The reliance on plastic - the plastic addiction - is only increasing.... Plastic clothes (polyester, nylon, etc.), plastic packaging, practically everything wrapped in plastic. Plastic has become an inescapable addiction - easy to use, easy to produce, but virtually impossible to get rid of. The world is full of microscopic plastic fibers that come from synthetic clothing, plastic that has decomposed into micro particles and plastic micro particles from many other sources ( many brands of teabags, for example, contain plastic in the bag, releasing billions of plastic particles from a single use teabag).
Plastic pollution removal requires dramatic change on many fronts. Instead, people placate themselves with feel good interventions, underestimating the seriousness and extent of what needs to be done. The plastic addiction is worldwide, but the means of properly disposing of plastic is nonexistent in much of the world. Plastic enters rivers and oceans daily by millions of kilos because hundreds of millions of people have no means of properly disposing of the plastic on which they depend. Proper waste management and proper disposal of plastic waste is virtually nonexistent in many countries. Most plastic waste already in the environment can only be removed by human labor, but there is no serious effort anywhere to provide consistent and fair wages for people to remove plastic pollution. Virtually no money is allocated to ensure that proper waste management and disposal of plastic becomes a universal goal to prevent the further destruction of the oceans. A comprehensive war against plastic pollution remains nonexistent.
Wednesday, October 30, 2019
Tuesday, October 29, 2019
Boyan Slat's River Device for Plastic Pollution: Pros and Cons
Plastic already in the oceans and environment, with millions of kilos of plastic trash added daily, cannot be easily removed. A new device that removes plastic from rivers before the plastic enters oceans is a needed technology. But if it fails to become part of what must become a comprehensive attack against plastic pollution, then it will achieve little.
The flow of plastic from certain rivers adds to the enormous daily flow of plastic into the oceans. Removing plastic from those rivers before the plastic enters into the oceans is an important step in the plastic pollution removal effort.
But an even more important step, which keeps getting ignored by the many well funded organizations concerned with ocean cleanups and plastic pollution, is the failure to remove plastic along coastlines and other areas that can only be removed by human labor. There is no technology that can remove plastic from coastlines, mangroves, river banks ,and land based areas. In many developing countries, the source of most plastic pollution entering into oceans, there is massive poverty and a ready labor force of millions of people desperate for work. Employing disadvantaged people to remove plastic pollution is straightforward and effective. In many developing countries, few can afford to be volunteers. Plastic pollution needs a sustained effort for its removal that only an employed workforce can achieve. There is a role for technology and for volunteers to play in the fight against plastic pollution. But as long as people keep expecting technology to save the day, or that plastic pollution can be removed on the cheap by relying on volunteers alone, then the plastic pollution problem will only get worse.
Employed labor, the most effective way to remove plastic pollution from coastlines, mangroves, river banks, forests and many other areas, means paying a fair wage. Most plastic pollution is not recyclable. Paying people only for recyclable plastic that they recover shortchanges them and the environment. People need stable employment and the environment needs all of the plastic trash removed, not just the minority of trash that is recyclable. Interventions that do not pay a fair, consistent wage are not effective in removing plastic from the environment.
To think most of the plastic pollution originates from certain rivers fails to recognize the enormous amounts of plastic that goes directly into the oceans from coastal communities and cities. The dumping of waste, including plastic, directly into the oceans continues in many places. Many ships, fishing boats and so forth dump their trash directly into the oceans.There are many locations where plastic trash on land ends up in the oceans not by forces of nature. Winds, storms and so forth carry enormous amounts of land based trash into oceans.
The enormous amount of plastic waste entering oceans daily from coastal communities and cities must not be underestimated. A large amount of plastic entering into rivers originates in the communities living along rivers. It is commonplace in many developing countries for people living along rivers to dump their plastic trash and other trash directly into rivers. Likewise, the plastic waste of hundreds of millions of people living in coastal areas have their plastic waste go directly into the oceans. Even if all the plastic that flows into oceans from rivers can be stopped, there will still be millions of kilos of plastic flowing daily into the oceans from coastal communities and cities. Refer to a December 13, 2016 YouTube video under my name called, "Coastal communities and The Failure To Save Oceans From Garbage", which shows the plastic waste from just one small coastal community.
Plastic is everywhere, even in the poorest of communities. In many impoverished areas, there is no waste management and nowhere to put plastic trash. The dumping of plastic into rivers and oceans will continue as long as the plastic addiction continues, combined with having no way to properly dispose of plastic.
Most plastic, including plastic bags, wrappers, packaging materials for candies, crackers, toothpaste, cosmetics, and thousands of other items that people use daily end up in the oceans in many places because they are materials that cannot be recycled, and there is no service to collect and dispose of the waste.
Once the river device removes plastic trash from rivers in developing nations, what happens next? Many landfills in developing countries are places where garbage is openly dumped and not secured. Winds and storms return trash in unsecured landfills and mountains of trash back into the environment.
Ensuring plastic waste is properly removed and buried or burned (such as in Sweden, where plastic is burned, used for energy, and contaminants are captured as much as possible), must be no less of a priority than the removal of plastic trash. Otherwise, plastic trash returns to the environment.
Micro plastics, synthetic clothing, the endless supply chain of plastic materials and failure to keep them out of the environment needs to be addressed. No river device is capable of screening out micro plastic particles and fibers.
Plastic pollution is an enormous problem. Boyan Slat's river device is a step in the right direction. But it is but one small part of what must become a comprehensive war against plastic pollution. Funding technology and volunteerism to the exclusion of employment only makes the plastic pollution problem worse.
Proper collection of plastic trash and properly disposing of plastic trash must become a world wide priority. Employed people must be at the forefront of the effort to remove plastic trash already in the environment. The plastic addiction must end. The companies that produce plastic or use it for their products must bear responsibility for the enormous cost of what plastic pollution inflicts upon the environment. Recycling is only of value if it keeps plastic pollution out of the environment. Thus far, decades of recycling have failed. Developed countries must stop shipping their plastic waste to developing countries already drowning in their own plastic under the pretense of recycling.
Unfortunately, the critical need to address poverty and plastic pollution by employing disadvantaged people continues to be ignored or dismissed. There is no device or machine that can go into mangroves, coastlines and many other places where only people can go and remove plastic pollution. Put river devices into rivers, ocean cleanup machines into ocean garbage patches, but do not continue failing to put people in the many plastic polluted areas where only people can go.
