My writings - and those of others.
Thinking about Bugs
Not something we normally do at the end of August. Black flies are long gone and mosquitoes aren’t as evident as they were earlier in the summer. Yet perhaps we should be thinking about bugs the way that writer Dave Goulson does in the Guardian in his recemt article, The Insect Apocalypse - Our world will grind to a halt without them. Here are just a few key points.
Insects have declined in abundance by as much as 75% in the last 50 years.
Three million tons of pesticides are going into the global environment each year - much stronger ones than Rachel Carson warned us against.
Insects provide us with a good deal of service: Goulson notes: “We need insects to pollinate our crops, recycle dung, leaves and corpses, keep the soil healthy, control pests, and much more – but for larger animals, such as birds, fish and frogs, which rely on insects for food. Wildflowers rely on them for pollination.”
They are the largest population on the planet and outnumber humans by a million to one.
We don’t eat them directly in the West. On the other hand, we do regularly consume them at one step removed in the food chain. Freshwater fish such as trout and salmon feed heavily on insects, as do game birds like partridge, pheasant and turkey.
87% of all plant species require animal pollination, most of it delivered by insects.
Insects are also intimately involved in the breakdown of organic matter, such as fallen leaves, timber and animal feces. This is vitally important work, for it recycles the nutrients, making them available once more for plant growth.
Insects are the undertakers of the world, disposing of all types of dead bodies
We are losing far too many of them. Like all aspects of climate change, we start noticing events at the edges - and suddenly they are totally upon us. It’s just another area where we have to consider what we are actually doing to the planet.
Out of the mouths of . . .
Young people are not letting us off the hook as Greta Thunberg writes this morning along with other young cohorts. The current generation of adults may not have created the world they live in, but their policies and actions continue its least admirable qualities. We can learn the basics from this selection for kids, who will become more and more the advocates to whom we must answer. Find it here
Choices
“We need character in order to extract the useful.” So said Robert Genn, a visual artist of note, who inspired me to write twice weekly as he did for years. He was born the same year as I was, but is now coming to us from the beyond through the reprints of his original messages since his death, curated by his artist daughter, Sara Genn.
Robert was originally writing about the distraction of haikus coming from other - which he proposed to alter as “eyekus” visual moments. I like that idea, but I also liked the quote I started with here. Robert wrote about life as well as art.
And there is a good deal to extract today. The balance between news and opinion in journalism is at least noted in the better press. I do pay attention to both. This morning’s New York Times, has lots of both from opinion writers that I do follow.
Tom Friedman thinks that Biden could be proved right re Afghanistan. He points out the fallacy of thinking that the Afghans needed to be taught to be fighters when they had resisted invasions by others for decades. He points out “In oft-occupied countries like Afghanistan, many people will actually prefer their own people as rulers (however awful) over foreigners (however well intentioned).” He goes on to say that we shouldn’t make judgments on “the morning after”, but wait for the “morning after the morning after”. We’ll be distracted by the chaos there now, which indeed is appalling, but the outcome cannot be determined immediately.
Then I moved on to The Bad Economics of Fossil Fuel Defenders, by the economist, Paul Krugman - another favorite, who makes economics understandable and relevant. He gives us four reasons not to believe the objectors to climate crisis proposals. First, the economy has always done better under Democratic party leadership. Second, when governments increase environmental protection, the costs never increase as much as expected, because businesses are spurred to innovate. Third, “history strongly refutes the notion that there’s any necessary link between economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions”. Last, we don’t need to depend on fossil fuels when renewable energies are growing, while decreasing in cost.
Money is part of the story; he notes “in the 2020 election cycle Republicans received 84 percent of political contributions from the oil and gas industry and 96 percent of contributions from coal mining. Perhaps that’s why it has become part of a culture war. And as Canadians are now in election mode, perhaps I should check on similar patterns in a national party here, that did not allow “Climate change is real” to become part of its platform.
