A new study finds steep, long-term losses across virtually all groups of birds in the U.S. and Canada
Absolutely disheartening. I’m already sad about the lack of butterflies. We’re running headfirst into some nearly irreversible trends here.
Don’t forget bats and bees!
😔
Fucking windmills have got to be stopped!
/s
Obviously more coal is the only solution. And it definitely has nothing to do with pesticides. Only a lefty hippie communist groomer would think that.
Avoid Pesticides
Look for organic food choices and cut out some of the 1 billion pounds of pesticides used in the U.S. each year.
Organic food isn’t necessarily pesticide free, it just uses “organic” pesticides, which aren’t necessarily any better.
More than 1 billion pounds of pesticides are applied in the United States each year. The continent’s most widely used insecticides, called neonicotinoids or “neonics,” are lethal to birds and to the insects that birds consume. Common weed killers used around homes, such as 2, 4-D and glyphosate (used in Roundup), can be toxic to wildlife, and glyphosate has been declared a probable human carcinogen
We are past beyond the point where we can make arguments based on “necessarily”. We cannot keep applying the same method. Those bird did not vanish for no reason. At least we know organic pesticides better than the endless new synthetic pesticides that take years to analyze after they have done their damage to the environment.
Point went right over your head it seems. Toxins are toxins, regardless if they’re organic or synthetic.
I expect much better from this sub than someone throwing more smokescreen at the problem.
The cigarette industry threw millions of dollars into slowing the research, into seeding doubt here and there, because each month of legal inaction from the government was one more full month of business for them. We know it, it’s documented. Slowing the regulations is their business now.
The endgame of your “which aren’t necessarily any better” is nothing else than pleading inaction because we are only sure at 99% and not 100%. So while you spend your time searching for this last percent I say we go organic.
You continue to ignore my point. I’m not defending synthetic pesticides. So stop the straw manning please, especially when I literally used the tobacco industry studies as an example in another comment chain yesterday.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
We shouldn’t be using organic pesticides either.
Our ecosystem is getting more and more fucked.
God, as someone who loves birds, this is heartbreaking. :(
Imho, this is a “canary in a coal mine” situation. The mass deaths is the beginning of the extinction wave that’ll clear off humans too. Whatever life will continue will hopefully be more respectful of our planet.
Tell that to all the motherfuckers chirping outside my bedroom at 4am
They’re coming to avenge their brethren. Be very afraid.
That’s “great” news to wake up to!
Here, https://kbin.social/m/news/t/182914 .
Now don’t tell me that I never bring you anything nice 😜
The birds are coming for us next!
Most people don’t even now what a dark-eyed junco is nowadays, the numbers have dropped dramatically.
Very sad to see.
The Age of Plastics, y’all.
aka The End Time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_time
The main loss for birds comes from the loss of their food source, which comes from pesticides and land use of the agricultural sector.
Add global warming to that mix, and we’re just pushing multiple species to extinction while hastening our own.
All this so already wealthy people can become more wealthy.
That’s definitely part of it, but cats have been decimating bird populations for a long time. Cats are an invasive species in North America and none of the birds here have had any time to adapt. Cats are actually very destructive as invasive species.
That’s, as far as I know, still a very disputed claim with a big lack of evidence behind it.
Cars are a huge cat killer too, which is probably even more true in the US and their very high car dependency, which is probably also why you don’t hear much about it but rather have people scapegoat cats and other things.I used to work with a trap neuter release program in my area. The fact that cats absolutely devastate native rodent and bird populations is well established. The problem is actually extremely severe and wild domestic cat populations continue to be out of control in many places and the impact they’re having on biodiversity is massive. Each ownerless domestic cat (per the nature study) kills on average 200 mammals a year to sustain itself. Even with very low estimates on the size of these populations, the impact they have i tremendous on birds and rodents. This is also not accounting for home animals who go outside and hunt, which is very common for outdoor cats to do.
The impact they have is absurd and in several countries the government is actively funding trap neuter release programs to desperately try to control the wild population size. I’m not speculating on which thing specifically impacts wild bird populations the most, but cats kill unironically billions of small wildlife every year. It is an extremely serious issue that people barely think about.
“Well established” aka “we estimate” on estimates of estimates of estimates. Yes, thanks for proving my point in the lack of actual factual data on that field and backing it up with anecdotal evidence about your previous work life. That’s exactly what I was talking about. This is also a huge issue on how scientific studies can skew results in a broader picture that has become a terribly large issue as well and is basically the same garbage that for example the tobacco & oil industries did to provide us with amazing studies that all benefited their cause / push certain agendas. This entire topic becomes even more stupid when you try to apply the data (or estimates of data) from islands, such as New Zealand, and try to apply that onto big continents, such as Europe or the US. Invasive species are always a much bigger issue on islands, because the other species that are native to them have typically no point of retreat & recover. You can’t apply this to landmasses of the size of continents. And doing so with such wonky data points, that on top of that rely on top of other wonky data points, is just making shit up at this stage. That’s also why you people always cite the same study over and over again.
To what possible end? I’m not denying climate change and deforestation are huge issues for birds too, but I’ve lived with a lot of cats in my life. My friends have had outdoor cats. I know how much they kill even when its not their primary source of food. You also seem to be downplaying the impact of any invasive species not on an island, or misunderstanding why the risk is so high on an island. It’s not simply a lack of room for escape but also small populations of animals. Which can obviously accelerate how fast extinction occurs. That doesn’t mean that invasive species are not also a major problem on continents though, merely that it takes a longer time for ecological disruption to play out.
This study cites the 2013 study in addition to several other studies done since. It’s not just a single study that documented this, nor a single region of the world. I also don’t understand why you refer to me as “you people” as though I am even attempting to argue your original point. I’m not, I know and agree that climate change is especially in the long term the most serious issue for biodiversity. I’m only commenting to add that there are other human caused factors also decimating wildlife populations.
To win a pointless internet argument, who knows. I don’t even care, because the why doesn’t really matter. The point is that anecdotal evidence is pointless and just there to make you feel better about whatever hypothesis you’re supporting, but it’s not actually factual data we should trust and build policies around. And sorry, but studies citing this study as their base assumption is also not making that point any more valid, it just proves my point further. If anything you want proper studies that back up this claim and actually confirm it, but with actual data instead of a bunch of guesstimates. Until then I cannot take it seriously.
When I was a kid in the '70s and '80s I can remember the front grill and windshield of our car being absolutely plastered with bugs. I mean like power wash to get them off plastered. Today it’s surprising if I have more than a handful of smudges on my windshield.
We really aren’t satisfied with having living dinosaurs it seems.
That’s a lot of cameras.
Thats more than sad. But can we Talk about the Graph? It makes it look Like the majority of bird Population is gone (expecting the Base Line to be Zero) and i See nothing to set the Numbers in any Relation. Wouldnt it be better to use a photo of a cute little birb instead?
It’s about a third of all birds.