Plastic pollution has become another feel good cause, with people latching on to easy answers and inadequate solutions. Plastic pollution is a disaster. This man made disaster, many years in the making, needs many interventions. It is a war that must be fought on many fronts. Unfortunately, people want to focus on feel good, quick fix interventions.
The flow of plastic from certain rivers adds to the enormous daily flow of plastic into the oceans. Removing plastic from those rivers before the plastic enters into the oceans is an important step in the plastic pollution removal effort.
But an even more important step, which keeps getting ignored by the many well funded organizations concerned with ocean cleanups and plastic pollution, is the failure to remove plastic along coastlines and other areas that can only be removed by human labor. There is no technology that can remove plastic from coastlines, mangroves, river banks ,and land based areas. In many developing countries, the source of most plastic pollution entering into oceans, there is massive poverty and a ready labor force of millions of people desperate for work. Employing disadvantaged people to remove plastic pollution is straightforward and effective. In many developing countries, few can afford to be volunteers. Plastic pollution needs a sustained effort for its removal that only an employed workforce can achieve. There is a role for technology and for volunteers to play in the fight against plastic pollution. But as long as people keep expecting technology to save the day, or that plastic pollution can be removed on the cheap by relying on volunteers alone, then the plastic pollution problem will only get worse.
Employed labor, the most effective way to remove plastic pollution from coastlines, mangroves, river banks, forests and many other areas, means paying a fair wage. Most plastic pollution is not recyclable. Paying people only for recyclable plastic that they recover shortchanges them and the environment. People need stable employment and the environment needs all of the plastic trash removed, not just the minority of trash that is recyclable. Interventions that do not pay a fair, consistent wage are not effective in removing plastic from the environment.
To think most of the plastic pollution originates from certain rivers fails to recognize the enormous amounts of plastic that goes directly into the oceans from coastal communities and cities. The dumping of waste, including plastic, directly into the oceans continues in many places. Many ships, fishing boats and so forth dump their trash directly into the oceans.There are many locations where plastic trash on land ends up in the oceans not by forces of nature. Winds, storms and so forth carry enormous amounts of land based trash into oceans.
The enormous amount of plastic waste entering oceans daily from coastal communities and cities must not be underestimated. A large amount of plastic entering into rivers originates in the communities living along rivers. It is commonplace in many developing countries for people living along rivers to dump their plastic trash and other trash directly into rivers. Likewise, the plastic waste of hundreds of millions of people living in coastal areas have their plastic waste go directly into the oceans. Even if all the plastic that flows into oceans from rivers can be stopped, there will still be millions of kilos of plastic flowing daily into the oceans from coastal communities and cities. Refer to a December 13, 2016 YouTube video under my name called, "Coastal communities and The Failure To Save Oceans From Garbage", which shows the plastic waste from just one small coastal community.
Plastic is everywhere, even in the poorest of communities. In many impoverished areas, there is no waste management and nowhere to put plastic trash. The dumping of plastic into rivers and oceans will continue as long as the plastic addiction continues, combined with having no way to properly dispose of plastic.
Most plastic, including plastic bags, wrappers, packaging materials for candies, crackers, toothpaste, cosmetics, and thousands of other items that people use daily end up in the oceans in many places because they are materials that cannot be recycled, and there is no service to collect and dispose of the waste.
Once the river device removes plastic trash from rivers in developing nations, what happens next? Many landfills in developing countries are places where garbage is openly dumped and not secured. Winds and storms return trash in unsecured landfills and mountains of trash back into the environment.
Ensuring plastic waste is properly removed and buried or burned (such as in Sweden, where plastic is burned, used for energy, and contaminants are captured as much as possible), must be no less of a priority than the removal of plastic trash. Otherwise, plastic trash returns to the environment.
Micro plastics, synthetic clothing, the endless supply chain of plastic materials and failure to keep them out of the environment needs to be addressed. No river device is capable of screening out micro plastic particles and fibers.
Plastic pollution is an enormous problem. Boyan Slat's river device is a step in the right direction. But it is but one small part of what must become a comprehensive war against plastic pollution. Funding technology and volunteerism to the exclusion of employment only makes the plastic pollution problem worse.
Proper collection of plastic trash and properly disposing of plastic trash must become a world wide priority. Employed people must be at the forefront of the effort to remove plastic trash already in the environment. The plastic addiction must end. The companies that produce plastic or use it for their products must bear responsibility for the enormous cost of what plastic pollution inflicts upon the environment. Recycling is only of value if it keeps plastic pollution out of the environment. Thus far, decades of recycling have failed. Developed countries must stop shipping their plastic waste to developing countries already drowning in their own plastic under the pretense of recycling.
Unfortunately, the critical need to address poverty and plastic pollution by employing disadvantaged people continues to be ignored or dismissed. There is no device or machine that can go into mangroves, coastlines and many other places where only people can go and remove plastic pollution. Put river devices into rivers, ocean cleanup machines into ocean garbage patches, but do not continue failing to put people in the many plastic polluted areas where only people can go.
Plastic pollution has become another feel good cause, with people latching on to easy answers and inadequate solutions. Plastic pollution is a disaster. This man made disaster, many years in the making, needs many interventions. It is a war that must be fought on many fronts. Unfortunately, people want to focus on feel good, quick fix interventions.
Saturday, October 26, 2019
Will Federal Felony Animal Cruelty Laws Help Animals?
Laws regarding murder, rape, child abuse, domestic violence and other violent crimes are almost always enforced on the state level. Murder, rape and many other violent crimes do not require federal statutes because everyone understands that not only are these laws on the books of states, but the police actually enforce the laws.
Animal cruelty, including dog fighting, is minimally enforced. Anti domestic violence and anti drunk driving organizations advocated for a widespread appropriate police response to those crimes decades ago, and continue to do so today. They did not argue that because there was a minimal police response, a mother from an anti drunk driving organization or someone from an anti domestic violence organization would substitute for the police.
When it comes to animal cruelty, numerous animal organizations fall all over themselves to present themselves as the go to place that investigates animal cruelty. They are enablers helping law enforcement to minimally respond to animal cruelty related crimes.
Many are the times dog fighters and animal abusers move their animals to another location after getting paid a visit from a humane investigator or someone else from an animal organization.
There is no excuse for any animal organization to conduct criminal investigations of any sort, including for animal cruelty and dog fighting. This matter belongs in the hands of the police - this is what animal organizations concerned about animal cruelty and dog fighting should advocate for, and have completely failed to do for decades now.
