Thank you Jason for writing this compilation of efforts . So many do not realize that it takes a community of like minded individuals to do what they can to protect our wildlife and change the path of the future. You show that anyone can step forward to help. We must advertise the joy to be found in the helping. Each state should have a list of ways for anyone interested. I know Vermont does .The website is called VT Center for Ecostudies that discusses various ways to help. From volunteering for a season to monitor by observation an individual lake for LoonWatch ( to get an idea of statewide statistics on loon populations and breeding). Events that help amphibians in the early spring to cross roads in safety as they head to vernal pools to breed. Large or small, any one person can find a way to make a change. Its too bad that this is not a part of curriculum in schools. Educate and make it fun.
I love your description of
“tossing white feathers” into the breeze for the swallows. Quite beautiful.
Thanks, Lor. I'm reminded of that wisdom I passed on recently from environmental philosopher Kathleen Dean Moore when asked what one person can do: "Don't be one person."
I wish there was a more robust funding network for wildlife rehab, and a reliable database of these facilities around the country (and world). I've seen attempts at the latter, but nothing that really works.
I like the idea of that VT directory. Not sure what Maine has along that line. There are good sources for various efforts (Big Night amphibian watch, etc) but I'll have to look for a general biodiversity to-do list.
"...humans are a two-headed beast. So much of what we do is in opposition to the community of life, and yet so many of us are working with deep empathy for our fellow species. From the point of view of the living world, this kind of coexistence looks a lot like parasitism undermined by empathy. The goal, then, is for the empathy to win out."
This reminds me that the more we all do our part, in our own small ways, the more our impact will add up to be so much greater than the sum of our parts. Thank you, @Jason Anthony, for tossing feathers to the swallows!
Thanks for this. I monitor 15 tree swallow/bluebird boxes in Sedgwick, and had been growing the number to try to accommodate all the birds that were fighting over them, mostly swallows, but the last few years the numbers seem to be decreasing-- no fights anymore that I've seen. Last year's cold, wet, spring was hard on the nesting and I had more failures than usual. I'm right there with the climate scientists with the despair and anger. And with support for Center for Biological Diversity and also EarthJustice and try to write emails to congress when they and NRCM tell me to!
Wonderful, Leda. Thank you for caring for the swallows and bluebirds. Last summer was a tough one for my colonies as well (great for the wetlands, forests, shrubs, etc. though). We're seeing plenty of birds this year, so are hoping for a good nesting season. All we can do on this end of their migration is have the boxes ready. Otherwise, yes, giving support to those groups that are fighting to maintain habitat everywhere else.
I try not to frame where I stand on all this as despair and anger, though that's a rational response to the failures that got us here. I'm trying instead to think of it as work to be done, even if the work seems undoable sometimes, or too little too late. There's no other choice, because the less we do the worse it gets.
A very very good essay. It goes straight to the heart of things, the disastrous heating, the human efforts to help other species.. currents and rip currents in the Anthropocene.
The first step in seeing non-human animals is to understand that human animals are not in any way superior to our non-human companions. This will require Humility on our part. The word Human does not mean superior. It is just a descriptive of one species out of 8 million.
Another excellent essay, Jason. I've shared it on FB.
In 1989 I wrote an essay that was published in a San Diego newspaper, in which I compared humans to bacteria. So it's interesting to learn that E.O. Wilson did the same. (I don't know who came first.) In my essay I noted that a colony of bacteria in a petri dish will continue to grow until one of two things happens: The bacteria poison themselves with their own waste products and die off, or they consume all the available food and all starve. I did not (nor do I now) see how humans are any different.
Many people make the mistake of assuming that we are somehow immune from the biological (and mathematical) principles that govern life on Earth. The biological drives to procreate and amass resources are pretty universal. One would have hoped our much-vaunted big brains would give us the wisdom and intellectual wherewithal to rein in those impulses in order to preserve our species. Apparently, that is not the case.
Resources and space are finite. Complex life requires a complex, biodiverse environment. Causing mass extinction is like removing card after card from a house of cards. Pretty soon it all falls down.
