell: campaign finance reform. If politicians actually represented their constituents, they would be able to effect the policy changes required. But they don’t, because campaign finance is broken, allowing the richest, most blood-sucking elements of society to have the biggest influence. If you have the opportunity to vote for someone who beli…

No use unless you replace FPTP voting with something capable of actual representation (mixed-member voting).

Re: A third of North America’s birds have vanished

#230

Post by ChatGTP »

bmitc wrote: post #114
23B1 wrote: post #35

One thing I dislike the most about these problems – and the information/media/activism around them – is the "solutioning". Yes, we should recycle and reduce carbon emissions and learn to live in a more integrated fashion with earth. But the problem is so diffuse and requires substantive work against powerful forces (government, business, apathy). What I'd like to see more of, when presented with these sorts of proble…

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…

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?

Post reply on HN