Token police forces or teams fielded to respond to animal cruelty are ineffective and do little more than placate the public. They, no different than ineffective, often harmful humane investigators, enable larger law enforcement to continue ignoring or minimally respond to dog fighting and animal cruelty.
Because animal cruelty and dog fighting can take place anytime, anywhere, only public law enforcement has the ability to respond appropriately to these crimes. Imagine if special teams were used to enforce drunk driving and domestic violence. This means that when those teams are off duty, or tied up at one location while the crime is occurring at another, no one gets arrested. Over 99 per cent of every drunk driver and domestic violence offender would never get caught or arrested if the police respond to those crimes as they do to animal cruelty.
Absent for decades now is advocacy to ensure law enforcement responds appropriately and in a timely manner to calls of dog fighting and animal cruelty, including when officers during the course of their tours of duty encounter these crimes on their own.
As long as the lack of enforcement continues, as long as animal organizations continue doing ineffectively and disgracefully what the police should be doing, as long as there is no widespread and appropriate police response to animal cruelty and dog fighting, then it does not matter how many more laws are put on the books. Animal abuse and dog fighting will persist as exploited and rarely enforced crimes.
If only group think did not exist, and someone somewhere that truly cares about animals investigated the poor police response to animal cruelty and dog fighting calls, they could expose what I have been unsuccessful in exposing. Animal cruelty and dog fighting continues to have an extremely poor police response, with very few exceptions. The paper trail of this is easy to locate. Unfortunately, people will complain about animal cruelty, but no one is interested in making sure there is an effective response to it. Token teams fielded by a police department are no better than if token teams exist for drunk driving, domestic violence, murder or any other crime of violence. If most of law enforcement ignores or minimally responds to a crime, that crime will flourish. Widespread appropriate enforcement, not token teams, are needed for all crimes, especially crimes of violence. Animal cruelty should not continue to be the exception.
If that same person also investigates the animal organizations that claim to investigate animal cruelty, they would see firsthand how these organizations are ineffective and often harmful. It is not uncommon for these organizations to provide animal abusers and dog fighters a heads up moment or opportunity to move their animals and continue their crimes against animals elsewhere. Its no different than if they knocked on the door of a drug dealer. The drug dealer will not let anyone in if there is no warrant (getting warrants often requires a lot of effort and police work ), and will move his drugs elsewhere after realizing he or she has been exposed.
Lessening or stopping animal cruelty and dog fighting will never happen as long as minimal enforcement continues to exist, along with ineffective, often harmful so called investigations by non police animal organizations.
Federal laws, any law, means nothing in the absence of widespread meaningful enforcement.
It is for these reasons that there are few arrests for animal cruelty in relation to how common and widespread are these crimes.
It is for these reasons that dog fighters have a greater chance of getting struck by lightning than ever getting arrested.
Making animal cruelty a federal offense makes a lot of people feel good. It helps politicians because, after all, who will say this is not a good thing? It will enrich the careers and coffers of certain individuals and animal organizations that will claim success. But for suffering animals, little to nothing will get better because the absence of laws was not the problem. The absence of widespread, appropriate and timely enforcement of new and existing laws is the problem.
Animal cruelty, including dog fighting, is minimally enforced. Anti domestic violence and anti drunk driving organizations advocated for a widespread appropriate police response to those crimes decades ago, and continue to do so today. They did not argue that because there was a minimal police response, a mother from an anti drunk driving organization or someone from an anti domestic violence organization would substitute for the police.
When it comes to animal cruelty, numerous animal organizations fall all over themselves to present themselves as the go to place that investigates animal cruelty. They are enablers helping law enforcement to minimally respond to animal cruelty related crimes.
Many are the times dog fighters and animal abusers move their animals to another location after getting paid a visit from a humane investigator or someone else from an animal organization.
There is no excuse for any animal organization to conduct criminal investigations of any sort, including for animal cruelty and dog fighting. This matter belongs in the hands of the police - this is what animal organizations concerned about animal cruelty and dog fighting should advocate for, and have completely failed to do for decades now.
Token police forces or teams fielded to respond to animal cruelty are ineffective and do little more than placate the public. They, no different than ineffective, often harmful humane investigators, enable larger law enforcement to continue ignoring or minimally respond to dog fighting and animal cruelty.
Because animal cruelty and dog fighting can take place anytime, anywhere, only public law enforcement has the ability to respond appropriately to these crimes. Imagine if special teams were used to enforce drunk driving and domestic violence. This means that when those teams are off duty, or tied up at one location while the crime is occurring at another, no one gets arrested. Over 99 per cent of every drunk driver and domestic violence offender would never get caught or arrested if the police respond to those crimes as they do to animal cruelty.
Absent for decades now is advocacy to ensure law enforcement responds appropriately and in a timely manner to calls of dog fighting and animal cruelty, including when officers during the course of their tours of duty encounter these crimes on their own.
As long as the lack of enforcement continues, as long as animal organizations continue doing ineffectively and disgracefully what the police should be doing, as long as there is no widespread and appropriate police response to animal cruelty and dog fighting, then it does not matter how many more laws are put on the books. Animal abuse and dog fighting will persist as exploited and rarely enforced crimes.
If only group think did not exist, and someone somewhere that truly cares about animals investigated the poor police response to animal cruelty and dog fighting calls, they could expose what I have been unsuccessful in exposing. Animal cruelty and dog fighting continues to have an extremely poor police response, with very few exceptions. The paper trail of this is easy to locate. Unfortunately, people will complain about animal cruelty, but no one is interested in making sure there is an effective response to it. Token teams fielded by a police department are no better than if token teams exist for drunk driving, domestic violence, murder or any other crime of violence. If most of law enforcement ignores or minimally responds to a crime, that crime will flourish. Widespread appropriate enforcement, not token teams, are needed for all crimes, especially crimes of violence. Animal cruelty should not continue to be the exception.
If that same person also investigates the animal organizations that claim to investigate animal cruelty, they would see firsthand how these organizations are ineffective and often harmful. It is not uncommon for these organizations to provide animal abusers and dog fighters a heads up moment or opportunity to move their animals and continue their crimes against animals elsewhere. Its no different than if they knocked on the door of a drug dealer. The drug dealer will not let anyone in if there is no warrant (getting warrants often requires a lot of effort and police work ), and will move his drugs elsewhere after realizing he or she has been exposed.
Lessening or stopping animal cruelty and dog fighting will never happen as long as minimal enforcement continues to exist, along with ineffective, often harmful so called investigations by non police animal organizations.