The way we treat this planet can be compared to a group of people living in a house, where they routinely defecate everywhere and tear down the walls and furniture to make fire. Shredding the biosphere is clearly not a sustainable way to live.
We are literally consuming the Earth, whether it's mineral resources, land, or biological resources. And we are soiling it with our technological feces (chemicals, plastic, pesticides, garbage). It doesn't take a genius so see that such runaway "growth" on a finite planet will ultimately lead to disaster. E.F. Schumacher said (and this was repeated later by David Attenborough in a slightly different form) "Anyone who thinks consumption can expand forever on a finite planet is either insane or an economist."
And those economists are insane.
Finally, people are always saying we need to save the Earth, or that we are destroying the Earth. That is a fallacy. We cannot destroy the Earth; we can only destroy the Earth's capacity to support us, and that we are doing with great alacrity. But there is a silver lining; once we go extinct, in 40 million years there will be a whole new group of animals and another thriving ecosystem. And maybe some future paleontologist will dig down and find a layer of plastic and PFAS chemicals and deduce what happened, and her species will use that knowledge to keep it from happening to them.
Hi Jim, great comment. I suppose one difference is that there probably aren't a faction of bacteria arguing for a different way, marching in the streets, working in governments to change policy, etc. Some of us know the wisdom you've laid down here, and some are looking to build an exit from the madness.
I love that quote from Schumacher/Attenborough.
And your last point about the Earth carrying on without us reminds me of a great speech at my college graduation by Stephen J Gould, the wonderful natural history writer and paleontologist, who made much the same point. We're not "saving the Earth", we're trying to save some version of the planet that nurtured our species and the millions of species alongside us.
"But the name is also an opportunity, something for the agency to live up to as they research and trial nonlethal alternatives." Very well said. Wildlife Services has always been hard for me to swallow, but seeing the potential or possibility helps a bit.
I hadn't planned on being this nice about the agency, but Ben Goldfarb's article focused on the gap between what the agency does and what it could be doing, based on its research activity.
Something I didn't get into but maybe should: It's really something to go through the very long kill list for an entire year and wonder what the stories are behind each terrible listing. 27 northern flickers, 583 nine-banded armadillos, 58 sandhill cranes, 28 common nighthawks, ad nauseam...
I put off reading this one for a while because it harkens back to a pretty dark period in my life. I represented an enviro group suing Wildlife Services for failing to release a FOIA request on its activities for the previous year. Part of my job involved reading and logging every page WS released to us to make sure they weren't wrongfully withholding anything. The work stretched over several months, from early to late-2020, so as you can imagine, this was dark work for lockdown. I have read the stories "behind each terrible listing" for one state, Oregon, for one single year, and it's just as bad as you think. Multiply that times 50 states (and territories) and X numbers of years that Wildlife Services has been on this killing spree -- it's decades, at least, if not a century, if I recall correctly, as WS has had other names in the past. It's staggeringly cruel. I won't belabor it, but one data point that hit me hard was the sheer number of birds killed on airport property (they are considered risks to air safety). It's a gargantuan number, and it happens at airports from the tiniest rural strip to the huge international ports. Yet another, often underappreciated, way that human travel is decimating our planet.
Oh, I'm so sorry you had to live inside that data and its stories at all, Rebecca, much less during the lockdown. That's an opening scene to a horror story... I'm glad you and your colleagues were doing the hard work, though. So very few people even know about that battle, much less fight the good fight. So thank you for that.
Yes, a century or so, and yes, under various names. They've seemed eager over the decades to change appearances if not behavior. Though I do believe they're doing less avian massacres around airports, favoring some kind of aggressive scare tactics. The new data on certain birds shows incredibly large numbers being moved. But I hadn't thought, as you do here, to connect that mortality with our taste for travel.
Thank you Jason for writing this compilation of efforts . So many do not realize that it takes a community of like minded individuals to do what they can to protect our wildlife and change the path of the future. You show that anyone can step forward to help. We must advertise the joy to be found in the helping. Each state should have a list of ways for anyone interested. I know Vermont does .The website is called VT Center for Ecostudies that discusses various ways to help. From volunteering for a season to monitor by observation an individual lake for LoonWatch ( to get an idea of statewide statistics on loon populations and breeding). Events that help amphibians in the early spring to cross roads in safety as they head to vernal pools to breed. Large or small, any one person can find a way to make a change. Its too bad that this is not a part of curriculum in schools. Educate and make it fun.
