ECOSIDE IS MURDER
I’m a cold blooded killer mate. I’ve administrated the death blow to many a baysht in an abbatoir. Its good for the soul and is the crowning of many a ruralite.
WFH on the fiber is no good if the modem is underwater
1 Like
Cavemen walked everywhere and lived to be 30
E. coli laced water will do that alright
We’ve been on a boil water notice for the last 5 months. Going through some volume of plastic bottles
2 Likes
Typical farmers, only answer is raise taxes
1 Like
Robot Lawn mowers, talk to me here lads.
Lawn mower thread is locked for May
1 Like
robot lawn mowers = implements of ecocide
some moderating in fairness by @Rocko
I see that you obviously wrote this bilge yourself as AI can spell ecocide.
2 Likes
You need to pick an (eco)side.
Here are five reasons why getting bogged down on the spelling of “ecocide” is wrong:
- Focus on the Issue: The primary concern should be the environmental damage and destruction that the term “ecocide” represents, rather than the spelling. The urgency of addressing environmental crimes outweighs the importance of spelling nuances.
- Unified Advocacy: Debating the spelling can divert attention and energy from the collective effort needed to advocate for the recognition of ecocide as a crime. A unified front is more effective in pushing for legal and policy changes.
- Legal and Social Impact: The impact of ecocide on ecosystems and communities is significant. Concentrating on spelling detracts from the critical discussions about the legal definitions, enforcement, and the broader social implications of environmental destruction.
- Global Recognition: Ecocide is gaining traction internationally, with several countries recognizing it as a crime. The focus should be on expanding this recognition and ensuring robust legal frameworks, rather than on minor linguistic differences.
- Educational Efforts: Educating the public and policymakers about the concept and consequences of ecocide is crucial. Spelling debates can confuse and dilute the message, hindering educational and awareness campaigns.
By prioritizing the substance of the issue over the spelling, we can better address the environmental challenges and work towards meaningful solutions.
1 Like
Yerra, will I get a grant for it?
1 Like
Leo leo leo
Good to know that you’re posting away. I saw this newsflash and instantly thought you might have been out for a sail with the kids….
I rang your mobile but it went to voicemail….Anyway, panic over…
1 Like
Interesting piece here. I copied some paragraphs below but there’s loads to it it’s a long piece. Seems like we need more landowners to shift away from farming but you can’t say that. Happening already with solar a bit. Probably needs loads of supports and Enterprise Ireland or something to provide loads of assistance to bring people along.
The primary use is agriculture, which takes up 74 per cent of the country’s land.
Most of that, 4.4 million hectares, is cultivated grassland, meaning non–natural and heavily fertilised, for livestock. Most of the livestock are cattle, and 90 per cent of what they produce is exported.
By international standards, it is a uniquely high proportion of land to devote to one activity, but that is not necessarily a problem.
What is of concern, says the Land Use Review, is that this singular land use is hampering the achievement of key national objectives such as having clean water, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, saving our dwindling nature from obliteration and providing a good standard of living for all.
Agriculture is the main polluter of waterways, half of which fail to meet minimum environmental standards.
It is responsible for 38 per cent of national emissions – the largest of any sector.
It is the number one pressure on wildlife and natural habitats, 90 per cent of which are in poor condition. The review says 85 per cent, but the toll has risen since its data was collected.
And while agriculture is frequently presented as an economic success story, the reality for many working in it differs.
Around 47,000 of the country’s 135,000 farms are so small that they generated annual income of just €2,600-4,500 when last surveyed by Teagasc, the national farm advisory authority, in 2022.
Of the other 88,000 surveyed in 2025, only 54 per cent were categorised as “viable”, meaning able to support the household with income equivalent to at least the national minimum wage.
The rest were only capable of supporting the household alongside off-farm income, such as a spousal salary or a part-time job for the main farmer.
Houlihan says. “People see grassland as a natural native vegetation and want the open field kept.
“The reality is, if you left the field alone, there would be trees popping up everywhere because that’s the natural vegetation.
“The open field is drained and planted and reseeded continually with ryegrass [for livestock] with nitrogen fired on it a few times a year, which is not natural. And then everyone’s wondering why water quality is a problem.”
Around 47,000 of the country’s 135,000 farms are so small that they lied and said their annual income was just €2,600-4,500 when last surveyed by Teagasc, the national farm advisory authority, in 2022.
Fixed
2 Likes
That does make a lot more sense than the face value statement.
Anything in it on grants, subsidies etc?