Federal laws, any law, means nothing in the absence of widespread meaningful enforcement.
It is for these reasons that there are few arrests for animal cruelty in relation to how common and widespread are these crimes.
It is for these reasons that dog fighters have a greater chance of getting struck by lightning than ever getting arrested.
Making animal cruelty a federal offense makes a lot of people feel good. It helps politicians because, after all, who will say this is not a good thing? It will enrich the careers and coffers of certain individuals and animal organizations that will claim success. But for suffering animals, little to nothing will get better because the absence of laws was not the problem. The absence of widespread, appropriate and timely enforcement of new and existing laws is the problem.
Monday, October 21, 2019
Facebook's Arbitrary Censorship About Plastic Pollution: Unlimited Power Granted A Social Media Monopoly
Facebook is a social media monopoly with no competition. How it was allowed to become the all encompassing giant that it is now speaks to the failure of the government to properly regulate and enforce laws and rules pertaining to monopolies.
There are some things that should be done immediately to stop Facebook's unregulated control and power over free speech and the press. When a supersized corporation controls the press, censoring arbitrarily and without explanation, it kills the first amendment. There is no freedom of the press when the free press no longer exists and is owned by supersized corporations.
I wrote some blogs about plastic pollution. Someone did not like what I wrote, and had Facebook block me. Facebook blocked me without providing an explanation and without providing any avenue by which I could argue why I should not be censored.
In case anyone is interested, the material Facebook found so damaging and worthy of blocking is as follows:
I wrote about how plastic pollution is not properly addressed. I advocated for the widespread employment of disadvantaged people to be paid to remove plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas. I discussed why this is the most effective approach to the cleanup portion of the plastic pollution crisis, and why employment, not technology or volunteerism, must come first. I also wrote about how plastic straw bans are being used to ignore the wider issue of plastic pollution. I support plastic straw bans, but believe the ban campaign must also address the far more urgent need to remove plastic already in the environment, and to stop the daily flood of new plastic into the oceans. Plastic straws are but a tiny amount of the total plastic pollution problem, yet they are far too often used as the excuse to ignore or do nothing about the over 99 per cent of plastic pollution that is not plastic straws. I wrote about how recycling is not working, and how wrong it is for developed nations to ship plastic waste to developing nations already drowning in their own plastic waste. Removing plastic waste from the environment, and keeping new plastic waste out of the environment must be the priority, not recycling. If recycling helps achieve this, then it has a role to play. Properly disposing of plastic waste; getting it out of the environment and keeping it out of the environment must come first. I argued vigorously for the immediate widespread employment of disadvantaged people to remove plastic waste from the environment before the plastic waste breaks down further into unrecoverable pieces. In this way, impoverished people and the environment are helped.
In my writings about plastic pollution, I discuss critically a serious problem that is destroying oceans, wildlife and more. There is no defamation of character. None of my blogs advocate hate, violence, or harm to other people. Instead of refuting my arguments, someone or somebody complained to Facebook, which then blocked me without any explanation.
There is no number or web address that Facebook provides where a live person can be reached.. There is no place to refute Facebook's arbitrary, unexplained censorship.
Facebook must hire live people to respond to their censorship. Censored people must be allowed legitimate avenues to contest Facebook's arbitrary censorship.
Facebook has already done enough damage to American democracy (think of the last presidential elections and Russian hacking and interference).
The overpaid executives at Facebook must employ people to respond to phone calls or online web chats. No company should have so much unlimited power over the media without a live person anywhere in sight to respond to complaints and unexplained censorship.
There are some things that should be done immediately to stop Facebook's unregulated control and power over free speech and the press. When a supersized corporation controls the press, censoring arbitrarily and without explanation, it kills the first amendment. There is no freedom of the press when the free press no longer exists and is owned by supersized corporations.
I wrote some blogs about plastic pollution. Someone did not like what I wrote, and had Facebook block me. Facebook blocked me without providing an explanation and without providing any avenue by which I could argue why I should not be censored.
In case anyone is interested, the material Facebook found so damaging and worthy of blocking is as follows:
I wrote about how plastic pollution is not properly addressed. I advocated for the widespread employment of disadvantaged people to be paid to remove plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas. I discussed why this is the most effective approach to the cleanup portion of the plastic pollution crisis, and why employment, not technology or volunteerism, must come first. I also wrote about how plastic straw bans are being used to ignore the wider issue of plastic pollution. I support plastic straw bans, but believe the ban campaign must also address the far more urgent need to remove plastic already in the environment, and to stop the daily flood of new plastic into the oceans. Plastic straws are but a tiny amount of the total plastic pollution problem, yet they are far too often used as the excuse to ignore or do nothing about the over 99 per cent of plastic pollution that is not plastic straws. I wrote about how recycling is not working, and how wrong it is for developed nations to ship plastic waste to developing nations already drowning in their own plastic waste. Removing plastic waste from the environment, and keeping new plastic waste out of the environment must be the priority, not recycling. If recycling helps achieve this, then it has a role to play. Properly disposing of plastic waste; getting it out of the environment and keeping it out of the environment must come first. I argued vigorously for the immediate widespread employment of disadvantaged people to remove plastic waste from the environment before the plastic waste breaks down further into unrecoverable pieces. In this way, impoverished people and the environment are helped.
In my writings about plastic pollution, I discuss critically a serious problem that is destroying oceans, wildlife and more. There is no defamation of character. None of my blogs advocate hate, violence, or harm to other people. Instead of refuting my arguments, someone or somebody complained to Facebook, which then blocked me without any explanation.
There is no number or web address that Facebook provides where a live person can be reached.. There is no place to refute Facebook's arbitrary, unexplained censorship.
Facebook must hire live people to respond to their censorship. Censored people must be allowed legitimate avenues to contest Facebook's arbitrary censorship.
Facebook has already done enough damage to American democracy (think of the last presidential elections and Russian hacking and interference).
The overpaid executives at Facebook must employ people to respond to phone calls or online web chats. No company should have so much unlimited power over the media without a live person anywhere in sight to respond to complaints and unexplained censorship.
Wednesday, October 16, 2019
The War Path That Trump, Ron Paul and Company Chose. Betrayal Of the Kurds
News reports state that an earlier arrangement made between the United States and Turkey meant that certain heavy weapons were taken away from the Kurds, making them even more vulnerable to the present Turkish invasion.
