Wish I noticed before submitting, I would have just shared that instead. Oh well. Thanks.
ElijahLynn 14 hours ago [-]
the comedy was what got me through it, probably wouldn't have read the Wikipedia article, fwiw.
randallsquared 11 hours ago [-]
No, this was much more entertaining to read.
zem 14 hours ago [-]
I enjoyed the author's style, personally
rubyfan 10 hours ago [-]
Felt like AI to me
littlestymaar 1 hours ago [-]
Please tell me which AI writes like that by default so I can recommend it to everyone who copy-paste the obnoxious chatGPT slop answers in the comment sections.
4pkjai 3 hours ago [-]
Normally I don't, but liked the humour.
xorcist 4 hours ago [-]
What's not funny is the amount of podcast episodes that are two guys summarizing the wikipedia article, trying to be funny.
When civilization ends, we will look back at podcast episodes more numerous than the stars in the sky, and wonder if it that was really the most productive use of our entropy.
hitekker 13 hours ago [-]
In addition, it feels like the author asked an AI to do the narration for him. He made some edits here and there but the humor feels off.
hypercube33 5 hours ago [-]
Thank you.
Another example of draining wetland is Mexico City I think. Drained to farm and then developed on.
yieldcrv 7 hours ago [-]
> Opinion about the value of Florida to the Union was mixed
was?
this article is hilarious as-is
IncRnd 11 hours ago [-]
Yea, so here's the tl;dr history in the article:
1. The author, who actually cribbed from wikipedia, gets the willies when he sees shallow water infested with tens of thousands of perfectly happy alligators. All he thinks is that amazing commerce will happen when he kills all the kind gators, flushes the state, and runs away before the next time it rains.
2. Everyone throughout history has wanted to Drain The Swamp. Every one of those amazing historical people has seemed perfectly reasonable and without a doubt was an incredibly towering bastion of science who wanted to drain the Everglades. Too bad they were all incompetent.
3. Please leave Florida Man and Gator Lake alone. They separate the Gulf of America on the West from the Sea of Florida on the East.
vermilingua 11 hours ago [-]
*Gulf of Mexico
JohnDeHope 16 hours ago [-]
As a Pasco county alumni, I think we should drop the people who want to drain the everglades off in the everglades and leave them in there until they gain an appreciation for the scenery.
devoutsalsa 8 minutes ago [-]
Not sure is that would work, as @fishinggarrett will yoink them for being an invasive species.
ecocentrik 15 hours ago [-]
Do we really want to introduce more invasive species into the Everglades?
tomcam 10 hours ago [-]
Whatever the karma is on this, it should be double
clickety_clack 13 hours ago [-]
The Everglades will continue until morale improves!
bdamm 16 hours ago [-]
Or until they become lunch?
dfltr 16 hours ago [-]
Until the scenery gains an appreciation for them, you might say.
cwmoore 13 hours ago [-]
Isn't that "The Pasco Promise"?
potato3732842 13 hours ago [-]
We ought to balance it out by doing something comparable to the people who simp for heavy handed regulations in areas that have already been build up and altered greatly by humans.
JohnDeHope 11 hours ago [-]
It’s true. I was more expressing a sentiment than suggesting a course of political or legislative action. I await my punishment.
nedrylandJP 10 hours ago [-]
Yeah! let's Make Everglades Zug Island Again!
ortusdux 15 hours ago [-]
Speaking of the uncanny feeling of shallow water, there are parts of the Florida keys where you can paddle a kayak a good half a mile from shore and still be in 2-4 ft of water. It's a great place to learn a new watersport as if you fall in you can just stand up.
Rendello 15 hours ago [-]
Leeches freak me out, I can't imagine swimming with (or falling on) the gators!
AdieuToLogic 10 hours ago [-]
>> Speaking of the uncanny feeling of shallow water, there are parts of the Florida keys ...
> Leeches freak me out, I can't imagine swimming with (or falling on) the gators!
