Anyway, this is the sequel.
First, I am going to make two presumptions:
- All of us basically accept that burning fossil fuel contributes to global warming and its ever-more-sinister consequences.
- All of us basically accept that we should do it less.
1. Impossible
Interestingly, Covid-19 briefly made high-carbon birding impossible. There are probably things other than a global pandemic that would do likewise, but realistically we need to focus on scenario 2...
2. Unpalatable
This one is tricky. How on earth do you make high-carbon birding unpalatable? That is, unpalatable to such an extent that birders no longer want to do it?
On the face of it, I can talk about low-carbon birding without too much hypocrisy. Virtually all my birding is local, and I have never flown abroad for a birding holiday.
But then I live on the coast, with lovely birding habitat on my doorstep. And I've been the twitching nutter in my youth and got it out of my system, so to speak. And the reason I have never flown abroad for a birding holiday is because it has never appealed. In other words, relatively low-carbon birding is not too much of a challenge or sacrifice for me. But suppose I lived in a city, or my livelihood depended on foreign birding tours? Well, you can see the problem. But from my 60+ years of life experience, I suspect the problem is actually far more intractable than the challenge posed by our various personal circumstances. And I'm going to illustrate how I see it by means of an analogy...
I grew up in a world where it was perfectly acceptable to smoke tobacco virtually anywhere you wanted to. You could smoke in the cinema, the football ground, the railway station, on public transport, in the pub, the restaurant, and very often in the workplace. I started smoking aged 12, and packed it in for the first time at 19. I finally knocked it on the head when I was 33. All those years of smoking I knew it would eventually kill me if I didn't stop. In more recent times, smoking has become increasingly restricted by means of the law. And it is far less socially acceptable these days too; huddling in the shady corner outside their office building, fag in hand, smokers probably feel like utter pariahs. And yet...and yet, millions and millions of people still smoke. Why? Knowing how deadly it is, how could they? Short answer? Because they want to.
On cigarette packets is an unambiguous message...
Does the prospect of an early grave put them off? Er...no.
Beat that, global warming!
In the normal course of things I am a cheerful optimist. However, when it come to low-carbon birding I fear the worst. On Twitter I have seen birders counter the issue by explaining that by choosing not to have children they are basically excused, thanks. And one of my favourite low-carbon birding advocates, Tim Allwood, constantly gets stuff like this...
I realise that a post of this nature is fairly out of character for NQS, but for some reason I cannot resist poking the hornet's nest. In a warped kind of way it amuses me. If my generation is the problem, well, in 30 years the vast majority of us will be gone! Meantime, I will endeavour to promote a birding ethos that finds fulfillment in what is mostly just down the road, if possible...
It's a global issue Gav. Take birding pollution out of it and it won't make a gnat's difference. I know, I know, that's just deferring onto the big corporations and evil lizard elite but it's true.
ReplyDeleteCows emit massive Co2 pollution from their backsides, me driving to a far flung spot to look at birds or have a dangle are genuinely insignificant unless I shoot a herd to compensate. Yes, were we all to abstain ...... it's still too little too late.
The UK is about 2% of the global problem too. Trump's makeup probably adds that much per anum. We've seen quiet roads and skies and it's a wake up. Jumbo jets are going to the big elephant grave yard, but they will be replaced when the world regains a modicum of normality.
I am pro ecology, anti pollution and have a level headed approach to life but global warming is beyond my help. I won't say I don't care, I see the effect on a daily process but I only concern myself with issues I can change and in a world run by oil money and the restrictions on how far an electric car can travel, there's little I can do. Also, I cannot afford a suitable hybrid that will do what I need my car to do so I'm bound to retain a diesel eater.
This is an issue that fine folk like yourself want to change from the tips of the flowers but it's the roots that need the attention and they are deep under ground.
But keep up the good work ;o)
I love your final paragraph Dave, nicely put. A post like this is just me popping in to the conference room, offering a comment, and heading out the door again. If it makes any difference whatsoever, it will be even less than the proverbial drop in the ocean. I know that, but sometimes I relish the mental exercise involved in constructing that comment.
DeleteAnd I agree, the issue is a global one. Personally I've been convinced for many years that mankind is incapable of stopping the rot, let alone reversing it. Doesn't stop me trying to be a slightly better person than I used to be...
Thanks for your thoughtful response Dave, much appreciated.
The idea that as we cannot change things individually, it is pointless to act, is never applied to other issues, like poverty, racism, plastics, smoking, drug use, and a multitude of other things.
