[LincolnTalk] Spraying...

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Robin Wilkerson
If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, then we are sunk. Spraying - with anything - will negatively affect bats, birds and other insects that are natural - undamaging - controls for mosquitoes.

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.


Robin Wilkerson
[hidden email]



--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

samattes
While that is a wonderful movie about farming, it is a farm.
And we live in the urban/rural interface where we are trying to find a balance.
We struggle to retain active ag. land and commercial properties and private lands, in addition to our conservation land.
We cannot/will not let it all revert to whatever as wildlife habitat.
We have let what were man-created ponds and pools become stagnant and potential breeding grounds for all sorts of critters, some of them harmful to both humans and animals.
What is the proper balance for this complex eco-system we inhabit and are stewards of?
Humans are part of it and must be part of the equation.

It would be nice if there was a multi-disciplinary forum to debate this for our community.
If there were one, it must include all points of view., which includes advocates for intervention.

In the meantime, I will continue to address issues on my own property as best I can.

Namaste,
Sara




> On Sep 8, 2019, at 11:22 AM, Robin Wilkerson <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, then we are sunk. Spraying - with anything - will negatively affect bats, birds and other insects that are natural - undamaging - controls for mosquitoes.
>
> I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.
>
>
> Robin Wilkerson
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
> --
> The LincolnTalk mailing list.
> To post, send mail to [hidden email].
> Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
> Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
> Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.
>

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Andrew Payne
In reply to this post by Robin Wilkerson
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


image.png



--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Jamie Banks

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


image.png


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.



--
Jamie Banks, PhD, MS
PO Box 533
Lincoln, MA  01773

Tel: 781.259.1717
Email: [hidden email]

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

samattes
"Over the next decade, we expect cancer incidence ratesto stay about the same, but the number of new cancer cases to go up, mostly because of an aging white population and a growing black population. Because cancer patients overall are living longer, the number of cancer survivors is expected to go up from about 11.7 million in 2007 to 18 million by 2020.


Seems to my read, demographics and lifestyle are driving #s.

On Sep 8, 2019, at 3:28 PM, Jamie Banks <[hidden email]> wrote:


On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


<image.png>


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.



--
Jamie Banks, PhD, MS
PO Box 533
Lincoln, MA  01773

Tel: 781.259.1717
Email: [hidden email]
--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.



--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Taylor, Gary
In reply to this post by Andrew Payne

Andy wrote:

 

That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

I may have to start ducking, but just to let everyone know, the South Lincoln Planning and Implementation Committee  (SLPIC), a subcommittee of the Planning Board, will be presenting just such a change to our zoning bylaw in the Lincoln Station (Mall) area near the commuter rail station.  This was laid out in a recent, well attended, public meeting and will the subject of a lot more public discussion before next year’s Town Meeting.  So stay tuned!

 

Gary

 

 

From: Lincoln [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Payne
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Robin Wilkerson
Cc: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

Robin Wilkerson wrote:

 

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

 

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

 

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

 

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

 

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

 

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

 

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

 

One person's view,

 

-andy

 

 

image.png

 

 

******************
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE FROM THE BRATTLE GROUP: This message, and any attachments, are
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and
may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error
please notify me immediately by return email and immediately delete the original and all
copies of the message and any attachments to it. Note also that nothing in this message is
intended to constitute an electronic signature or otherwise to satisfy the requirements for
a contract unless an express statement to the contrary is included in the message.

Please ensure you have adequate virus protection before you open or use attachments.
The Brattle Group does not accept any liability for viruses.

 
******************


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Orest Hurko
In reply to this post by Andrew Payne
Andrew

Thank you for bringing a little rigor into this spirited conversation.  Many legitimate points about EEE, the effects of spraying on pollinators, the utility of organic mint oils, and others have been made but in the absence of some sort of quantitation it is not possible to make a reasonable decision.  Everything has a cost -- including doing nothing -- but it would be useful to size things up with at least a rough quantitative cost-benefit analysis.  Of course none of us wants to contribute to the death of children or honeybees.  Without some numbers, we are going around in circles.

Orest Hurko

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


image.png


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

samattes
In reply to this post by Taylor, Gary
(-well, you opened the door....)

I’ll be interested in hearing how increased density addresses Lincoln’s carbon footprint.
More people=more carbon footprint than we have now.
It may address a regional issue-the MAPC drumbeat, but I can’t see where it helps LINCOLN reduce its own footprint.