FWIW, neither leeches nor alligators are indigenous to salt water, which is what surrounds the Florida keys.
dhussoe 10 hours ago [-]
Alligators maybe not, but in the one time that I have paddleboarded in the keys I saw a crocodile. Probably a crocodile rather than a gator, I didn’t get that close… but from reading articles they’ll occasionally eat a small dog around there, so they are definitely out there.
AdieuToLogic 10 hours ago [-]
Saltwater crocs do exist in southern Florida, no doubt. And there's some chance a gator could swim from one island to another (or the mainland).
The easiest way to discern each is based on their snout. If the reptile you saw has a blunt nose about the same width as its jaw, then it's a gator. If, instead, the jaw looked more like a trapezoid, then it's a croc.
Both are opportunistic hunters capable of taking down mammals up to adult bovines or horses. The latter two examples are rare as the size of the croc/gator has to be rather large.
stronglikedan 15 hours ago [-]
The alligators are generally scared of people. It's the crocs that you got to worry about. (not really though - even they are quite timid, unlike their African counterparts)
jandrewrogers 11 hours ago [-]
Leeches are ubiquitous in North America, though I've seen more of them east of the Rocky Mountains. Most freshwater streams and lakes probably have some.
I understand the psychological aspect but they are otherwise totally harmless.
throwaway5752 13 hours ago [-]
> there are parts of the Florida keys
Then allow me to ease your mind. Leeches are not a problem in the marine environment of the Florida Keys, unless you are a turtle. They person you replied to changed the topic slightly from the Everglades, where they could be a problem. In either case I'd worry about midges and mosquitos first.
Similarly with alligators, they are primarily freshwater and uncommon in the keys. American crocodiles can tolerate the marine environment better, but they are threatened as a species and have just two confirmed attacks in 75 years.
So wear a personal flotation device and you should be okay.
soperj 13 hours ago [-]
Why?
That's like being afraid of mosquitoes. You can't even really feel a leech.
codingdave 13 hours ago [-]
Mosquitoes are the deadliest creature on the planet, to be fair.
hedora 10 hours ago [-]
[flagged]
throwaway173738 11 hours ago [-]
I’ve been in clouds of mosquitos so thick they cover you in black when you sit down. They land in your food and try to eat it. I could understand being afraid of them having seen that buzzing miasma bearing down at all times, relentless for a drop of blood.
squigz 13 hours ago [-]
Well GP didn't say they were afraid. I have pretty much the same reaction of being "freaked out" by leeches too. And while my reaction to mosquitoes is hardly the same, I'm going to avoid both if I possibly can, which seems entirely reasonable to me
Anyway you don't feel leeches coming off? That's surprising.
Rendello 2 hours ago [-]
That's right, I (GP) am not really afraid of them, I just find leeches and bloodsuckers quite unpleasant.
A funny story: a few years ago I went canoeing up a small river with my younger cousin. There's not a lot of current because the river is shallow and there are beaver dams around every corner. Most of the dams are unused and broken up, but the river's so shallow in the late summer that they block quite a bit of water anyway and necessitate portaging.
My cousin, being young, gets bored and stops padding, though he's still willing to help portage. We zig zag up the small river, crashing into either side every few paddlestrokes, because I hadn't realized that being the heavier one, I should be in the back of the canoe.
Eventually we get to a large felled tree blocking the river, and we attempt to portage around it, but the banks are quite steep and thick with brush, and I end up losing the canoe down the river. The current is slow, still, but the canoe is floating away, so I have to strip down and jump in after it. Unfortunately my feet touched the bottom and I was covered in bloodsuckers large and small, some of which hid themselves under my feet and between my toes for the rest of the excursion.
When I got back to the house, I lifted my leg, put my foot in the sink, and said "get the salt!"
cyberax 11 hours ago [-]
Because we're large. In nature, crocodilians prey on small/mid-size mammals and birds. Humans are larger than their normal prey, and we're also tall, so we appear more massive to them. And most predators actively avoid animals that are too large to be their prey.
