Comments wren7 has made

Chip, congratulations!!!  What an honor to win this prestigious award, and what well-deserved recognition of your work on behalf of the environment.  We long-time Grist subscribers know that Grist is the best darned environmental site out there, but for the establishment to also recognize it is awesome.

I used to subscribe to numerous other environmental email services but finally un-subscribed to all of them except for Grist -- because all the others were total doom and gloom.  I was about to jump off a cliff from the depressing news.  With Grist, I get the important environmental news, but it always makes me laugh.  Your original idea of bringing some levity to environmental reporting really works!

I'll be reading Grist for years to come.

From a birder and a cat owner ...

I found these posts and the article interesting, because I'm a birder and a cat owner.  By birder I mean I go on week-long birding trips to see new species to add to my life list; I don't just "like birds."  I love both species, birds and cats.  However, I have read enough (and seen enough behavior from my prior cats and my current cat) that I realize as much as I'd like to let my cat roam outdoors, it is hugely unfair to the wild bird population, which as some posters above correctly pointed out, did not evolve with domesticated cats and so cannot escape from them.  It's a grossly unfair balance, with birds on the losing side.  Every study that's been done says that cats kill many millions of birds annually.  And only some of these birds are non-native, nuisance species such as European starlings and House Sparrows (neither of which are protected in the U.S.).  As annoying as some may find blue jays, they are a native species and are protected.  Cats kill millions upon millions of warblers, wrens, flycatchers and other native (and endangered or threatened) birds each year.  Really, songbirds and other wild bird species are in enough trouble due to humans (habitat destruction, climate change, pollution, etc.) that they shouldn't have to deal with cats too.

My current (one) cat has been indoors-only since we adopted him from a rescue group as a young kitten.  And he's a happy cat.  Actually, he loves watching the birds at the feeders just outside our kitchen window.  He's safe and the birds are safe.  I love cats -- but I wish every cat owner would keep their cat(s) indoors.  On Umbra on cats and birds posted 2 years ago 72 Responses

From a regular Whole Foods shopper

I live in Austin, TX, the headquarters of Whole Foods. We have one of their "flagship" stores downtown, and it is truly an incredible place.  It's enormous; the selection is almost overwhelming; you can buy nuts freshly roasted in the store or sit down and eat at one of about 15 stations scattered throughout the store with freshly prepared foods. It is a beautiful place.  But the prices are extremely high pretty much across the board. We do have a couple of other, much smaller natural food stores here, including two Sun Harvest stores, which are owned by Wild Oats.

The prices at Sun Harvest are usually lower, and often much lower, than those at WF. Sun Harvest also has fantastic sales that I never see at WF, such as 25% off of all vitamins and supplements or 25% off of all body care products. If WF is allowed to take over Wild Oats, I'd be surprised if they kept the Sun Harvest stores here open, and even if they did, they would never keep these types of prices and sales. The result would be fewer choices for purchasers of natural and organic products and higher prices.

On a different note, I was saddened after reading the (excellent) post by Tom Philpott. This was the first I've heard some of these facts about John Mackey and the apparent philosophy of Whole Foods.  I used to have a positive opinion of WF, but that just changed. It doesn't sound that different to me from Wal-Mart or Microsoft. It just wants to gobble up all of its competition and hurt its suppliers and many others in the process.  

I hope the FTC does block this takeover. I'm amazed the FTC is even paying attention, since I don't remember it ever blocking a corporate merger or takeover (it probably has but I can't recall an example), but as Tom pointed out, Mr. Mackey gave the FTC ample ammunition with his own words.On Why the FTC is right to block Whole Foods' buyout of Wild Oats posted 2 years, 4 months ago 28 Responses

Ann Coulter

Every time I see Coulter on TV (and I try not to), I wonder if she actually believes all the far-right wing blather she spews forth, or if it's all an act. I don't see how anyone could be so extremely one-sided who has an ounce of intelligence ... and anyone these days who continues to say global warming is just a big hoax, as she did on this Fox video clip, is a total moron.  Hasn't the White House even caved, finally, and admitted (since every scientist of any caliber in the world says it is real) that the climate is indeed warming, and that humans are largely responsible?

After all, she sells lots of books with this crap and right-wing conservatives eat it up and keep her rich by buying her books.