Years ago MAPC challenged our zoning.
They have a one-size-fits all approach, and left to them, all towns would look the same.
Luckily our regional alliances, at the time, supported us and the notion that Lincoln offered regional amenities ( open space, tails, ag) close to and accessible from the urban core, and those were worth protecting.
Our 2 acre zoning contributed to that.
I pray we have not lost that position and have been drawn into the MAPC roadmap to homogeneity.

I will stay tuned.

Best,
Sara



Sent from my iPad

On Sep 8, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Taylor, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:

Andy wrote:

 

That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

I may have to start ducking, but just to let everyone know, the South Lincoln Planning and Implementation Committee  (SLPIC), a subcommittee of the Planning Board, will be presenting just such a change to our zoning bylaw in the Lincoln Station (Mall) area near the commuter rail station.  This was laid out in a recent, well attended, public meeting and will the subject of a lot more public discussion before next year’s Town Meeting.  So stay tuned!

 

Gary

 

 

From: Lincoln [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Payne
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Robin Wilkerson
Cc: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

Robin Wilkerson wrote:

 

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

 

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

 

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

 

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

 

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

 

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

 

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

 

One person's view,

 

-andy

 

 

<image001.png>

 

 

******************
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE FROM THE BRATTLE GROUP: This message, and any attachments, are
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and
may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error
please notify me immediately by return email and immediately delete the original and all
copies of the message and any attachments to it. Note also that nothing in this message is
intended to constitute an electronic signature or otherwise to satisfy the requirements for
a contract unless an express statement to the contrary is included in the message.

Please ensure you have adequate virus protection before you open or use attachments.
The Brattle Group does not accept any liability for viruses.

 
******************

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Taylor, Gary

Sara,

 

The issue isn’t really Lincoln’s carbon footprint.  We are an infinitesimal piece of the overall puzzle of how to save coming generations from some of the more dire consequences of our profligacy.  Denser, mass transit-oriented housing at Lincoln Station will reduce car commuting, increase walking and bicycle traffic, and as an added benefit, help us maintain a viable and active commercial center.  All this activity would for the most part be constrained to areas already zoned commercial or for multifamily housing, so it wouldn’t undercut our generous single family zoning, and it would enhance opportunities to access the trail and cultural amenities that you cite as Lincoln’s contribution to the region.  As an added benefit, it would encourage the development in Lincoln of the mid-range, RELATIVELY less expensive housing that we so sorely lack.

 

This isn’t to ignore other pieces of the puzzle like regional shuttle service, but I hope that you can see this as a step in the right direction.  As always, I’m happy to discuss such issues further.

 

Best,

Gary

 

 

 

From: Sara Mattes [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 4:49 PM
To: Taylor, Gary
Cc: Andrew Payne; Robin Wilkerson; <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

(-well, you opened the door....)

 

I’ll be interested in hearing how increased density addresses Lincoln’s carbon footprint.

More people=more carbon footprint than we have now.

It may address a regional issue-the MAPC drumbeat, but I can’t see where it helps LINCOLN reduce its own footprint.

 

Years ago MAPC challenged our zoning.

They have a one-size-fits all approach, and left to them, all towns would look the same.

Luckily our regional alliances, at the time, supported us and the notion that Lincoln offered regional amenities ( open space, tails, ag) close to and accessible from the urban core, and those were worth protecting.

Our 2 acre zoning contributed to that.

I pray we have not lost that position and have been drawn into the MAPC roadmap to homogeneity.

 

I will stay tuned.

 

Best,

Sara

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad


On Sep 8, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Taylor, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:

Andy wrote:

 

That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

I may have to start ducking, but just to let everyone know, the South Lincoln Planning and Implementation Committee  (SLPIC), a subcommittee of the Planning Board, will be presenting just such a change to our zoning bylaw in the Lincoln Station (Mall) area near the commuter rail station.  This was laid out in a recent, well attended, public meeting and will the subject of a lot more public discussion before next year’s Town Meeting.  So stay tuned!

 

Gary

 

 

From: Lincoln [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Payne
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Robin Wilkerson
Cc: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

Robin Wilkerson wrote:

 

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

 

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

 

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

 

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

 

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

 

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

 

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

 

One person's view,

 

-andy

 

 

<image001.png>

 

 

******************
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE FROM THE BRATTLE GROUP: This message, and any attachments, are
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and
may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error
please notify me immediately by return email and immediately delete the original and all
copies of the message and any attachments to it. Note also that nothing in this message is
intended to constitute an electronic signature or otherwise to satisfy the requirements for
a contract unless an express statement to the contrary is included in the message.

Please ensure you have adequate virus protection before you open or use attachments.
The Brattle Group does not accept any liability for viruses.