DeleteThe charge of preaching is a common one too, and also seldom applied to other areas. However, I note that Chris Packham never gets accused of preaching when he mentions climate change, despite him actually having a huge carbon footprint and not backing his words up.
Individual action has been shown to be an effective way of encouraging others to take action. We cannot change the world on our own, but surely we can do our bit when we find ourselves in such dire circumstances?
If we take what action we can as individuals, talk about the issues with our friends and colleagues, then we at least stand a chance of averting the coming disaster. Yes, a lot of dangerous change is already locked in, but everything we can do now will make things less bad in the future.
I could turn the argument on its head and ask what on earth is the point bothering about all the "minor" issues, when they will be rendered largely inconsequential in the not-too-distant future...?
Well, you got me talking about it...
DeleteAgree with the gist of what you're saying Gavin and like how you accept low carbon birding is simple for you (& me what with there being an NNR so close). I often think that I should do more too. e.g. Should I ever drive? Don't drive for work [except when it's one of those surveys in an annoying location and time where public transport fails even in a built up county like Hampshire] but do drive for birding, sometimes... but then sometimes also thing "what's the point? What difference would it make?"
ReplyDeleteBeing young-ish and having grown up with the warnings and predictions my whole life and being aware that really action should've started before I was born, I can understand those who are trying to make the most of life now and enjoy their birding trips abroad etc, as what will life be like in 10, 20, 50 years time? If the predictions are true, it could easily not be worth living or be difficult to survive.
I'm constantly told about how much better it used to be (from a naturalist's perspective). You could seawatch off Hill Head in spring and see thousands of waders and terns pass through or in autumn have over 1000 terns to sift through with multiple Roseate, Black, Arctic etc etc. There were thousands of Wigeon on the reserve, Yellowhammers, and insect numbers, and well, the list goes on... Also have a copy of the Birds of Hampshire from the year I was born and again, it's a similar picture. Scary and sad, especially knowing it's not something I'll ever experience.
It feels like the damage is done, and the big changes needed - even bigger than one birder stopping their trips or twitching - is unlikely. Plus the fact that people don't even want to manage SPAs etc so that they're (human/dog) disturbance free says it all to me - we don't want change if it means big sacrifices, even if those sacrifices will have long term benefits for the greater good. But good to talk & blog about it though!
Ok, that was a bit of a ramble - sorry!
DeleteOn a side note, been reading the twitter responses too and there's one saying that whose who don't have children, don't have a stake in the future. Personally disagree with that and it reminds me of the many times people have gone on at me for saying I'm not interested in having children etc or the various comments saying childless people are selfish, and like, it's my (our) life and future too?! Amy
Hi Amy, very kind of you to take the time to write these comments. Yes, big changes are needed, and yes, I agree, they do seem out of reach. Still, despite all the changes for the worse, thankfully it is still possible to get enormous pleasure from our bird life and other aspects of natural history. And there is satisfaction in trying to do so in a way that sets a good example. Of course, that applies whether we are parents or not!
DeleteThanks again Amy.
Thanks Gavin - Agree one can still enjoy nature and I do, on the whole! Incidentally, sometimes during migration I had too high expectations so would become disappointed if it was a poor day, but this year I think lockdown has helped to refind the "right" level and enjoy & appreciate all of it. Just need to remind myself to lower expectations further on autumn ringing days! Their tapes are so loud / effective, even over 1km away, the canal path becomes rather eerie.
DeleteGav, to be fair, global warming doesn't bother me at all. That's because for the majority of the time this planet has played host to living things, the average temperature has been way higher, even double what it is today.
ReplyDeleteThe global warming issue is about what affects humans. More to the point, where those in power can lay their bets safe in the knowledge they are going to pay off. It affects the predictable outcomes, which is key.
For me the real issue is plastic waste. The ground down micro particles are everywhere. In everything. Ingested by everything, including us. However, none of this will stop. Apart from accepting that every piece of plastic I use makes me a hypocrite. There's an aspect of human nature that rules against.
It's called 'The Tragedy of the Commons'. It's about how people would prefer to totally destroy a situation, rather than keep it and let anyone else benefit from it.