That's why it gets so much more dangerous if you're swimming. If a crocodile is above the water, then it can only see your head. And it's just the right size to be its prey.
And if the crocodile is underwater, then it may be even worse. Humans usually look clumsy when swimming, just like an animal in distress. In other words, an easy prey.
hwc 13 hours ago [-]
I used to live in this part of the country. There's an insane amount of disregard for the environment and climate. Yes, new buildings have to be reinforced against hurricanes. But they are still building new houses only a few meters above sea level, as if sea level rise wasn't already unavoidable.
And on the largest scale, there is a limit to the amount of fresh groundwater that wells along the South Florida coast can get. Once they exceed that amount, they'll be pumping brackish water seeping in from the ocean. Then they have to desalinate the brackish water.
But the last time I was there, they were still building new houses.
fijiaarone 11 hours ago [-]
How do you feel about Holland?
hedora 10 hours ago [-]
Holland’s dykes are mostly built on impermeable clay.
As I understand it, that’s not possible in Florida, or at least in places like Miami, where the soil is almost entirely sand.
Holland has been creating progressively better soil surveys since the 1800’s, partially to allow them to place dykes intelligently.
The reason why we had something like the Delta works was due to a 12 Bft storm hitting our shores in 1953. This infrastructure is built to withstand these kind of storms and protect the land from flooding. The protections in place (movable doors in storm surge barriers etc.) are used a few times the last decades when storms did hit our shores. I don't know if this is useable in the Florida context. It's easy to say whenever a big hurricane hits the Florida shore: "Yeah, just ask the Dutch to fix this.." And I am sure some smart guys from our tech universities can pull it off, but you need money and political will. And it literally takes decades to built it.
deadbabe 11 hours ago [-]
“a few meters above sea level” is still not sea level. That’s a good 12-15 feet to work with.
KingMob 10 hours ago [-]
Iirc, there are scientific estimates that Greenland's ice sheet alone would raise sea levels by 24 ft if it melted.
12-15 ft may really not be enough for very long.
hedora 10 hours ago [-]
It’s already probably not enough to weather a 25-100 year storm (looking forward to compute storm frequency).
neilv 15 hours ago [-]
I've heard the theory that humor is actually a censor mechanism, to inhibit learning nonsense.
So, IIUC, if the censor identifies something nonsensical, it throws the amusement switch, to keep your brain from integrating the wrong thing.
While we might think that the presentations of fact in the article are informative, the humor-saturated prose could be a good way to cloud any thinking about the topic.
Does this mean it's OK to mention expanding the Florida Everglades? One could plan out a path of bulldozing, excavation, and flood fills, given an existing map of gerrymandering for national elections.
toomanyrichies 13 hours ago [-]
The headline reminds me of the Mr. Show sketch about America blowing up the moon [1].
This reminds me of something much more local to me, which is similar but perhaps looking from the other direction in time: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fens
jason_s 14 hours ago [-]
California's Central Valley would like a cautionary word....
SilverElfin 14 hours 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 14 hours ago [-]
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.
bubblyworld 3 hours ago [-]
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.
tbyehl 10 hours ago [-]
> 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.
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.
blitzar 5 hours ago [-]
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
pharrington 14 hours ago [-]
I'm way more afraid of the humans that want to drain and eradicate the native population of the Everglades!
ux266478 13 hours ago [-]
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!
seszett 5 hours ago [-]
> 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.
potato3732842 13 hours ago [-]
>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.
ux266478 12 hours ago [-]
> 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.
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.
jonstewart 12 hours ago [-]
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.
downut 12 hours ago [-]
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.
internet_points 4 hours ago [-]
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.
jason-phillips 14 hours ago [-]
I used to swim with alligators in the bayou when I was a kid in the 1980s. They're not so bad.
Dilettante_ 14 hours ago [-]
Amos Moses, is that you?