She is also probably the most vitriolic, hate-filled person I've ever seen.  A totally negative person.On My aborted adventure on Fox posted 2 years, 9 months ago 11 Responses

Other bidders

From the NYT article:  "Monday's merger agreement allows TXU's board to solicit bids from other potential buyers through April 16, and TXU said it intends to do so."

It remains to be seen whether other bidders might drive up the price of the buyout, and if so whether environmental issues will become less important than in the current Kohlberg Kravis Roberts/Texas Pacific Group deal.  I hope not.
On Some details emerge posted 2 years, 9 months ago 6 Responses

Adios

Regarding your comment, "None of us really knows how we are coming across.  Regarding trollishness and flaming, there is a technical psychological term, something like Online Disinhibition Effect.  But more generally, even when we are civil, or assuming we are being civil, we come across differently than how we would come across were we face-to-face."

Amen.  I for one will probably not post here again.On How do you choose yours? posted 2 years, 9 months ago 54 Responses

A good plague

Jason, you wrote:  "The point being, that I think that addressing these issues is a GREATER priority than addressing climate change right now."

What bigger issue could there be right now than global climate change??  If we don't get serious about climate change NOW, there will not be a liveable earth for our children or their children to inhabit.  Forget issues like Guinea worm, malaria and AIDS -- millions of people will likely be displaced by extreme drought, starvation, and poverty, not to mention increased flooding, hurricanes and rising sea levels.  Some scientists say we've already waited too long.

In my mind, humans have so devastated the environment in many places on this earth and consequently the ability of the earth to support life (look at what's happening in the Amazon for just one example) that I seriously question whether this small planet will even be able to support mankind several hundred years from now.  Oh, and there's the ability of humans to reproduce at a rate that the earth is barely able to support now, not to mention the future.  Over 6 billion people now with projections at 9 billion in the not-too-distant future.

My husband and I joke (and we're not entirely joking) that "what the world needs now" isn't love, but a good plague to seriously reduce the world's population.  And lest anyone say "that's easy for you to say," we both volunteer.  I'm so weary of the ability of humans to destroy not just each other but the planet that I think it may be the only way the earth will survive.  I know this is a draconian view, and I wish I didn't feel this way.

Lisa
On How do you choose yours? posted 2 years, 9 months ago 54 Responses

Having Kids

I'm a 44 year old married female, and I long ago decided not to have kids.  (My husband has a grown daughter from his first marriage and was fine with not having any more.)  At the time it wasn't because I was an environmentalist (I wasn't until a few years ago), but because I just don't like kids.  That's a radical thing to say in this world, and certainly in this country.  I must have been born without the "mommy gene," because I have never felt the urge to have a baby.  I have several female friends around my age who feel the same way, and they chose not to have children either.  All are well educated and have satisfying careers.  We whisper among ourselves that we are glad we don't have kids; we all have friends who do, and they are exhausted, have no time for themselves, and are financially strapped due to the huge cost of raising kids and trying to save for college.

I don't understand why so many people who do want kids have two, three, even four or more children.  What's wrong with having just one, which would ease the burdens on working parents and allow many of them to save both for college and for their own retirement?

I often feel like a "female mutant" for feeling this way, because it is definitely not the norm.  But since becoming an environmentalist several years ago, I have another reason to be glad that I'm childless.On When it comes to having kids, this global citizen can't bear it posted 3 years, 11 months ago 13 Responses

Having Kids

I'm a 44 year old married female, and I long ago decided not to have kids.  (My husband has a grown daughter from his first marriage and was fine with not having any more.)  At the time it wasn't because I was an environmentalist (I wasn't until a few years ago), but because I just don't like kids.  That's a radical thing to say in this world, and certainly in this country.  I must have been born without the "mommy gene," because I have never felt the urge to have a baby.  I have several female friends around my age who feel the same way, and they chose not to have children either.  All are well educated and have satisfying careers.  We whisper among ourselves that we are glad we don't have kids; we all have friends who do, and they are exhausted, have no time for themselves, and are financially strapped due to the huge cost of raising kids and trying to save for college.

I don't understand why so many people who do want kids have two, three, even four or more children.  What's wrong with having just one, which would ease the burdens on working parents and allow many of them to save both for college and for their own retirement?

I often feel like a "female mutant" for feeling this way, because it is definitely not the norm.  But since becoming an environmentalist several years ago, I have another reason to be glad that I'm childless.On Is too few people the new "population problem"? posted 3 years, 11 months ago 13 Responses