There was a positive story in the Times as well about fighting environmental racism. Community organizers prevented a pipeline to run through predominantly black communities. Environmental spills had been all too common in the company’s safety record. Pollution is higher in neighborhoods inhabited by people of colour everywhere and it has to stop. The story ended on a positive note:
“What happened in Memphis this year is an example of how historically powerless people can work together to interrupt a pattern of environmental racism that has been in place for more than a century and a half. It’s also an example of why everyone else should care.”
These extractions were useful among lots of distractions!
Less Time to Spare
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is the United Nations body for assessing the science related to climate change. It just recently released its sixth report, which confirms that we are running out of time. The message of the IPCC report pulls no punches: “We have to raise the ambition level of mitigation for the coming COP26 meeting in Glasgow,” says Petteri Taalas, secretary-general of the World Meteorological Organization.
It’s hard to get people focused on this issue as a rule, but a summer of forest fires, floods and heat waves may help. Thomas Berry, a theologian who preferred to call himself a geologian, noted the problem in 1978 when few were paying attention. Since the last Paris conference, young activists like Greta Thunberg and the Sunrise Movement have helped spread the word.
One of the things that helps is when scientists sound confident in what they are saying. During the pandemic, for example, tentative messages have created anxiety or distrust when the detractors don’t realize that dealing with a new virus is an exploration. Generally scientific language is conservative. But this time, according to the following Time magazine chart, there is considerably more confidence in their assertions:
The world is undoubtedly more aware. What is required is a real change of how those in the most prosperous part of the world live, especially when our behaviour impacts those in the least prosperous places even more severely. Scientific consensus will be necessary to ward off the very real campaigns of those who have the most to lose - the fossil fuel industries. It’s good to see the confidence of the scientists gaining ground.
Sometimes studies help
How often do we read of reports and studies and know that all the time put in is probably wasted. They sit on a shelf for a while and then are forgotten as personnel change or recommendations seem impossible because of the cost. I was involved with one such study some years ago in which the cost estimate was $40,000. Ouch, we said - and asked how long could we delay implementing the study recommendation. The answer came back as two to three years. We did nothing. I later left the volunteer post. Recently I hears there was water damage for an estimated starting cost of $13,000 with another $30,000 or $40,000 to follow. Some years ago we had the money in the bank to proceed. Now after shutdown and other events, we no longer have it.
I was glad, therefore, to read about a study that seems to have some practical implications for something I know nothing about - except for eating salmon. I am joined by the people of the Wiulinkinuxv First Nation on Rivers Inlet BC and some grizzly bears who depend upon it for survival. The latter animals are magnificent and I saw some at close range when travelling in the Yukon fourteen years ago. One actually stood up suddenly on hind legs, but we missed the photo op.
In this case, the study looks at how a resource under pressure can be managed to benefit an entire system. Both the community and the bears depend on salmon for food. Over- fishing can deplete the stocks. Twenty five years ago commercial fishing did just that.
What was used was a new approach called ecosystem-based management. It quantifies the relationship of how much use can be made of a food resource for humans and bears without jeopardizing the salmon population in the future. At one point the location had plenteous resources of fish, but overdoing commercial fishing depleted the stock and put the people who lived there in danger from starving bears coming too close. Commercial fishing was halted.
The researcher started working with the community to gather hairs from barbed wire fences that the bears left behind. Isotopes from those hairs allowed the researcher to determine what percentage of salmon was part of the bears’ diet. Over time that percentage created a formula published this week in the Journal, Marine and Coastal Fisheries - (not my normal weekend reading, of course. I learned about it from The Globe and Mail). The researcher, Dr. Megan Adams, spent seven years to see if the bears were gradually able to consume more fish. What it showed was that if the local population reduced fishing by 10% the bears could gain the same amount and be healthy. Since commercial fishing stopped, the stocks have returned - but not at a level to resume commercial fishing.
There are lots of studies that probably please other academics, but have little functional application to make life better for both humans and grizzly bears. Bravo for this one.