 
******************

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Leslie Turek
In reply to this post by Orest Hurko
I understand everyone's desire to DO SOMETHING. I feel it, too. I love the outdoors and hate that I now have to inhibit my access and use repellent when I do go out, and for who knows how long.

But I also wonder, how effective is spraying? There's an awful lot of outdoors out there and it's hard to believe that spraying will reach every little pocket where mosquitos may lurk. And how frequently must it be done? The guidelines tell us to dump out standing water at least every 4 days. Does that mean mosquitos make a new generation every 4 days or so? Does that mean weekly spraying would be required until frost? 

And one point I think others have tried to make is that not only honeybees would be in danger, but also other insects, such as dragonflies, that *eat mosquitos*. So if we kill the predators along with the prey, will we have a boomerang effect and end up with more mosquitos in the long run?

I wonder why there is no vaccine for EEE? They have one for horses. Is it the same story as the rabies vaccine - no private company wants to take on the liability risk?

I don't have the answers and I don't have a position. I'm just saying things may not be as simple as they seem. 

Leslie Turek



On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 4:45 PM Orest Hurko <[hidden email]> wrote:
Andrew

Thank you for bringing a little rigor into this spirited conversation.  Many legitimate points about EEE, the effects of spraying on pollinators, the utility of organic mint oils, and others have been made but in the absence of some sort of quantitation it is not possible to make a reasonable decision.  Everything has a cost -- including doing nothing -- but it would be useful to size things up with at least a rough quantitative cost-benefit analysis.  Of course none of us wants to contribute to the death of children or honeybees.  Without some numbers, we are going around in circles.

Orest Hurko

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


image.png


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Leslie Turek
Oops - in my previous message I meant the Lyme disease vaccine, not the rabies vaccine. I should read my email before hitting "send". Sorry.
Leslie

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 6:08 PM Leslie Turek <[hidden email]> wrote:
I understand everyone's desire to DO SOMETHING. I feel it, too. I love the outdoors and hate that I now have to inhibit my access and use repellent when I do go out, and for who knows how long.

But I also wonder, how effective is spraying? There's an awful lot of outdoors out there and it's hard to believe that spraying will reach every little pocket where mosquitos may lurk. And how frequently must it be done? The guidelines tell us to dump out standing water at least every 4 days. Does that mean mosquitos make a new generation every 4 days or so? Does that mean weekly spraying would be required until frost? 

And one point I think others have tried to make is that not only honeybees would be in danger, but also other insects, such as dragonflies, that *eat mosquitos*. So if we kill the predators along with the prey, will we have a boomerang effect and end up with more mosquitos in the long run?

I wonder why there is no vaccine for EEE? They have one for horses. Is it the same story as the rabies vaccine - no private company wants to take on the liability risk?

I don't have the answers and I don't have a position. I'm just saying things may not be as simple as they seem. 

Leslie Turek



On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 4:45 PM Orest Hurko <[hidden email]> wrote:
Andrew

Thank you for bringing a little rigor into this spirited conversation.  Many legitimate points about EEE, the effects of spraying on pollinators, the utility of organic mint oils, and others have been made but in the absence of some sort of quantitation it is not possible to make a reasonable decision.  Everything has a cost -- including doing nothing -- but it would be useful to size things up with at least a rough quantitative cost-benefit analysis.  Of course none of us wants to contribute to the death of children or honeybees.  Without some numbers, we are going around in circles.

Orest Hurko

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


image.png


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Dennis Liu
In reply to this post by Jamie Banks

Sorry, Jamie, not sure what your point is re the link you provided below?

 

Thx,

 

--Dennis

 

From: Lincoln <[hidden email]> On Behalf Of Jamie Banks
Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2019 3:28 PM
To: Andrew Payne <[hidden email]>
Cc: <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

 

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:

Robin Wilkerson wrote:

 

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

 

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

 

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

 

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

 

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

 

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

 

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

 

One person's view,

 

-andy

 

 

image.png

 

 

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


 

--

Jamie Banks, PhD, MS
PO Box 533
Lincoln, MA  01773

Tel: 781.259.1717
Email: [hidden email]


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Seth Rosen
In reply to this post by Leslie Turek
Leslie, just so there isn’t any doubt or confusion. The services like Mosquito Squad and others who spray a pyrethroid insecticide (such as bifenthrin) are INCREDIBLY effective.  They spray your trees and shrubs (and lawn and other areas) with a backpack sprayer that is gas powered and gets the mixture up 40+ feet in the air.

