Remix.run Logo
SilverElfin 5 days ago

One thing I don’t understand is why so many appreciate the Everglades. To me a landscape infested with aggressive animals (gators) doesn’t sound attractive or safe. Between them and the invasive snakes I feel like you would need to be on guard all the time. Maybe drain it, replace it with different animals that are friendly, and then refill it. I’m only sort of joking.

CGMthrowaway 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

During the lockdown I canoed thru the everglades and camped on the islands as it was one of the only places open. It's a lot more than gators. I saw a family of dolphins teaching their child to swim and jump. The fishing is incredible. The gators arent the worst pest (the biting insects are). You can spot manatee. Of course it's a paradise for birds. And that way that mangroves ultimately create dry land from nothing is quite amazing.

rexpop 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The perspective that nature, including the Everglades, should be "attractive or safe" for human convenience is profoundly misguided and chauvinistic. Nature does not exist for humanity's comfort or aesthetic preferences—its value and purpose are independent of human desires or perceptions. The Everglades is a complex, irreplaceable ecosystem essential for biodiversity, climate regulation, water filtration, and flood control. It hosts countless species found nowhere else on Earth, including apex predators like alligators, which are critical to the ecological balance.

To suggest draining such a vital natural landscape and replacing its inhabitants with "friendly" animals ignores the intricate interdependencies that sustain these ecosystems. This not only threatens extinction of unique species but undermines the health of the entire region, affecting millions of people who rely on its ecosystem services. Demanding nature conform to a sanitized or human-safe version reflects a narrow, anthropocentric arrogance.

The wildness of the Everglades is part of its profound purpose and beauty. Any view that diminishes this is reductive, environmentally ignorant, and ethically troubling. Nature is not a backdrop to human desires but a living system demanding protection, understanding, and awe.

nlitened 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

> Nature does not exist for humanity's comfort or aesthetic preferences

To be fair, in most religions (including christianity and atheism) it kinda does

Scarblac 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

Atheism isn't a religion and as an atheist I find that an offensive statement.

Nature existed before we did and will exist after us, it can't be true that it exists for us.

nlitened 4 days ago | parent [-]

> it can't be true that it exists for us

You're saying it as if you assume some external entity judging whether something exists for somebody or not.

As an atheist you would acknowledge that the entire concept of "existing for something/somebody" is entirely a construct of human mind, which human mentally applies to the observable universe around them. So for an atheistic human mind, everything exists for human, as there's nobody else to exist for.

4 days ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
rexpop 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

We're putting too much pressure on the word "for", here. There are no great truths to be found at this level of linguistic imprecision .

goatlover 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Doesn't matter what those religions claim, nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us. On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas. And life may exist on other planets.

nlitened 4 days ago | parent [-]

> nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us

If this is true (and I believe it is), then it does not really matter much what humanity does in the big picture. Might as well drain some swamps and seas to reclaim some land.

> On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas

You can both acknowledge that, and believe that human must do what's good for humans and animals that are good for humans.

vixen99 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I have to say - thank you for that!

tbyehl 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Maybe drain it, replace it with different animals that are friendly, and then refill it. I’m only sort of joking.

It's not a zoo. Jungle Island might be more your speed. Staff have chastised me for rubbing the kangaroos' bellies, saying they really don't like that, but in my defense he rolled over for me to do it. YMMV.

What lead me to appreciating the Everglades was randomly deciding to go to Shark Valley / Bobcat Boardwalk Trail on some cold day in February. The annoying bugs were mostly gone to wherever they go when it's cold, the 'gators were lounging around trying to catch some warmth, and the anhingas and other water birds were quite active. I caught a guided walking tour somewhere and what really stuck with me was how every tiny rise in elevation up to a few feet completely changes the ecosystem. I'd lived in Florida practically my whole life until then and never really "seen" that but from then on I could never not see it. I left 15 years ago and whenever I drive home for a visit, crossing that threshold into southern Florida where I start seeing it again brings me comfort.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Everglades#Ecosystems

bubblyworld 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I think there's a bit of "Chesterton's fence" with these issues. If you don't know enough about the ecosystem to appreciate its complexity (aggressive animals are a tiny part of what's going on there) then you definitely shouldn't be allowed to remove or change it. Human ecological interventions have a bad track record.

ux266478 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Alligators are the exact opposite of aggressive. If you walk up and pat one on the head it'll probably just hiss and start slinking away at the speed of syrup. You should be more afraid of the spiders and blood-sucking insects.

pharrington 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm way more afraid of the humans that want to drain and eradicate the native population of the Everglades!

ux266478 5 days ago | parent [-]

Even putting aside that it destroys incredible natural beauty for land that's not even productively useful, it astounds me that people still buy into major terraforming projects. Every single time it's had absolutely horrendous consequences often with millions of human deaths attached. Don't make large changes to chaotic systems!

potato3732842 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

>Even putting aside that it destroys incredible natural beauty for land that's not even productively useful, it astounds me that people still buy into major terraforming projects. Every single time it's had absolutely horrendous consequences often with millions of human deaths attached. Don't make large changes to chaotic systems!