13 hours ago [-]
hnuser123456 14 hours ago [-]
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 10 hours ago [-]
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.
rexpop 13 hours ago [-]
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 6 hours ago [-]
> Nature does not exist for humanity's comfort or aesthetic preferences
To be fair, in most religions (including christianity and atheism) it kinda does
goatlover 5 hours ago [-]
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 1 hours ago [-]
> 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 6 hours ago [-]
I have to say - thank you for that!
soperj 13 hours ago [-]
I feel the same way about Miami.
fijiaarone 11 hours ago [-]
Everything from Miami to Ft. Myers was the Everglades.
hunter-gatherer 12 hours ago [-]
You'd make a terrible wildlife biologist.
inglor_cz 16 hours ago [-]
Once upon a time, draining wetlands was the only somewhat efficient way to reduce malaria. That made sense, given the drop in mortality. Lots of places in Italy, for example, are ex-swamps.
howard941 13 hours ago [-]
Sea level rise will finish the 'glades.
11 hours ago [-]
datavirtue 10 hours ago [-]
What is: Dr. Evil's plan to set off a global catastrophy?
chrisallick 11 hours ago [-]
no
darkerside 13 hours ago [-]
If it's so shallow, it seems like draining it would have little impact on flood risk
scythe 14 hours ago [-]
>Did this giant dike work? Did the 143 miles of dikes work? Let’s see what Wikipedia says:
>>The enlarged water control structures around Lake Okeechobee and in the Everglades did not prevent either frequent floods or dry spells in which cattle died for lack of water and fires burned in the peat of the Everglades.
>So yeah, that’s a no. A big ol’ drought (technical term) ensued!
This is a good example of how a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. We actually do know that the Hoover Dike worked: it survived Hurricanes Andrew, Francis, Wilma, Milton, and several others I probably forgot to mention.
15 hours ago [-]
bandyaboot 14 hours ago [-]
> Hopefully nothing that advances a dystopian fascist agenda, right? Right?
Hey! You can’t say that! That’s wrong speak!
p1necone 13 hours ago [-]
The only people I trust to fuck with wetlands without finding out are the Dutch, and even then I suspect the find out part is still due shortly after they vote some populist politician in asking why they're spending all those taxpayer dollars maintaining dykes and water infrastructure when there's not even any water here?
mrbluecoat 15 hours ago [-]
> 5x the size of JFK (the airport, not the person)
lol
cramcgrab 15 hours ago [-]
Fresh water = bad
5 hours ago [-]
aaronbwebber 16 hours ago [-]
betteridge's law of headlines still undefeated
bee_rider 15 hours ago [-]
Bit of a layup for it in this case.
yesbut 15 hours ago [-]
no
Meph504 16 hours ago [-]
what an odd clickbait type article, it goes over the history of people who previously wanted to do this. But mention there is no current effort to do so, and asking the question is irrelevant.
When civilization ends, we will look back at podcast episodes more numerous than the stars in the sky, and wonder if it that was really the most productive use of our entropy.
Another example of draining wetland is Mexico City I think. Drained to farm and then developed on.
was?
this article is hilarious as-is
1. The author, who actually cribbed from wikipedia, gets the willies when he sees shallow water infested with tens of thousands of perfectly happy alligators. All he thinks is that amazing commerce will happen when he kills all the kind gators, flushes the state, and runs away before the next time it rains.
2. Everyone throughout history has wanted to Drain The Swamp. Every one of those amazing historical people has seemed perfectly reasonable and without a doubt was an incredibly towering bastion of science who wanted to drain the Everglades. Too bad they were all incompetent.
3. Please leave Florida Man and Gator Lake alone. They separate the Gulf of America on the West from the Sea of Florida on the East.
> Leeches freak me out, I can't imagine swimming with (or falling on) the gators!
FWIW, neither leeches nor alligators are indigenous to salt water, which is what surrounds the Florida keys.
The easiest way to discern each is based on their snout. If the reptile you saw has a blunt nose about the same width as its jaw, then it's a gator. If, instead, the jaw looked more like a trapezoid, then it's a croc.
Both are opportunistic hunters capable of taking down mammals up to adult bovines or horses. The latter two examples are rare as the size of the croc/gator has to be rather large.
