Dear David Attenborough

Dear David Attenborough

I recently had the opportunity to watch your latest documentary titled “A Life on Our Planet” (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11989890/).  I am grateful that you have committed your life’s work to sharing the natural wonders of our planet with viewers and trying to instill wonder for life within multiple generations of people.  Your witness statement is a clear and unmistakable call to action.  Your voice and expressions are clearly pained by what you have observed over your lifetime.  I deeply appreciate that you understand what is occurring to the earth (not just intellectually, you feel it within you as well). 

The approximately first ⅔ of the documentary is a must-watch by every single human living within agricultural and industrial societies.  The case you have made is compelling.  However, the approximately final ⅓ of the documentary, where you lay out a vision of the future, will not achieve your goals (as I interpret them).  It is the final portion of your vision that I am writing about to you.

You make a strong argument for the rewilding of our planet but leave out of this vision the key species that is causing catastrophic harm to worlds biota—Homo sapiens. 

#GetOverYourselfYounger

#GetOverYourselfYounger

I read the following article recently (“OK boomer” isn’t just about the past. It’s about our apocalyptic future; URL:  https://www.vox.com/2019/11/19/20963757/what-is-ok-boomer-meme-about-meaning-gen-z-millennials?utm_source=pocket-newtab).  It makes some really salient points about the current situation regarding Baby Boomers (now in their 50s, 60s, early 70s).  Of course, it also discusses the “rage” presented by Generation Z (now single digits through early 20s) and the world they have inherited.  But it misses several major points that I believe need to be made.

Will Plastic Raining from the Sky Initiate Change?

Will Plastic Raining from the Sky Initiate Change?

Plastic microparticles have now been found in rainwater, meaning our atmosphere contains tiny pieces of trash that originate from our industrial society.  Our oceans, rivers, groundwater, and now air are polluted with plastic. 

These materials are not inert, but disrupt endocrine function, meaning they alter our hormones and can create an increased risk of cancer.  They are becoming so ubiquitous that we eat, drink, and breathe our own trash. 

Risk Elimination In Hunting And The Loss of Reward

Risk Elimination In Hunting And The Loss of Reward

I wonder how many folks reading this post have watched videos of people hunting dangerous game (i.e., animals capable of wounding or killing humans) with bows and noticed there is usually an armed contingent of people in association with the bow hunter. Sometimes this is a single person, sometimes more, who are armed with high-caliber firearms.  The bow hunter, who is almost always using a pulley bow, a weapon with much greater arrow speed, accuracy, and lethal distance than a hand-made wooden bow, is essentially protected by one or more armed bodyguards.  In fact, if the animal comes too close or charges prior to the arrow shot, it will be dispatched with the firearms.

, , ,

Lead ammunition . . . again

, , ,
Lead ammunition . . . again

Evidence is mounting (really, has already mounted) that lead bullets contaminate the carcasses of animals shot with them. I'm not discussing bird shot, but bullets used from rifles on terrestrial animals. Research shows that microscopic fragments tear free from the bullet and are found over a large portion of the carcass (i.e., they are not just restricted to the bullet wound). These fragments, which can number in the hundreds, are being passed on to the consumers when they eat the meat and are exposing them to a very toxic metal. It's time for awareness and a change. The entire blog article is available at the link below (and there is nothing to buy, no tracking, no selling your information, it is merely where I post my blogs).

Is the Acceptance of Physical Punishment a Symptom?

Is the Acceptance of Physical Punishment a Symptom?

Physical punishment is a commonly used parenting method in the United States—over 70% of parents utilize this technique for directing the behavior of children. It is so common and believed to be so necessary that parents who do not strike their children are sometimes chastised (the old adage is “spare the rod and spoil the child”).

 

Corporal punishment (as it is sometimes called) of children is likely something relatively new in our evolutionary history given observations of modern hunter-gatherers found it to be extremely rare (and these observations are suggestive that our Paleolithic ancestors may not have used this method).  It is very often the case that new social behaviors are harmful to the humans that experience them, especially later in life when the accumulations of various traumas impact health.  And even though there is evidence that physical punishment harms the developmental progress of children that are subjected to it, it is still widely used and widely supported by parents. 

Why You Should Consume Seafood ... Despite the Warnings

Why You Should Consume Seafood ... Despite the Warnings

Many people have read the dire warnings about the health consequences of consuming fish and shellfish.  These admonishments usually center on mercury contamination—most of which is produced by coal-fired facilities, chlorine production, and mining—which is converted to an organic form of mercury (methylmercury) by the action of various aquatic micro-organisms.  This organic form of mercury comes to be located in marine animals and bioaccumulates as one ascends the trophic ladder as progressively larger animals consume smaller ones.  Mercury is a real threat because it is linked to cognitive impacts in children (e.g., loss of IQ points, problems with attention, decreased memory function) and various health effects in adults (e.g., cardiovascular disease, autoimmune disease).  People are frequently told (through various media) to limit fish consumption to prevent mercury poisoning. 

"But Wild Food Is..."

"But Wild Food Is..."

I lecture on wild food frequently, discussing various issues that concern this subject to a wide variety of people.  For years, the information was received with interest and people appreciated learning about this part of our collective human history and what wild food can mean for human and ecosystem health.  In the last year or so, there has been an increasing number of criticisms about the message of wild food.  While these arguments center on important social issues, they are representative of a broader narrative that has become very pervasive and sometimes applied to topics that may not be core to the subject of privilege and power.

Have we traded some of our human-ness for longevity?

Have we traded some of our human-ness for longevity?

Many wild animals live longer in a captive setting.  While there are some exceptions (such as elephants), most animals provided with shelter, a constant supply of food and nutritional supplements, and protection from the wild interactions that might wound, maim, or kill them experience increases in longevity.  And despite the greater life expectancy and longer lifespan, most people understand that wild animals held in a zoo setting do not live the lives they were biologically intended to.

The Core Issue

The Core Issue

Many people have some level of awareness of the harm we are inflicting on this world.  In theory, they realize that if we degrade our landscapes, we will have no way to safely produce the food and raw materials we need to survive.  We employ modern fixes, such as green technologies, to both limit the ecological devastation and help us feel less depressed about humanity’s current situation.  Unfortunately, using industrial technology to fix problems caused by industrial technology is an ineffectual system of reversing ecocide—it can only slow the injury (at best).