271
submitted 11 months ago by deconstruct@lemm.ee to c/news@lemmy.world

In just one night, more than a thousand migrating birds died after crashing into a single building in Chicago, due to what experts say was a deadly combination of migration season, difficult weather, and a lack of “bird-friendly” building measures.

Philadelphia has dimmed its skyline after a 'mass collision' killed thousands of migrating birds

The Chicago Field Museum collected more than a thousand dead birds that had collided with the McCormick Place Lakeside Center, a convention center located on the shore of Lake Michigan, Wednesday night into Thursday morning, Annette Prince, director of Chicago Bird Collision Monitors, told CNN.

Volunteers working with Chicago Bird Collision Monitors collected an additional thousand dead birds from the city’s downtown area, said Prince. And there were likely more birds that flew away after colliding into a building but later died of their injuries, she said.

“It was overwhelming and tragic to see this many birds,” Prince said. “I went to a building where, when I walked up to the building, it was like there was just a carpet of dead and dying and injured birds.”

A combination of factors likely contributed to the extraordinary number of deadly collisions, Prince said.

There was a particularly high volume of birds set to migrate south for the winter that night. The birds had been waiting for winds from the north or west to ease their journey. “Those birds essentially piled up,” Prince said. When the right winds arrived on Wednesday, a large number of birds set off for their migration at once. Additionally, “there were foggy and low cloud conditions, which can bring them into confusion with lights and buildings,” Prince said. The clouds likely caused the birds to fly at a lower altitude, bringing them closer into contact with buildings. McCormick Place in particular “is one of the first buildings birds encounter as they move along Lake Michigan,” she said.

all 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 46 points 11 months ago

It didn't have to be this way

In 2006, not one of the major bird conservation organizations considered window collisions a serious issue, though Dr. Daniel Klem of Muhlenberg College had been publishing studies about it since his 1979 Ph.D. dissertation. The Wilson Bulletin and Journal of Field Ornithology had both published his scientific work, but reviewers for the American Ornithologists’ Union’s journal The Auk rejected every one of his papers out of hand because they—some of the top ornithologists on the continent—didn’t think window strikes constituted a legitimate conservation issue. They wanted research to focus on habitat loss at nesting, wintering, and stopover areas rather than what they considered a minor, localized issue that didn’t affect many species.

In 1990, Klem published two papers in The Journal of Field Ornithology, “Bird injuries, cause of death, and recuperation from collisions with windows” and “Collisions between birds and windows: mortality and prevention” in which he calculated that between 100 million and 1 billion birds are killed in window collisions every year in the United States alone. Again, his work was dismissed by most conservation biologists. If they acknowledged Klem’s work at all, scientists at major conservation non-profits and universities said his numbers were off by orders of magnitude.

Klem had been approaching manufacturers to try to find a window glass that birds could see as an obstruction to avoid, but it was slow-going. If the major ornithological institutions were all denying that a problem even existed, how could glass manufacturers benefit from solving it?

...

In 2009, Daniel Klem presented a paper at a conference of the International Partners in Flight titled, “Avian Mortality at Windows: The Second Largest Human Source of Bird Mortality on Earth.” The news media picked up on it, and suddenly conservation biologists were being inundated with questions about window collisions. Because they had long been saying the problem was trivial compared to habitat loss, they launched their own studies to finally prove their case and put the issue to rest.

Except oops!—their own studies proved that Klem was spot on. But rather than admit they’d been wrong to dismiss his work for over a quarter century, they made it sound as if their scientists had just discovered a brand new problem.

...

The way our country allocates so very few resources for conservation work, researchers, institutions, and organizations must scrabble for every donation and grant, leading to cutthroat competition. As more researchers started working with glass manufacturers, they stayed in competitor rather than collaborator mode. At this point, no glass is 100 percent bird safe, but to find the best realistic solutions, scientists must remember that the whole point of this critical work is to protect birds, not to shore up their own standing and funding by ignoring or even attacking others trying to solve the same problems.

Meanwhile, in recent months I’ve been getting mass emails from the Ornithology Center at Muhlenberg College with subject lines such as “Experts Warn the Native Plants may Create Ecological Traps,” filled with dire warnings against growing native plants because windows are the real problem.

...

I’m dismayed that the very scientist who was the victim of other scientists minimizing the value of his research on window collisions for so many decades is part of a new effort to minimize the importance of backyard habitat. It’s not either/or! Safe glass and natural habitat are BOTH essential for the future of birds.

Whether we have expertise in a single conservation issue or a hundred; whether our primary focus is native plants, window collisions, pesticides, cat predation, climate change, Bird Friendly certified coffee, beef production, mowing schedules to protect nestling Bobolinks and meadowlarks, or anything else; and whether we’re individuals on our own or part of larger institutions or organizations, let’s all of us who care about birds aim our fire at what’s hurting them, not at one another.

[-] GaimDS@lemmy.world 20 points 11 months ago

Damn, we really are just obliterating earth lmao, this is real bad

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 28 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Humanity is the worst thing to happen to Earth since at least the Chicxulub Asteroid 66 million years ago.

We are a plague upon this world and all non-human life on it, as well as one another.

All for what? So that the most mentally ill, sociopathic humans in existence can live like gods of gluttony on the backs of the vast majority of their own species' misery. Our species is a waste of life, a macro-cancer of Earth's biome that spreads and consumes with zero consideration.