When Ron Paul talks about Americans not engaging in senseless foreign wars, does he not understand the role the United States has played in preventing wars? Why does the U.S. have troops stationed in South Korea and elsewhere? Does he want those troops pulled out?
The small number of American troops that were embedded with the Kurds, one of the most reliable allies the United States had, were not at war. They were, in fact, helping keep the peace.
This is not the same as the American invasion of Iraq, or U.S. involvement in Libya.
The United States has played an important role in keeping the peace and preventing war. Ron Paul isolationists do not understand this.
The Kurds were a U.S. ally. Notice this is written in the past tense. Betraying an ally and leaving them to be slaughtered like sheep is what Trump, Ron Paul and their ilk provided.
Perhaps Kim Jong-un will pick up the phone and call Trump, letting him know that he will invade South Korea and that Trump should remove all American troops.
When Ron Paul talks about Americans not engaging in senseless foreign wars, does he not understand the role the United States has played in preventing wars? Why does the U.S. have troops stationed in South Korea and elsewhere? Does he want those troops pulled out?
The small number of American troops that were embedded with the Kurds, one of the most reliable allies the United States had, were not at war. They were, in fact, helping keep the peace.
This is not the same as the American invasion of Iraq, or U.S. involvement in Libya.
The United States has played an important role in keeping the peace and preventing war. Ron Paul isolationists do not understand this.
The Kurds were a U.S. ally. Notice this is written in the past tense. Betraying an ally and leaving them to be slaughtered like sheep is what Trump, Ron Paul and their ilk provided.
Perhaps Kim Jong-un will pick up the phone and call Trump, letting him know that he will invade South Korea and that Trump should remove all American troops.
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
Workers, Not Technology, Must Be Priority In Plastic Pollution Fight
Technology receives far too much attention and funding to the exclusion of basic employment.
The cleanup portion of the plastic pollution crisis must expand far beyond volunteerism and reliance upon technology into actual employment. Millions of impoverished people the world over desperately need work, and the environment is in critical need of having plastic pollution removed. Employment must become the core element of the plastic cleanup effort. One small nonprofit organization employs disadvantaged people to do plastic cleanups. It can set the spark and be an example of what needs to be done, but this employment effort has to be embraced by larger nonprofits, for profits and government entities. There is far too much plastic pollution already in the environment, with millions of kilos more entering daily. Volunteers and technology can supplement what must become a massive anti poverty/environmental project. There is no technology or volunteer effort that can ever come close to removing the plastic pollution that employed people can remove. Every day in which people are not employed to remove plastic is another day in which enormous amounts of plastic that could have been captured and removed from the environment never will be.
People need work, and the environment needs to be cleaned. Instead of seeking technological miracles, people that truly care about the oceans, wildlife and the environment need to get serious about removing plastic pollution by providing actual employment. There is no technology that can come anywhere near removing the amount of plastic pollution that employed people can remove - especially in developing countries, where there is massive poverty and plastic pollution, and where few can afford to be volunteers. Employed people can remove enormous amounts of plastic along coastlines and other areas that no technology or volunteer effort can ever come close to removing. Technology can be utilized in areas where human grit and labor cannot go, such as in the middle of the ocean. But even then, the plastic that technology can pull from the oceans will never come close to removing what humans can remove from coasts and other areas. Plastic accumulates along coasts, brought in from lands, rivers, and from the oceans themselves that return plastic to the coasts through waves, tides, currents and storms. The more plastic removed from coasts and other areas, the less plastic goes into the oceans or return to the oceans. If plastic is not captured along coasts and other areas by human labor, it will break down into smaller plastic pieces that can never be recovered. Hoping for technology to rescue oceans, wildlife and humanity from the plastic pollution disaster may make people feel good, and it certainly attracts funds, donors and celebrity attention, but it will not rescue oceans, wildlife or humanity from this disaster. Employing disadvantaged people to remove plastic pollution from coasts and other areas needs to be front and center. Helping people rise out of poverty by providing employment while cleaning the environment from plastic pollution makes sense. Why this simple, workable and most productive and effective way to remove plastic pollution from the environment continues to be ignored is disgraceful.
Monday, October 14, 2019
Did Trump Betray The Kurds?
It is said that after a conversation with the Islamist dictator of Turkey, Erdogan, Trump decided to remove the small number of Americans that were assisting the Kurds on the Syrian side. Trump gave convoluted reasons for his decision, including some nonsense about the Kurds not being present during Normandy.
Defense Secretary Esper said that the 50 or so Americans that were with the Kurds were pulled out because the administration knew the Turks and their allied Arab militias were going to attack, and so the Americans were taken out of harms way.
What is the truth? Did Trump's conversation with Erdogan and Trump's decision to pull out the Americans embedded with the Kurds provide the green light for the invasion, and now the administration is covering its tracks?
If Trump knew Turkey was going to attack the Kurds, then what, if anything, did he do to stop the invasion? Trump said he is a masterful negotiator. Are we to assume he could do nothing to stop the Turkish invasion, assuming he did not green light it? Or that he plain did not care?
If Trump knew Turkey was going to attack the Kurds, then what, if anything, did he do to stop the invasion? Trump said he is a masterful negotiator. Are we to assume he could do nothing to stop the Turkish invasion, assuming he did not green light it? Or that he plain did not care?
Why did Trump decide to pull out the small number of Americans, which is now followed up with the removal of the other 1000 or so American troops working with the Kurds?
The argument that Americans must stop being involved in overseas conflicts only makes sense if there was actually a conflict. While the Americans were with the Kurds in the Kurdish controlled zone, there was peace. The American presence deterred Turkey, Assad and Russia.
If Trump gave the green light to Turkey, then Trump and his administration bear full responsibility for the harm that is now befalling the Kurdish population, for the ISIS Islamist prisoners that the Kurds were guarding and that escaped, and for throwing one of America's most dependable allies under the bus and into the arms of the Russians, Assad regime and Iran.
Friday, October 11, 2019
Plastic Straw Ban: Helps Or Hinders Fight Against Plastic Pollution?
Reducing plastic pollution will not be helped by expending massive amounts of money and effort on what is not a significant source of plastic pollution - plastic straws. Such an effort may be justified by some that believe stopping plastic straws is the gateway to a greater awareness about plastic pollution. But the opposite is happening, in which plastic straw bans are the excuse by many to continue doing little to nothing about plastic pollution under the pretense that something important is being done.
There is a critical need to remove plastic pollution already in the environment. Nonprofits concerned about plastic pollution should immediately employ disadvantaged people in developing countries to remove plastic pollution from coasts and other areas.