Ah, yes, terrible consequences, such as, the irrigation and suitability for farmland of central California, the lack of frequent flooding of the Mississippi river and tributaries and the present dryness of the Netherlands.

I don't think draining the everglades is tractable and I think it's more valuable as is since you're not gonna out farm the midwest. But it's really easy to be on a high horse and not appreciate the successful projects that we benefit from the results of.

jonstewart 5 days ago | parent | next [-]

It does not take much familiarity with the history of Mississippi flood control and the Army Corps of Engineers to realize how risky, fraught, and short-sighted the whole project has been. The delta's dying and the Old River Control Structure is one bad day away from diverting the entire river to the Atchafalaya.

_The Great River_ by Boyce Upholt from last year is a good place to start learning about the Mississippi.

jason_s 4 days ago | parent [-]

Or John McPhee's "Atchafalaya".

jonstewart 3 days ago | parent [-]

I'm currently reading Annals of the Former World. :-)

4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]
[deleted]
ux266478 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> the irrigation and suitability for farmland of central California

The unsustainable irrigation that's draining aquifers during droughts and causing permanent damage[1] to groundwater retention? The irrigation that's causing changes in land topography[2]?

> the lack of frequent flooding of the Mississippi river

You mean the system which is a well known ecological disaster?[3][4][5]

And no frequent flooding? Since 2017, the Mississippi River Corridor Critical Area (which covers only a small portion of the watershed) has seen the USDA pay out $11.4 billion[6] to cover damages from flooding. I live in the watershed and for most of the summer I get flood alerts every time it rains. Damages are on the news constantly. In 2008, a tributary river flooded so badly it destroyed two mid-sized cities in Iowa[7]. Then you have the the 2011 flooding[8] of the Mississippi which was the most disastrous since before most modifications had been made to the river. Lack of frequent flooding? Just because you don't hear about it doesn't mean it's not happening.

Like what are we talking about here? Even reaching for what you assume to be innocuous examples, empirically observable negative consequences hang off of them like fruiting bodies. Who knows what the consequences will look like in 100-200 years when they've had time to iteratively feed back into themselves.

[1] - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30197456/

[2] - https://www.usgs.gov/centers/land-subsidence-in-california

[3] - https://repository.lsu.edu/geo_pubs/2126/

[4] - https://repository.lsu.edu/geo_pubs/1614/

[5] - https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2023/03/230306143336.h...

[6] - https://www.ewg.org/research/usda-policies-fall-short-helpin...

[7] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iowa_flood_of_2008

[8] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Mississippi_River_floods

potato3732842 4 days ago | parent [-]

This is exactly the sort of ignorant of the past viewpoint I was complaining about.

The part of CA we're talking about was a desert shithole before (arguably still is). There's debate about just how much we can sustainably irrigate it, but at least we can irrigate it. The alternative is basically no agricultural activity. Maybe some grazing.

Ditto for the Mississippi. It floods "a little" now vs "somewhere on it is getting wiped out just about every year" before. If it's only happening once a decade now that's a huge improvement. You can mislead all you want by saying things like "worst since X" and whatnot but the fact of the matter is that the system clearly works ok if most of the Xs are from before the system was there.

The material wealth generated by the economic activity enabled by these two projects is almost impossible to quantify.

I think it speaks volumes that you didn't even attempt to address my 3rd example.

jason_s 4 days ago | parent [-]

You talking about the Imperial Valley or the Central Valley? The former is naturally desert, the latter was naturally abundant in wetlands and flood-prone grasslands, before agriculture took over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salton_Trough

It sounds like you're talking about the Imperial Valley, which is a different ball of wax from the whole wetland-draining argument here.

I object to "desert shithole" --- the Sonoran Desert is an ecosystem worthy of value in its own right, we just don't benefit from it as humans unless we turn to resource extraction or agriculture.

potato3732842 4 days ago | parent [-]

You're right I misspoke. I'm talking about the Imperial valley.

seszett 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Every single time it's had absolutely horrendous consequences often with millions of human deaths attached

Although I think it's best for nature to leave things how they are, draining the Landes in France (a swampy area comparable to that of the Everglades) and replacing it with a pine forest only had positive impacts on the humans living there (if only because it was a major step towards eradicating malaria in France).

