I think you're right that people agree in principle that habitat loss is bad, although I think a lot of people have no concept of the type of habitat loss that is bad - there are some areas of wasteland/ex-industrial that have more value for bees and other wildlife than areas like parks, playing fields and some modern gardens. I think it would be WAY more helpful to plant more flower-rich margins and restore hedgerows in agriculture, leave road verges untrimmed, and plant amenity land more thoughtfully (less of the South American evergreens and hideous bleeping Pelargoniums, more of the native/naturalised flowering plants and ones with actual value to insects) than it would be to try and overhaul pesticide use all in one go.
You're right about food - I guess people these days spend a smaller proportion of their overall income on food than at any time ever, but then they spend a larger proportion on housing in a lot of cases, and we are probably more acquisitive than ever before. We probably also need to shift the type of food we're eating to a more sustainable balance of animal versus vegetable proteins.
I remember emperor's explanation of organic dairy in the UK and it made me think carefully about organic and trading off different aspects of the possible benefits. I certainly like farming to be sustainable...but it needs to be actually sustainable, not greenwashed, and if a couple of well-targeted pesticide treatments make the operation more financially viable and mean the farmer can afford to leave some wildflower strips and wildlife corridors, if the quality is higher (so less rejection of crop by supermarkets) and if the crop is sold locally then that to me is better than wilfully avoiding pesticide use without really doing anything to actively improve the farm's footprint. There are also some speculations I've heard that one of the reasons organic crop yields in the UK are even as high as they are is a spillover effect from surrounding conventional farms - fewer pests can migrate in because they're being killed off on your neighbour's crop, type of thing. Not sure how far that goes but would love to see it investigated at a landscape scale.
Apparently the one place organic does give massively improved yields is Africa - partly because it tends to go hand in hand with better farmer training and more conscientious growing techniques so the soil has more organic matter and so on (and pesticides in Africa are often adulterated or mislabelled). It's an area I hope to work on more myself.
no subject
I think you're right that people agree in principle that habitat loss is bad, although I think a lot of people have no concept of the type of habitat loss that is bad - there are some areas of wasteland/ex-industrial that have more value for bees and other wildlife than areas like parks, playing fields and some modern gardens. I think it would be WAY more helpful to plant more flower-rich margins and restore hedgerows in agriculture, leave road verges untrimmed, and plant amenity land more thoughtfully (less of the South American evergreens and hideous bleeping Pelargoniums, more of the native/naturalised flowering plants and ones with actual value to insects) than it would be to try and overhaul pesticide use all in one go.
You're right about food - I guess people these days spend a smaller proportion of their overall income on food than at any time ever, but then they spend a larger proportion on housing in a lot of cases, and we are probably more acquisitive than ever before. We probably also need to shift the type of food we're eating to a more sustainable balance of animal versus vegetable proteins.
I remember
Apparently the one place organic does give massively improved yields is Africa - partly because it tends to go hand in hand with better farmer training and more conscientious growing techniques so the soil has more organic matter and so on (and pesticides in Africa are often adulterated or mislabelled). It's an area I hope to work on more myself.