I understand the psychological aspect but they are otherwise totally harmless.
Then allow me to ease your mind. Leeches are not a problem in the marine environment of the Florida Keys, unless you are a turtle. They person you replied to changed the topic slightly from the Everglades, where they could be a problem. In either case I'd worry about midges and mosquitos first.
Similarly with alligators, they are primarily freshwater and uncommon in the keys. American crocodiles can tolerate the marine environment better, but they are threatened as a species and have just two confirmed attacks in 75 years.
So wear a personal flotation device and you should be okay.
Anyway you don't feel leeches coming off? That's surprising.
A funny story: a few years ago I went canoeing up a small river with my younger cousin. There's not a lot of current because the river is shallow and there are beaver dams around every corner. Most of the dams are unused and broken up, but the river's so shallow in the late summer that they block quite a bit of water anyway and necessitate portaging.
My cousin, being young, gets bored and stops padding, though he's still willing to help portage. We zig zag up the small river, crashing into either side every few paddlestrokes, because I hadn't realized that being the heavier one, I should be in the back of the canoe.
Eventually we get to a large felled tree blocking the river, and we attempt to portage around it, but the banks are quite steep and thick with brush, and I end up losing the canoe down the river. The current is slow, still, but the canoe is floating away, so I have to strip down and jump in after it. Unfortunately my feet touched the bottom and I was covered in bloodsuckers large and small, some of which hid themselves under my feet and between my toes for the rest of the excursion.
When I got back to the house, I lifted my leg, put my foot in the sink, and said "get the salt!"
That's why it gets so much more dangerous if you're swimming. If a crocodile is above the water, then it can only see your head. And it's just the right size to be its prey.
And if the crocodile is underwater, then it may be even worse. Humans usually look clumsy when swimming, just like an animal in distress. In other words, an easy prey.
And on the largest scale, there is a limit to the amount of fresh groundwater that wells along the South Florida coast can get. Once they exceed that amount, they'll be pumping brackish water seeping in from the ocean. Then they have to desalinate the brackish water.
But the last time I was there, they were still building new houses.
As I understand it, that’s not possible in Florida, or at least in places like Miami, where the soil is almost entirely sand.
Holland has been creating progressively better soil surveys since the 1800’s, partially to allow them to place dykes intelligently.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S00167...
https://floridaphoenix.com/2024/05/15/desantis-signs-bill-er...
For context; only the hurricane we have a clear record of had 8.5 meter storm surges. I’m not sure, can the Dutch barriers hold that back?
but parts of the Netherlands are -3 below sea level, it kinda evens out.
I think the other point to mention is that there isn't one barrier, there are a fuck load of them. (https://nltimes.nl/2024/09/03/tech-failure-nearly-caused-mas... but they also need to be close to work....)
12-15 ft may really not be enough for very long.
So, IIUC, if the censor identifies something nonsensical, it throws the amusement switch, to keep your brain from integrating the wrong thing.
While we might think that the presentations of fact in the article are informative, the humor-saturated prose could be a good way to cloud any thinking about the topic.
Does this mean it's OK to mention expanding the Florida Everglades? One could plan out a path of bulldozing, excavation, and flood fills, given an existing map of gerrymandering for national elections.
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTJ3LIA5LmA
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
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.
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.
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
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.
_The Great River_ by Boyce Upholt from last year is a good place to start learning about the Mississippi.
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.
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.
To be fair, in most religions (including christianity and atheism) it kinda does
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.
>>The enlarged water control structures around Lake Okeechobee and in the Everglades did not prevent either frequent floods or dry spells in which cattle died for lack of water and fires burned in the peat of the Everglades.
>So yeah, that’s a no. A big ol’ drought (technical term) ensued!
This is a good example of how a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. We actually do know that the Hoover Dike worked: it survived Hurricanes Andrew, Francis, Wilma, Milton, and several others I probably forgot to mention.
Hey! You can’t say that! That’s wrong speak!
lol