I love your description of
“tossing white feathers” into the breeze for the swallows. Quite beautiful.
Thanks, Lor. I'm reminded of that wisdom I passed on recently from environmental philosopher Kathleen Dean Moore when asked what one person can do: "Don't be one person."
I wish there was a more robust funding network for wildlife rehab, and a reliable database of these facilities around the country (and world). I've seen attempts at the latter, but nothing that really works.
I like the idea of that VT directory. Not sure what Maine has along that line. There are good sources for various efforts (Big Night amphibian watch, etc) but I'll have to look for a general biodiversity to-do list.
"...humans are a two-headed beast. So much of what we do is in opposition to the community of life, and yet so many of us are working with deep empathy for our fellow species. From the point of view of the living world, this kind of coexistence looks a lot like parasitism undermined by empathy. The goal, then, is for the empathy to win out."
This reminds me that the more we all do our part, in our own small ways, the more our impact will add up to be so much greater than the sum of our parts. Thank you, @Jason Anthony, for tossing feathers to the swallows!
That's kind of you to say, Sydney. Thank you. There's so much to do - generations of work, really - so all we can do is keep doing it.
Thanks for this. I monitor 15 tree swallow/bluebird boxes in Sedgwick, and had been growing the number to try to accommodate all the birds that were fighting over them, mostly swallows, but the last few years the numbers seem to be decreasing-- no fights anymore that I've seen. Last year's cold, wet, spring was hard on the nesting and I had more failures than usual. I'm right there with the climate scientists with the despair and anger. And with support for Center for Biological Diversity and also EarthJustice and try to write emails to congress when they and NRCM tell me to!
Wonderful, Leda. Thank you for caring for the swallows and bluebirds. Last summer was a tough one for my colonies as well (great for the wetlands, forests, shrubs, etc. though). We're seeing plenty of birds this year, so are hoping for a good nesting season. All we can do on this end of their migration is have the boxes ready. Otherwise, yes, giving support to those groups that are fighting to maintain habitat everywhere else.
I try not to frame where I stand on all this as despair and anger, though that's a rational response to the failures that got us here. I'm trying instead to think of it as work to be done, even if the work seems undoable sometimes, or too little too late. There's no other choice, because the less we do the worse it gets.
Thanks for the note.
I needed this one — didn’t know it ‘til I read it. Thanks!
Thanks, Bryan. I'll make a comment over in your neighborhood, but I was impressed with how you put such a deep keel on the migration story.
A very very good essay. It goes straight to the heart of things, the disastrous heating, the human efforts to help other species.. currents and rip currents in the Anthropocene.
Thank you, Michael. Rip currents, indeed. Swimming strategies are required...
Side note: Did you see the recent decision by CO to create the state's own version of the wetlands protections lost under the SCOTUS Sackett ruling? https://coloradosun.com/2024/05/09/colorado-law-protecting-wetlands-supreme-court/
The first step in seeing non-human animals is to understand that human animals are not in any way superior to our non-human companions. This will require Humility on our part. The word Human does not mean superior. It is just a descriptive of one species out of 8 million.
Well said, Perry. Thank you.
Another excellent essay, Jason. I've shared it on FB.
In 1989 I wrote an essay that was published in a San Diego newspaper, in which I compared humans to bacteria. So it's interesting to learn that E.O. Wilson did the same. (I don't know who came first.) In my essay I noted that a colony of bacteria in a petri dish will continue to grow until one of two things happens: The bacteria poison themselves with their own waste products and die off, or they consume all the available food and all starve. I did not (nor do I now) see how humans are any different.
Many people make the mistake of assuming that we are somehow immune from the biological (and mathematical) principles that govern life on Earth. The biological drives to procreate and amass resources are pretty universal. One would have hoped our much-vaunted big brains would give us the wisdom and intellectual wherewithal to rein in those impulses in order to preserve our species. Apparently, that is not the case.