It’s not a small difference where you wonder if it’s working or not.  It’s literally a 95% reduction in all bugs.  Also there is a large body of longitudinal evidence that establishes both the efficacy of the insecticide and it’s safe use (it doesn’t do anything to humans).  

Now there’s always a group of people who just believe any chemical is a bad chemical... to those people, there isn’t any logical argument that will get them off of that position.  So it’s not worth debating here and I won’t attempt to do so.  Each person should make their own assessment of the risk-benefit.

The well established reasons not to do a broadcast spray of pyrethroid are harm to pollinators (it does kill bees), and especially harm to aquatic life if you are anywhere near an area with fish.

But if anyone is wondering if it works - it does.  Spraying late in the season is not ideal, you really want to be spraying your property once a month starting in April to circumvent breeding.  Also you should remove or treat all standing water.

Seth 

On Sep 8, 2019, at 6:08 PM, Leslie Turek <[hidden email]> wrote:

I understand everyone's desire to DO SOMETHING. I feel it, too. I love the outdoors and hate that I now have to inhibit my access and use repellent when I do go out, and for who knows how long.

But I also wonder, how effective is spraying? There's an awful lot of outdoors out there and it's hard to believe that spraying will reach every little pocket where mosquitos may lurk. And how frequently must it be done? The guidelines tell us to dump out standing water at least every 4 days. Does that mean mosquitos make a new generation every 4 days or so? Does that mean weekly spraying would be required until frost? 

And one point I think others have tried to make is that not only honeybees would be in danger, but also other insects, such as dragonflies, that *eat mosquitos*. So if we kill the predators along with the prey, will we have a boomerang effect and end up with more mosquitos in the long run?

I wonder why there is no vaccine for EEE? They have one for horses. Is it the same story as the rabies vaccine - no private company wants to take on the liability risk?

I don't have the answers and I don't have a position. I'm just saying things may not be as simple as they seem. 

Leslie Turek



On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 4:45 PM Orest Hurko <[hidden email]> wrote:
Andrew

Thank you for bringing a little rigor into this spirited conversation.  Many legitimate points about EEE, the effects of spraying on pollinators, the utility of organic mint oils, and others have been made but in the absence of some sort of quantitation it is not possible to make a reasonable decision.  Everything has a cost -- including doing nothing -- but it would be useful to size things up with at least a rough quantitative cost-benefit analysis.  Of course none of us wants to contribute to the death of children or honeybees.  Without some numbers, we are going around in circles.

Orest Hurko

On Sun, Sep 8, 2019 at 3:24 PM Andrew Payne <[hidden email]> wrote:
Robin Wilkerson wrote:

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

One person's view,

-andy


<image.png>


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

Mark Levinson
In reply to this post by Taylor, Gary

To correct some of the glossed-over assertions in the SLPIC proposal:

 

1.  The Commuter Rail at Lincoln Station is not “mass transit”.  It is a commuter rail.  The overwhelming usage is, and will be, for people commuting to Boston and back.  That’s it.

 

2.  There will be an INCREASE in car commuting in LINCOLN.  An increased population at Lincoln Station may have some percentage of people who use  the commuter rail.  But there is no guarantee that they will.  Let’s say that the percentage of new households with someone who uses the commuter rail would be 50%, which I think is high.  Most every one of the those households will have a significant other who will not use the commuter rail, but will commute by car.  So, given the 50% who do not use the commuter rail, plus the significant others, every new household will add roughly 1.5 cars per day to the commuter traffic in Lincoln.

 

3.  Yes, we would all like to see more affordable housing in Lincoln, but nothing in the proposed zoning changes guarantees that.  Developers’ goal is to make money.  They will build the most profitable types of housing they can.  The only way they will build less expensive housing is if that housing is subsidized by the town (or whomever), either through direct payments to reduce sale prices or rents, or though allowing them to build more units of expensive housing than they would normally be permitted.

 

The new zoning proposal sounds great on the surface, but when you think about it a little, it’s really not so attractive.

 

Best,

Mark

 

From: Taylor, Gary <[hidden email]>
Sent: Sunday, September 8, 2019 6:08 PM
To: Sara Mattes <[hidden email]>
Cc: Andrew Payne <[hidden email]>; Robin Wilkerson <[hidden email]>; <[hidden email]> <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

Sara,

 

The issue isn’t really Lincoln’s carbon footprint.  We are an infinitesimal piece of the overall puzzle of how to save coming generations from some of the more dire consequences of our profligacy.  Denser, mass transit-oriented housing at Lincoln Station will reduce car commuting, increase walking and bicycle traffic, and as an added benefit, help us maintain a viable and active commercial center.  All this activity would for the most part be constrained to areas already zoned commercial or for multifamily housing, so it wouldn’t undercut our generous single family zoning, and it would enhance opportunities to access the trail and cultural amenities that you cite as Lincoln’s contribution to the region.  As an added benefit, it would encourage the development in Lincoln of the mid-range, RELATIVELY less expensive housing that we so sorely lack.