Well Ric, that's an expression I've never come across before. So I googled it, and see that I now have a reading assignment! Ha ha! Thanks!*
Delete*That's an ironic 'thanks', obviously! ;)
I am glass half empty person in this debate. We're doomed. Humanity is too selfish, too entrenched, too stupid. As long as positive economic growth is the only major measure of success for so much of the population and their leaders, then nothing will change. Various clever initiatives may slow the change, but fundamentally the ongoing acquisition and accumulation of wealth is a broken system. Look how quickly, post lockdown, levels bounced right back up. In years to come these three months will not even register.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to birding lockdown has been great for a resurgence in local birding. Many many birders have professed to loving it. Many of those same birders were straight back into their cars and year-listing as soon as they could.
I'm a very long way from being a Saint unfortunately, my travel pre-2020 was excessive. Very excessive. Partly that stems from being a part of the system and being able to afford to do it, but a large part of it is that birding locally had become so unpleasant and so unrewarding due to the actions of my fellow man both locally and on other continents that it did not provide the "fix". A day birding in eastern europe for example will demonstrate beyond doubt how abysmal many parts of the UK are. I live in London, I have it bad. But 2020 has forced me to totally reevaluate my birding, which can only be a good thing.
Tim and Jonathan both put forward eloquent and cogent arguments. So, who is right? I think they both are. I'm now 60, and since getting on my first plane at the age of 23, I've probably flown no more than a dozen times, and never beyond Europe. But if I'm honest, I have to say that this isn't because of global environmental concerns, it's because I loathe airports and air travel. But generally, if the opportunity exists, people will do what they want. It's not just air travel. How many "ordinary" people these days drive enormous cars? I have a neighbour. It's just her and her daughter. Yet she drives a 4.5-litre Range Rover that has a fridge in the back. She has plenty of money (obviously), and that's the choice she makes. I agree with Jonathan, nothing will really change unless the basic capitalist economic model changes, and that ain't going to happen. Too many powerful vested interests (business, political etc). Or else, you would have to introduce some sort of draconian control over people's lives (restricting what they can drive, when, where and how they can travel etc), but who wants to live in that sort of society?
ReplyDeleteMalcolm
Hi Malcolm,
ReplyDeleteI think that in the not-too-distant future, people will be complaining that change wasn't imposed or made much more attractive to them. Just as with Covid-19, where people are now asking why we weren't locked down earlier. I've had several conversations with people who were not in favour of locking down at the time, but now say we should have done it as soon as possible.
I realise that everything is geared up to promote consumption, but look at this blogpost for starters - we've all made changes, me, Gav, Jono, you. People are rapidly getting behind doing things differently. It might not work, it might work a little but not well enough, or it might just work well enough to give us some time to keep the planet one where life is still pretty pleasant.
It's worth trying anyway. We need to talk about the issues and spread the message. People will get on board in increasing numbers...
Despite my gloom it is likely true that the sum of many small (and generally easy) changes could make a difference if adopted by many many people. It isn't just about getting on planes or not getting on planes (btw some positive COVID news has seen not only a dramatic reduction in air travel but also the mass retirement of many aging and comparatively inefficient aircraft), there are a ton of other things. Going veggie (for a regular family that is pretty meaningful and also reduces packagin waste), recycling everything you can, not always buying the latest and greatest, mending your clothes, growing your own produce (had my first beans last week, absolutely fabulous), cycling and walking, turning lights off and heating down, the list goes on and on. My fear is that all of this effort counts for sweet FA compared to the output of factories, flights, the impact of deforestation and all the many other things that all count as positive economic progess and GDP.
DeleteHi Tim
ReplyDeleteThanks for your response. Your observation that in the not-too-distant future, people will be complaining that change wasn't imposed or made much more attractive to them is a valid one, but I think it also illustrates the ultimate problem with people's behaviour. You could probably stop 100 people at random and ask them if they think taking action to halt climate change is important, and they would all say yes. But in the privacy of their own lives, they don't want this action to impact on their lifestyle and freedom of choice. Yes, when it's too late and they personally are suffering the consequences, they'll complain like hell. I think the madness of the scenes at some beaches and places like Snowdonia after lockdown was eased proves this. People were urged to be sensible, but so many weren't. If the consequences of that is a second lockdown, they'll blame the government, or other people. They won't take a long, hard, honest look at themselves. I guess I agree with Jonathan when he says that humanity is too selfish, too entrenched, too stupid. You, perhaps, have a slightly more charitable view of mankind, which is to your credit.
Malcolm
My grateful thanks to all of you for commenting on this post and sharing your thoughts; it's been a pleasure to read them. As I get older it becomes increasingly easy to look at the behaviour of fellow humans and wonder if any of them actually possess a conscience. Evidently some do. Thanks again...
ReplyDelete