In developing countries, the source of most plastic pollution, many people desperately need work. There is no excuse to not employ this motivated workforce. Technology and volunteer efforts can supplement their efforts but can never achieve anywhere near what motivated workers paid a decent wage can achieve in removing plastic waste from the environment.
Every single day that people in need of work in developing countries and elsewhere are not employed to remove plastic pollution from coasts and other areas is another day in which enormous amounts of plastic trash enter into the oceans that could have been stopped. It is inexcusable to not provide this employment, thereby helping people and significantly decreasing plastic trash already in the environment.
Plastic accumulates along coasts from lands and rivers. Oceans are full of plastic trash. Waves, tides, currents and storms returns plastic from oceans back to the coasts. Removing plastic from the coasts protects the oceans and lands, and prevents plastic from breaking down into smaller pieces that never can be recovered once they enter or re-enter the oceans.
Ensure plastic is either properly burned, like in Sweden, or buried properly in secured landfills. Far too much plastic waste goes into open pits or garbage mountains in many developing countries, or is burned out in the open, exposing people and the environment to toxic gases and toxic ash.
Prioritize cleaning up the environment from the plastic waste already present. Fight for better collection and disposable of plastic and other oil based waste the world over. Fight to reduce the enormous amount of new plastic waste entering the environment daily. Lead the way to the use of alternative materials to wean humanity from the plastic addiction. There is so much that needs to be done, and this is only a partial list.
Do not allow plastic straws to be a diversion from seriously addressing the catastrophic plastic pollution problem before our oceans, wildlife and more are completely destroyed. If plastic straws cease to exist, it will not make a dent in the millions of kilos of plastic, Styrofoam and other oil based trash pouring into the oceans daily.
Ban the straws, but do so much more.
There is a critical need to remove plastic pollution already in the environment. Nonprofits concerned about plastic pollution should immediately employ disadvantaged people in developing countries to remove plastic pollution from coasts and other areas.
In developing countries, the source of most plastic pollution, many people desperately need work. There is no excuse to not employ this motivated workforce. Technology and volunteer efforts can supplement their efforts but can never achieve anywhere near what motivated workers paid a decent wage can achieve in removing plastic waste from the environment.
Every single day that people in need of work in developing countries and elsewhere are not employed to remove plastic pollution from coasts and other areas is another day in which enormous amounts of plastic trash enter into the oceans that could have been stopped. It is inexcusable to not provide this employment, thereby helping people and significantly decreasing plastic trash already in the environment.
Plastic accumulates along coasts from lands and rivers. Oceans are full of plastic trash. Waves, tides, currents and storms returns plastic from oceans back to the coasts. Removing plastic from the coasts protects the oceans and lands, and prevents plastic from breaking down into smaller pieces that never can be recovered once they enter or re-enter the oceans.
Ensure plastic is either properly burned, like in Sweden, or buried properly in secured landfills. Far too much plastic waste goes into open pits or garbage mountains in many developing countries, or is burned out in the open, exposing people and the environment to toxic gases and toxic ash.
Prioritize cleaning up the environment from the plastic waste already present. Fight for better collection and disposable of plastic and other oil based waste the world over. Fight to reduce the enormous amount of new plastic waste entering the environment daily. Lead the way to the use of alternative materials to wean humanity from the plastic addiction. There is so much that needs to be done, and this is only a partial list.
Do not allow plastic straws to be a diversion from seriously addressing the catastrophic plastic pollution problem before our oceans, wildlife and more are completely destroyed. If plastic straws cease to exist, it will not make a dent in the millions of kilos of plastic, Styrofoam and other oil based trash pouring into the oceans daily.
Ban the straws, but do so much more.
Rethinking Recycling And Plastic Pollution
An MIT researcher says we should trash all our recyclable plastic.
Most plastic material and oil based non biodegradable material, synthetic clothing included, is not recyclable. Of the plastic that is recyclable, it is important to ask if the benefit of recycling outweighs the environmental cost. In many places where people think there is recycling, there is in fact little to none, or the plastic gets shipped to developing countries already drowning in their own plastic waste.
Sweden generates energy by burning its plastic waste as efficiently and cleanly as is possible with today's existing technologies. This is far preferable to the open burning of plastic that is common in many places, which exposes people to harmful carcinogens and contaminates the environment.
Burying plastic waste in landfills is common, but properly burying plastic waste in landfills is not. Many places bury plastic waste in open pits or in improper sites where winds, rains, storms, waters and time bring it back into the larger environment.
Plastic waste is only getting worse. Recycling is often not working. Furthermore, most plastic waste cannot be recycled. The priority must be on keeping plastic waste out of the oceans and environment and ensuring this is achieved. This, not recycling, must be the goal. If recycling helps achieve this, then it has a role to play. The nonsense that has gone on for years in which developed countries ship their plastic waste to developing countries under the guise of recycling must stop.
The millions of kilos of new plastic trash entering the oceans daily must be stopped or at least slowed.
Effort must focus on cleaning up plastic pollution already in the environment. This cleanup effort must become the most massive anti poverty employment program the world has ever seen, supplemented by the use of technology and volunteers.
Money and resources must be devoted to ensuring plastic waste that does go into landfills is properly buried. The controlled burning that Sweden does must also be considered.
The plastic addiction must be fought. It is hard to understand how technology has come so far in so many fields, and yet the primitive reliance on plastic materials only gets worse. Imagine if the same effort that goes into designing ways to kill each other was instead directed towards finding affordable materials that do not harm oceans, rivers, lakes, wildlife, and people.
Most plastic material and oil based non biodegradable material, synthetic clothing included, is not recyclable. Of the plastic that is recyclable, it is important to ask if the benefit of recycling outweighs the environmental cost. In many places where people think there is recycling, there is in fact little to none, or the plastic gets shipped to developing countries already drowning in their own plastic waste.
Sweden generates energy by burning its plastic waste as efficiently and cleanly as is possible with today's existing technologies. This is far preferable to the open burning of plastic that is common in many places, which exposes people to harmful carcinogens and contaminates the environment.
Burying plastic waste in landfills is common, but properly burying plastic waste in landfills is not. Many places bury plastic waste in open pits or in improper sites where winds, rains, storms, waters and time bring it back into the larger environment.
Plastic waste is only getting worse. Recycling is often not working. Furthermore, most plastic waste cannot be recycled. The priority must be on keeping plastic waste out of the oceans and environment and ensuring this is achieved. This, not recycling, must be the goal. If recycling helps achieve this, then it has a role to play. The nonsense that has gone on for years in which developed countries ship their plastic waste to developing countries under the guise of recycling must stop.