 

This isn’t to ignore other pieces of the puzzle like regional shuttle service, but I hope that you can see this as a step in the right direction.  As always, I’m happy to discuss such issues further.

 

Best,

Gary

 

 

 

From: Sara Mattes [[hidden email]]
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 4:49 PM
To: Taylor, Gary
Cc: Andrew Payne; Robin Wilkerson; <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

(-well, you opened the door....)

 

I’ll be interested in hearing how increased density addresses Lincoln’s carbon footprint.

More people=more carbon footprint than we have now.

It may address a regional issue-the MAPC drumbeat, but I can’t see where it helps LINCOLN reduce its own footprint.

 

Years ago MAPC challenged our zoning.

They have a one-size-fits all approach, and left to them, all towns would look the same.

Luckily our regional alliances, at the time, supported us and the notion that Lincoln offered regional amenities ( open space, tails, ag) close to and accessible from the urban core, and those were worth protecting.

Our 2 acre zoning contributed to that.

I pray we have not lost that position and have been drawn into the MAPC roadmap to homogeneity.

 

I will stay tuned.

 

Best,

Sara

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad


On Sep 8, 2019, at 3:32 PM, Taylor, Gary <[hidden email]> wrote:

Andy wrote:

 

That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

I may have to start ducking, but just to let everyone know, the South Lincoln Planning and Implementation Committee  (SLPIC), a subcommittee of the Planning Board, will be presenting just such a change to our zoning bylaw in the Lincoln Station (Mall) area near the commuter rail station.  This was laid out in a recent, well attended, public meeting and will the subject of a lot more public discussion before next year’s Town Meeting.  So stay tuned!

 

Gary

 

 

From: Lincoln [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Andrew Payne
Sent: Sunday, September 08, 2019 3:24 PM
To: Robin Wilkerson
Cc: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [LincolnTalk] Spraying...

 

Robin Wilkerson wrote:

 

If climate change - and skyrocketing cancer rates - don't teach us about the result of short term gains over long terms costs, ...

 

No. Cancer rates are not "skyrocketing".  

 

Incidence has actually been on the decline since the early 90s.  See:  https://progressreport.cancer.gov/diagnosis/incidence . (graph below).  As Dennis noted, with diagnostic and treatment advances, mortality rates for cancer are clearly dropping.

 

There may be other very good reasons to avoid non-discriminate spraying, but we'll have the best chance with any policy if first make sure our facts are in order (respectfully).

 

I highly recommend the movie The Biggest Little Farm. It is very instructive on how people - getting out of the way - is the best solution to our survival.

 

With 7.53 billion people now, it's very hard to "get out of the way" -- we began as guests on planet Earth, and now we own it.  

 

And a real "solution" has been politically unpalatable so far:  fundamental, widespread lifestyle changes.  One example:  moving away from single-family homes to multi-family & apartments, which get a lot more people housed for much lower energy costs (direct and indirect), shrink the road network we have to build and maintain, lower transportation demands (no driving to play dates; just take the elevator!), etc.  That's how we "get people out of the way" for nature, but suggest zoning that permits higher density housing (for example), and people will lose their minds.  Or, point out that our 2ac zoning has actually driven a pretty high per-resident energy footprint, with about ~50ft of (mostly) paved public road per resident (~5k non-Hanscom residents, ~50mi of roads) among other things...and duck.

 

The solutions are there; we're just not ready for them yet.

 

One person's view,

 

-andy

 

 

<image001.png>

 

 

******************
 
IMPORTANT NOTICE FROM THE BRATTLE GROUP: This message, and any attachments, are
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and
may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure
under applicable law. Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error
please notify me immediately by return email and immediately delete the original and all
copies of the message and any attachments to it. Note also that nothing in this message is
intended to constitute an electronic signature or otherwise to satisfy the requirements for
a contract unless an express statement to the contrary is included in the message.

Please ensure you have adequate virus protection before you open or use attachments.
The Brattle Group does not accept any liability for viruses.

 
******************

--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.


--
The LincolnTalk mailing list.
To post, send mail to [hidden email].
Search the archives at http://lincoln.2330058.n4.nabble.com/.
Browse the archives at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/private/lincoln/.
Change your subscription settings at https://pairlist9.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/lincoln.