To be honest though, it was originally a forest, and had turned into a swamp after being deforested by humans in the early middle ages.

thepryz 4 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I generally agree though I have to say I’ve been impressed by China’s efforts to reduce desertification. It’s not perfect, but they seem to have an evolving strategy and the right priorities.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/scotttravers/2025/03/25/why-chi...

blitzar 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If you walk up to me and pat me on the head I will probably hiss and start slinking away at the speed of syrup too

downut 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I do not think that a 12' gator is going to appreciate you patting it on the head. And for short distances, they can outrun a human. That said I am a 3rd generation S. Floridian who grew up 50 years ago swimming and water skiing in the canals along what was then two-lane Highway 84, out west of Plantation, nothing much else there. Never had a problem, but the big ones got shot, officially or not.

Fun story: I was slaloming bank to bank down that canal and wiped out. The canal is narrow enough the boat has to slow down and idle around the u-turn to then plane up to get back, so it takes a bit. There was a high arched water pipe over the canal and a kid parked on the apex. Kid sez, there's a gator next to you. I said, sure, right kid. Kid sez, there's a gator next to you... and I look and yep, maybe a 6', 7' gator about 10' away. Well... not much to do... I started waving the ski and a couple of minutes later they throw me the rope and I orientated and up and away I went. ha haha. Good times. I think I was 15.

Another one: Buddy of mine is on two skis and is kinda mellowing out just running down that same canal and I'm driving and see a gator ahead in the middle of the canal, and why not, I steer around the gator and then steer him right over it and it explodes in a huge splash ha aha haar I am just laughing at the memory and he looks back and then back at me with a big shit eating grin. I was probably 16.

Same canal: I got this hot gf I'm trying to teach to ski and she's fiddling with the skis, as you do starting out, and a nice 5' tarpon rolls about 6' away from her. Panic! We're like no no no they do not bite, it's just a tarpon, they're friendlies! Oh well, no water skiing for her. I was... 17.

But I'm not here to tell you these stories. I'm here to talk about the river of grass, the Everglades. Many millions have lived around the periphery but you can look at maps and see it's a long way across with "nothing" there. How would you see the vast scope of the interior, in an efficient way, right down at water level?

Family 2 doors over in Melaleuca Isles (still exists, I see) the father was the district superintendent (I think) for the Florida Fish & Game Commission, or whatever it's called these days. In those days the US was a normal country and everybody hung out, the kids, the parents. So I'm over there in the morning and he says want to go on patrol. I say sure. So we drive the airboat out to the launch point on 84 (Alligator Alley) and off we go. This thing had a Lycoming flat six and there's not much to the boat but the Al flat hull, the two tier seats, and the enormous engine and propeller. And for 5 hours, at speeds peaking at 100mph[1], we criss cross the entire sector of the Everglades north of Hghwy 84. I stopped counting deer in the sawgrass in the water at 100. The vistas were of an endless prairie of sawgrass. He drove across the hammocks where there was grass by just powering the boat onto the land and then over.

I came away from that experience with a full appreciation of the scope of the Everglades, the idea of it, and am sad that the idea of wilderness has softened like melting fat into an ideal of a cozy unthreatening warm bath. There is nothing that can be accurately described as wilderness unless organisms endemic there are present and may be out to eat you. Starting with mosquitos and ending with alligators.

[1] In those medieval times we did not know nor understand the term "eye protection" and so I had none, though my neighbor did. He didn't care. At 100mph your face is quite distorted. Some debris is getting through the screen on the front of the boat. What a MF adventure.

ninininino 4 days ago | parent [-]

Thanks for sharing your stories, I enjoyed them.

jason-phillips 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I used to swim with alligators in the bayou when I was a kid in the 1980s. They're not so bad.

Dilettante_ 5 days ago | parent [-]

Amos Moses, is that you?

5 days ago | parent [-]
[deleted]
hnuser123456 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It sounds like hurricanes keep it topped off. So then what, you design some poison to only attack gators, then find out later it poisons people too? Because draining it and then discovering that underground wells turn to saltwater isn't enough?

hedora 5 days ago | parent [-]

It’s fine. Future generations can just put the freshwater back in the wells, like we currently do to keep Silicon Valley from sinking into the bay.

soperj 5 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I feel the same way about Miami.

NickC25 4 days ago | parent | next [-]

I live in SoFLA in the Miami metro area.

People can't stop building here. I don't get it. It's going to be under water in under 50 years. Yet for some reason there's a 100+ story building going up across from Bayfront Park and Ken Griffin is spending a billion on a massive tower in Brickell.

fijiaarone 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Everything from Miami to Ft. Myers was the Everglades.

internet_points 4 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have never been there and don't plan to. Still I wish for it to exist, so the many complicated, wild, strange and wonderful creatures and plants that have been dependent on that ecosystem for ages can continue to exist.

hunter-gatherer 5 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You'd make a terrible wildlife biologist.