The millions of kilos of new plastic trash entering the oceans daily must be stopped or at least slowed.
Effort must focus on cleaning up plastic pollution already in the environment. This cleanup effort must become the most massive anti poverty employment program the world has ever seen, supplemented by the use of technology and volunteers.
Money and resources must be devoted to ensuring plastic waste that does go into landfills is properly buried. The controlled burning that Sweden does must also be considered.
The plastic addiction must be fought. It is hard to understand how technology has come so far in so many fields, and yet the primitive reliance on plastic materials only gets worse. Imagine if the same effort that goes into designing ways to kill each other was instead directed towards finding affordable materials that do not harm oceans, rivers, lakes, wildlife, and people.
Monday, October 7, 2019
The Kurdish People Must Not Be Abandoned
The Kurds have been at the forefront of the fight against ISIS. They have been strong and reliable allies.
Bush attacking Iraq, followed by Obama's hurried retreat and meaningless red lines (which strengthened the hand of the ISIS Islamic fanatics), must not now be compounded by abandoning the Kurds.
More blood must not be shed from foolish, brash decisions.
Bush attacking Iraq, followed by Obama's hurried retreat and meaningless red lines (which strengthened the hand of the ISIS Islamic fanatics), must not now be compounded by abandoning the Kurds.
More blood must not be shed from foolish, brash decisions.
Friday, October 4, 2019
Boyan Slat's Ocean Cleanup: Garbage Patch, Plastic Pollution And What Is Missing
First, the problem. Trillions upon trillions of plastic particles, pieces and fibers (fibers from synthetic clothing, polyester, nylon, acrylic, etc.) already are in the oceans. Every single day, millions upon millions of pounds and kilos of additional plastic enters into the oceans.
Much of the plastic breaks down and disperses. Waves, tides and storms brings a lot of the plastic already in the oceans back to coasts and rivers. Lands and rivers brings new plastic into the oceans. Meanwhile, plastic, Styrofoam and other oil based non biodegradable materials keep breaking down into smaller and smaller particles that eventually are impossible to capture or recover. Eventually these particles break down into pieces too small to be seen and that never degrade. And so, there they are, trillions upon trillions of plastic particles endlessly polluting the oceans, coasts, lands and rivers and other waters, and endlessly harming wildlife and humans.
A recent study of plastic waste collecting in the ocean garbage patches suggests this waste is coming from ships, and that it is not originating from the land. So where are all the millions of kilos of plastic entering into the oceans daily going? It disperses, and does not make it to the garbage patches.
Even if the garbage patches are completely cleaned, it will not help with the enormous amount of plastic already in the oceans, with millions of additional kilos entering every day.
Plastic pollution cleanup efforts need three strong approaches. Of the three, the one that is most effective and needed the most is the one least funded and least considered.
Volunteer cleanups, such as beach cleanups, receive a lot of attention and funding. These work best in developed countries where people can afford to be volunteers. But even in developed countries, these efforts are often sporadic and not consistent. Many under served areas receive no cleanups.
In developing nations, there is mass poverty. Few can afford to be volunteers.
Employing people in need of work - disadvantaged people - to cleanup coasts and other areas, an actual employment project that can and should employ millions, is near nonexistent.
The much advertised technology that Boyan Slat offers receives millions of dollars of funding.
Just to be clear, if his technology works, as he says it does or will in the future, then let us hope he cleans the garbage patches as he says he will.
But imagine if even one tenth of the millions of dollars his organization receives was directed at employing disadvantaged people to remove plastic from coasts and other areas. An employed force cleaning up plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas will remove far more plastic pollution than any technology or volunteer effort ever can, at far less cost than any technology.
This is not to say Boyan Slat should not continue his effort to cleanup the garbage patches.
But the failure to employ the low tech, far less costly simple approach of providing employment to disadvantaged people to do hands on cleanups means losing the critical opportunity to prevent trillions of kilos of plastic pollution already littering coastlines and other accessible areas from breaking down further into forever damaging unrecoverable pieces.
The plastic pollution cleanup portion of the plastic pollution disaster needs three things:
1. Employed workers doing the cleanups.
2. Volunteer cleanups.
3. Technologies that can clean areas that laborers cannot cleanup, such as ocean garbage patches.
Of the three things needed for plastic pollution cleanups, the core of the effort must be on employed workers because that is what will achieve the most in terms of helping people and in removing the most amount of plastic.
Volunteerism and technology, instead of being the primary focus of the effort, as they are now, must be seen as the supplementation to the core effort.
How effective is Boyan Slat's technology? There needs to be an objective determination and not rely only on his word or that of his organization. People also need to know clearly that even if the garbage patches of the world are completely cleaned, it will have only removed a small amount of the plastic already in the oceans.
Employed people glad to receive work and that are paid a decent, fair wage, will remove far more plastic pollution than any volunteer effort or technology can ever hope to achieve.
Instead of waiting for a technological miracle and allowing the oceans and coasts to get further destroyed, why not immediately implement what is most effective and works? An army of people employed to remove plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas is needed now. Every day that passes without this army means another day of destruction to wildlife, oceans, people and more.
Much of the plastic breaks down and disperses. Waves, tides and storms brings a lot of the plastic already in the oceans back to coasts and rivers. Lands and rivers brings new plastic into the oceans. Meanwhile, plastic, Styrofoam and other oil based non biodegradable materials keep breaking down into smaller and smaller particles that eventually are impossible to capture or recover. Eventually these particles break down into pieces too small to be seen and that never degrade. And so, there they are, trillions upon trillions of plastic particles endlessly polluting the oceans, coasts, lands and rivers and other waters, and endlessly harming wildlife and humans.
A recent study of plastic waste collecting in the ocean garbage patches suggests this waste is coming from ships, and that it is not originating from the land. So where are all the millions of kilos of plastic entering into the oceans daily going? It disperses, and does not make it to the garbage patches.
Even if the garbage patches are completely cleaned, it will not help with the enormous amount of plastic already in the oceans, with millions of additional kilos entering every day.
Plastic pollution cleanup efforts need three strong approaches. Of the three, the one that is most effective and needed the most is the one least funded and least considered.
Volunteer cleanups, such as beach cleanups, receive a lot of attention and funding. These work best in developed countries where people can afford to be volunteers. But even in developed countries, these efforts are often sporadic and not consistent. Many under served areas receive no cleanups.