At this point, the most accidentally benevolent thing we can do is use our technology to destroy ourselves, so that the planet can begin to heal from yet another mass extinction event, as it has many times.

[-] CarbonatedPastaSauce@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

Every passing year my viewpoint shifts further towards supporting the antagonist in 12 Monkeys.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Growing up, I dreamed humanity may one day grow into something resembling Gene Roddenberry's dream for our species: exploration, common purpose, benevolence, empathy, etc.

The longer I live though, the more I realize we're some bastard species more self-destructive and duplicitous than Romulans and somehow greedier and more sociopathic than ferengi.

If only humanity possessed even a small fraction of the positive traits in humanity's empty rhetoric about humanity. It's not even about having to still learn and grow, as humanity constantly proves, even in the age of digital storage, that we refuse to learn the lessons of history for longer than a single generation at most.

[-] SheeEttin@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

The thing about Star Trek is that there was a nuclear holocaust before they hit post-scarcity

[-] Jilanico@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago

And from the ashes, another sentient life form will evolve and repeat all our mistakes, perhaps make even worse mistakes. Instead of mass suicide, how about we focus on solving the problems you identified? There are indeed horrible humans, but there are also plenty of incredibly wonderful humans.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Because the owners have intentionally visible places for people that refuse to play ball and propagate this race to oblivion for short term profit. These places exist to serve as a warning to people like you and I to go back into making them money silently and obediently for scraps as the planet burns:

If you fight back and don't have excess capital to sustain yourself somehow somewhere, you'll be made into a capitalism scarecrow to serve them by publically dying of exposure and ~~police~~ capital defense force harassment. The owners aren't waging class war, they won it handily half a century ago, under Reagan here, Thatcher in the UK, etc. This is a class occupation. That's its own problem, but it stops us from interfering with the occupier's interests, namely killing the planet with us on it for short term profit.

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 1 points 11 months ago

Bell Riots when

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Zink@programming.dev 16 points 11 months ago

You guys this is bad. Zelenskyy himself is viewing the casualties.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 months ago

It's weird how similar they look. If someone said that was him, I'd believe them.

[-] SaltySalamander@kbin.social 14 points 11 months ago

There must have been a windmill on that building.....

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago

Why are we making buildings that are mostly glass? Are we convinced climate change isn't real still?

[-] eltimablo@kbin.social 7 points 11 months ago

Do you want to work in a windowless office for 9-10 hours a day, 5 days a week? I'm not saying we can't shrink the windows down, but having worked in a building with very few windows for way too long, it begins to feel like a jail cell extremely quickly.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 4 points 11 months ago

Isn't it also more ecological to have good natural lighting?

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Not when the trade off is a mostly glass building. Temperature control takes more energy than light.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

I mean yeah but doesn't solar heating more space naturally also cut back?

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

Not enough to offset the increased AC use to offset the fact the building is made of glass. We really should stop making buildings like this.

[-] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Everyone knows it's real at some level, most just delude themselves into believing/hoping it won't be their problem, as is human tradition.

There's capitalist profit to be made, after all.

I just wish we could leave a giant, titanium gravestone the size of a skyscraper for future dolphin archeologists that reads "Humanity: for one shining moment in time, we generated a lot of money for shareholders!" Because that's all we cared about, to our own extinction, and I'd like that to be the only discoverable fact about our species by any future sapient species. I want the insatiable greed and greed worship that defined humanity to ourselves to be our epitaph.

[-] macallik@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

Positive psychological impact of sunlight is my guess

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

How would you do it? Vertical prisons and pay for running lights all day with the only way to change temperatures is by HVAC vs simply closing and opening a blind?

Oh look at this free source of energy that makes people happy. Let's go get rid of it.

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago

What are you talking about? This is a glass office building in Chicago. It will leak heat and air conditioning because it is mostly glass. It should be made from concrete or stone as those are more environmentally friendly.

[-] jeremyparker@programming.dev 2 points 11 months ago

Fwiw I used to live in a mostly-glass building in Chicago and the sun the winter made it so that we basically never turned the heat on. Summer heat, on the other hand - we needed A/C

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago

And if you were mostly concrete you might not have needed either.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago

Enjoy your societ-style concrete block

[-] Peaty@sh.itjust.works 0 points 11 months ago

Why does it have to brutalist? The Empire State. Building is mostly concrete as are many buildings. What they shouldn't be is massive glass towers.

Climate change is coming and it doesn't give a fuck about your sense of aesthetics.

[-] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago
[-] fellstone@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 11 months ago

Killing 2 birds with 1 stone has really come a long way.

[-] xc2215x@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

That is really sad for so many birds.

[-] money_loo@1337lemmy.com 3 points 11 months ago

Apparently this is a yearly thing there…sheesh.

[-] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 4 points 11 months ago

This one was "enormous", though.

The number of birds killed at McCormick Place during that one night is around the same as would typically die from collisions at the building in a year, according to Farnsworth.

[-] DanglingFury@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

Sounds like Rand is in Chicago. /WoT

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago

No, I said the medium chicken bucket!

[-] edgemaster72@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

My apologies sir, your other thousand will be ready shortly.

[-] tdawg@lemmy.world 0 points 11 months ago

Man, idk why but the title made me burst out laughing. Like one of those wierd opposite reaction moments

this post was submitted on 10 Oct 2023
271 points (96.9% liked)

News

22869 readers
4232 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS