David Attenborough: a life on our planet

[Paul Arden]

Not having children would be a bigger contribution. I really don’t know what the solution is. But I do see overpopulation as our root problem. We’re told that the planet can support 11 billion, but we are not doing a very good job with 7 billion. It seems totally ironic to me, that having children, in the numbers that we do, has the potential to make us all extinct.

Buy a pet! Or better still go fishing

Anyway we can’t turn the clocks back but we could at least try promote not having more than one child for some generations.

Cheers, Paul

[Boisker]

Perhaps we should pass a law....
Children... no flights
No children... flights

Works for me

[Paul Arden]

Just imagine international flights without screaming babies! I think you’re on to something here

[Carol]

Financial incentives may be the best way in countries where you are taxed. The more kids you have, the more you get taxed. In some Catholic cultures, a big family is the norm. My ex came from an Irish Catholic family with five kids. After we divorced he married a woman from India and they had four kids. How do you change the mindset where people feel that only having children will fulfill them? He is a well educated professional but couldn't see beyond that particular method of finding fulfillment. But what about poor cultures/nations? Folks in poverty tend to have the most children and are least able to afford it. It stems from losing children to disease and it's their security in old age. And how do you change the cultures where machismo reigns? How do you educate women to escape abusive machismo spouses so that they can hope for a life that is more than bearing/raising children? These are all difficult social questions and each culture needs to address them. The problem is, nobody is even asking the questions. God forbid a politician ask them because he/she would be voted out.

[Carol]

We justify a lot of things. For instance I can't eat legumes at all. So I eat chicken, some whey and nuts and seeds for protein. Although we're going to try Beyond Meat this week. And we live in friggin' Siberia, so we use more resources to stay warm.

Overall, though, not having kids means there are less resource-consumers on the planet, consumers that would want all manner of plastic trinkets as children, technology as they get older, and then a car to run from soccer practice to games and friends' homes. When you add it all up, I don't think flying can come close to the resources required and carbon footprint of feeding, clothing and raising them, to say nothing of them continuing on as adult consumers. Nevertheless, your point is taken. We all make choices, and hopefully we will, as a society, start making ones that consider the well being of the planet and other species.

[Paul Arden]

Unfortunately most people don’t look at the big picture and politics isn’t well set up for this. Elected for 4-5 years, promise the Earth and good times. No consideration about how we are leaving the planet for future generations.

I’ve fished in Siberia! It was warm. Unfortunately it’s getting warmer https://www.resourcesmag.org/common-res ... e-siberia/

Cheers, Paul

[Boisker]

It seems like a depressing situation to resolve... even if the political will was there the choices are pretty bleak..
People talk about reduction in birth rates, but apart from the political nightmare of enacting it, the reality is that many countries need more young people, if only to support the elderly who steadfastly refuse to die early
Life expectancy increases decade on decade due to improvements in medical care, but above the age of 65 Alzheimer’s / Dementia increase exponentially..... life expectancy has gone from about 70 to 78 since 1960 (US)...
By the middle of the century the number of cases of Alzheimer’s/ Dementia will have quadrupled, 16.5 % of the US population is over 65 and this is expected to increase to 22% by 2050... it was only 8% in 1950!.... and the oldest end of the old age segment is the fastest growing segment of the population at 12%.
So, looking forward... at a time when we have a massively expanding segment of the population that will require care and support from active working tax payers we also have the need to reduce population... but reducing the Population through reducing the % of young in the population seems massively fraught with risk and will have massive economic problems.

The above is very much a western picture, but one in which many developing countries are progressively heading in the same direction.

All people can do is make the right moral choice within which they feel comfortable.

For instance... I work in the env charity sector, within conservation / nature reserves, live in a small house, no kids, fly probably once a year, perhaps every other or third year longhaul.... I’m comfortable with that, to be honest if I could afford it, both in time and cash, I would no doubt fly more...
but let’s face it, that doesn’t put me in a position to judge anyone else or absolve myself of blame or responsibility.... none of my flights are essential, people’s lives don’t rely on them... I reckon we are all culpable

[Carol]

I’ve fished in Siberia! It was warm. Unfortunately it’s getting warmer.

The Dolores River Anglers chapter of Colorado TU in SW Colorado had an environmental study done on their waters about four years ago. It was estimated that in 17 years (now, 13 or less), there will be no trout below 9,000'. One can only suspect that the habitat reach of trout is going to shrink just about everywhere, including Siberia. Speaking of which, has anyone heard what the long-term effects might be of the poisoning of Avacha Bay in Kamchatka?