In developing nations, there is mass poverty. Few can afford to be volunteers.
Employing people in need of work - disadvantaged people - to cleanup coasts and other areas, an actual employment project that can and should employ millions, is near nonexistent.
The much advertised technology that Boyan Slat offers receives millions of dollars of funding.
Just to be clear, if his technology works, as he says it does or will in the future, then let us hope he cleans the garbage patches as he says he will.
But imagine if even one tenth of the millions of dollars his organization receives was directed at employing disadvantaged people to remove plastic from coasts and other areas. An employed force cleaning up plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas will remove far more plastic pollution than any technology or volunteer effort ever can, at far less cost than any technology.
This is not to say Boyan Slat should not continue his effort to cleanup the garbage patches.
But the failure to employ the low tech, far less costly simple approach of providing employment to disadvantaged people to do hands on cleanups means losing the critical opportunity to prevent trillions of kilos of plastic pollution already littering coastlines and other accessible areas from breaking down further into forever damaging unrecoverable pieces.
The plastic pollution cleanup portion of the plastic pollution disaster needs three things:
1. Employed workers doing the cleanups.
2. Volunteer cleanups.
3. Technologies that can clean areas that laborers cannot cleanup, such as ocean garbage patches.
Of the three things needed for plastic pollution cleanups, the core of the effort must be on employed workers because that is what will achieve the most in terms of helping people and in removing the most amount of plastic.
Volunteerism and technology, instead of being the primary focus of the effort, as they are now, must be seen as the supplementation to the core effort.
How effective is Boyan Slat's technology? There needs to be an objective determination and not rely only on his word or that of his organization. People also need to know clearly that even if the garbage patches of the world are completely cleaned, it will have only removed a small amount of the plastic already in the oceans.
Employed people glad to receive work and that are paid a decent, fair wage, will remove far more plastic pollution than any volunteer effort or technology can ever hope to achieve.
Instead of waiting for a technological miracle and allowing the oceans and coasts to get further destroyed, why not immediately implement what is most effective and works? An army of people employed to remove plastic pollution from coastlines and other areas is needed now. Every day that passes without this army means another day of destruction to wildlife, oceans, people and more.
Animals,Wildlife, Voiceless Populations Suffer As Nonprofits Profit
The lack of accountability in far too much of the nonprofit world has meant decades of inefficiency, ineffectiveness and harm. This is especially true in the realm of unseen places and in services to voiceless populations.
Conservation, wildlife and animal related organizations are great at pointing out problems. Knowledge and expertise regarding problems and plights does not mean that the programs and services these organizations provide are effective and not harmful.
Regarding the efficacy of these nonprofits - scrutiny and accountability goes out the window, and they say and do whatever it is they want.
And so, they grow and become wealthier while the populations they are supposed to service diminish and suffer. The more there is suffering, the more these organizations capitalize on plights and problems and raise more money for themselves.
Raising awareness and pointing out problems and plights is not the same as concrete, effective action.
If for profit businesses operated the same way; good at talk, pointing out problems and raising awareness but weak at solutions and absent in efficacy, they would quickly go out of business.
Conservation, wildlife and animal related organizations are great at pointing out problems. Knowledge and expertise regarding problems and plights does not mean that the programs and services these organizations provide are effective and not harmful.
Regarding the efficacy of these nonprofits - scrutiny and accountability goes out the window, and they say and do whatever it is they want.
And so, they grow and become wealthier while the populations they are supposed to service diminish and suffer. The more there is suffering, the more these organizations capitalize on plights and problems and raise more money for themselves.
Raising awareness and pointing out problems and plights is not the same as concrete, effective action.
If for profit businesses operated the same way; good at talk, pointing out problems and raising awareness but weak at solutions and absent in efficacy, they would quickly go out of business.
Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Cats Killing Birds, Timidity, TNR, Microchips: Crashing Bird Populations
A scientist from one well funded conservation oriented nonprofit organization wrote about the harm that cats inflict upon birds. The foundation he is employed by made sure to disassociate themselves from the scientist's findings and opinions. Too timid to take a stand, and not wanting to alienate cat loving donors, the foundation made clear their priorities: money, no boat rocking - not birds and conservation.
In the recent edition of a popular magazine, a man described as a bird watcher, writer and photography talked about cats and birds. If cats are microchipped, he suggests, abandoned cats can be traced back to those that dumped them. How will that help anything? Return a cat to the person that dumped it? A family dumped their kitten, who had grown too large in their opinion. They had their 12 year old son put the kitten in a plastic bag, and leave it in an empty lot, still in the bag, about a half mile from where they live. What decent person would return that kitten back to that family?
Microchipping cats and dogs has its benefits, especially if a dog or cat is lost, but it does nothing for the cats kill birds problem.
Is trap, neuter and release (tnr) the answer? Cats, even if they are fed, still kill birds and other wildlife.
The hard choice has to be made, whether someone likes it or not. Doing nothing is also a choice, because ignoring the cats living or allowed outside means the certain death of birds and other wildlife.
Cats living or allowed outside are in harms way from vehicles, sadistic people, and more. Cats outside certainly put birds in harms way.
There is no feel good answer, no matter how many people want to pretend or believe that there is.
Leaving millions, even billions of birds to be slaughtered out of sight, out of mind, is the cowardly way out.
In the recent edition of a popular magazine, a man described as a bird watcher, writer and photography talked about cats and birds. If cats are microchipped, he suggests, abandoned cats can be traced back to those that dumped them. How will that help anything? Return a cat to the person that dumped it? A family dumped their kitten, who had grown too large in their opinion. They had their 12 year old son put the kitten in a plastic bag, and leave it in an empty lot, still in the bag, about a half mile from where they live. What decent person would return that kitten back to that family?
Microchipping cats and dogs has its benefits, especially if a dog or cat is lost, but it does nothing for the cats kill birds problem.
Is trap, neuter and release (tnr) the answer? Cats, even if they are fed, still kill birds and other wildlife.
The hard choice has to be made, whether someone likes it or not. Doing nothing is also a choice, because ignoring the cats living or allowed outside means the certain death of birds and other wildlife.
Cats living or allowed outside are in harms way from vehicles, sadistic people, and more. Cats outside certainly put birds in harms way.
There is no feel good answer, no matter how many people want to pretend or believe that there is.
Leaving millions, even billions of birds to be slaughtered out of sight, out of mind, is the cowardly way out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)