Resources and space are finite. Complex life requires a complex, biodiverse environment. Causing mass extinction is like removing card after card from a house of cards. Pretty soon it all falls down.
The way we treat this planet can be compared to a group of people living in a house, where they routinely defecate everywhere and tear down the walls and furniture to make fire. Shredding the biosphere is clearly not a sustainable way to live.
We are literally consuming the Earth, whether it's mineral resources, land, or biological resources. And we are soiling it with our technological feces (chemicals, plastic, pesticides, garbage). It doesn't take a genius so see that such runaway "growth" on a finite planet will ultimately lead to disaster. E.F. Schumacher said (and this was repeated later by David Attenborough in a slightly different form) "Anyone who thinks consumption can expand forever on a finite planet is either insane or an economist."
And those economists are insane.
Finally, people are always saying we need to save the Earth, or that we are destroying the Earth. That is a fallacy. We cannot destroy the Earth; we can only destroy the Earth's capacity to support us, and that we are doing with great alacrity. But there is a silver lining; once we go extinct, in 40 million years there will be a whole new group of animals and another thriving ecosystem. And maybe some future paleontologist will dig down and find a layer of plastic and PFAS chemicals and deduce what happened, and her species will use that knowledge to keep it from happening to them.
Hi Jim, great comment. I suppose one difference is that there probably aren't a faction of bacteria arguing for a different way, marching in the streets, working in governments to change policy, etc. Some of us know the wisdom you've laid down here, and some are looking to build an exit from the madness.
I love that quote from Schumacher/Attenborough.
And your last point about the Earth carrying on without us reminds me of a great speech at my college graduation by Stephen J Gould, the wonderful natural history writer and paleontologist, who made much the same point. We're not "saving the Earth", we're trying to save some version of the planet that nurtured our species and the millions of species alongside us.
Great to hear from you.
"But the name is also an opportunity, something for the agency to live up to as they research and trial nonlethal alternatives." Very well said. Wildlife Services has always been hard for me to swallow, but seeing the potential or possibility helps a bit.
I hadn't planned on being this nice about the agency, but Ben Goldfarb's article focused on the gap between what the agency does and what it could be doing, based on its research activity.
Something I didn't get into but maybe should: It's really something to go through the very long kill list for an entire year and wonder what the stories are behind each terrible listing. 27 northern flickers, 583 nine-banded armadillos, 58 sandhill cranes, 28 common nighthawks, ad nauseam...
I put off reading this one for a while because it harkens back to a pretty dark period in my life. I represented an enviro group suing Wildlife Services for failing to release a FOIA request on its activities for the previous year. Part of my job involved reading and logging every page WS released to us to make sure they weren't wrongfully withholding anything. The work stretched over several months, from early to late-2020, so as you can imagine, this was dark work for lockdown. I have read the stories "behind each terrible listing" for one state, Oregon, for one single year, and it's just as bad as you think. Multiply that times 50 states (and territories) and X numbers of years that Wildlife Services has been on this killing spree -- it's decades, at least, if not a century, if I recall correctly, as WS has had other names in the past. It's staggeringly cruel. I won't belabor it, but one data point that hit me hard was the sheer number of birds killed on airport property (they are considered risks to air safety). It's a gargantuan number, and it happens at airports from the tiniest rural strip to the huge international ports. Yet another, often underappreciated, way that human travel is decimating our planet.
Oh, I'm so sorry you had to live inside that data and its stories at all, Rebecca, much less during the lockdown. That's an opening scene to a horror story... I'm glad you and your colleagues were doing the hard work, though. So very few people even know about that battle, much less fight the good fight. So thank you for that.
Yes, a century or so, and yes, under various names. They've seemed eager over the decades to change appearances if not behavior. Though I do believe they're doing less avian massacres around airports, favoring some kind of aggressive scare tactics. The new data on certain birds shows incredibly large numbers being moved. But I hadn't thought, as you do here, to connect that mortality with our taste for travel.
Thank you for saying all of this, Rebecca.
Whew. Like the worst kind of poetry. :/