# First International Dark Sky Reserve in Idaho, USA



## SeaBreeze (Dec 25, 2017)

I think this is a good thing, there is a lot of light pollution that negatively affects both people and animals. 

More here.  http://www.newser.com/story/253074/s...-preserve.html



> Newser)                                         –                                          A giant chunk of central Idaho with a dazzling  night sky has become the nation's first International Dark Sky Reserve,  the AP  reports. The International Dark-Sky Association designated the  1,400-square-mile Central Idaho Dark Sky Reserve this week.
> 
> The sparsely  populated area's night skies are so pristine that  interstellar dust  clouds are visible in the Milky Way. "That such truly  dark nighttime  environments still exist in the United States is  remarkable," says J.  Scott Feierabend, executive director of the  Arizona-based association,  calling the designation a milestone for the  group.
> 
> ...


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 25, 2017)

*Preserving the Night*

Artificial lighting casts a long shadow over animal and human health.
Susan Weiner
November / December 2009







Before the lightbulb, people slept beneath inky skies with only the  flicker of a candle or torch to hold the darkness at bay. Today we  control when we sleep and when we rouse, staying awake late into the  night amid domes of artificial light reflected from homes, businesses  and streetlamps.


Cities can be seen from space, yet the bright world we’ve created has  its downsides. More than simply hamper our view of the stars, artificial  light—or light pollution—affects the migration, reproduction and  feeding of wildlife, and is suspected of causing some cancers in people.  Plants and coral reefs are also affected by artificial light as it  disrupts their natural growth cycles.


Bright lights and haze can extend more than 100 miles beyond the borders  of an urban area, exposing deer, coyotes, moose, raccoons, bats and  other animals to predators and hindering their ability to search for  food. Frogs and other wetland inhabitants become disoriented, leading to  a decrease in reproduction. Moths and other insects encircle artificial  lights, neglecting to reproduce and pollinate, dying of exhaustion or  becoming targets for predators. 


In North America, 100 million birds die in collisions with lighted structures. Near coastal areas, 
marine birds can fly off course to the point where they die of  exhaustion. Sea turtle hatchlings, instinctively drawn to the ocean by  the reflection of the moon and the stars, crawl towards roads and  communities, ultimately dying from dehydration, cars, predators and  fatigue.

*Complete Article...http://www.energytimes.com/pages/dep...tters0911.html*


----------



## Traveler (Dec 25, 2017)

And what is the solution ?  Are we expected to wind the clocks back to a time when there was no electricity ?  Is this another one of those "the sky is falling" ideas ?


----------



## Big Horn (Dec 26, 2017)

Traveler said:


> And what is the solution ?  Are we expected to wind the clocks back to a time when there was no electricity ?  Is this another one of those "the sky is falling" ideas ?


There are too many people today: more than 330 million.  There were only about 150 million in 1950.  Outlying suburbs of Chicago had a dark night sky.  The population of this country was fifty million in 1880.  That must have been wonderful.

There was electricity virtually everywhere in 1950.  Cities were well lighted in 1880 as well.  It's not so bad to rewind the clock to a better time.  I've essentially done that by living where I do.  I have no answer for the terrible destruction of wildlife.  However, a reduction in consumption of meat would free many lands from agriculture allowing them to revert to their natural state.  The bulk of grains are grown for animal feed, not for human consumption.  That is something to consider.

I have five chickens.  They do eat grain, but they also eat all sorts of vegetables as well as bugs in season and meal worms year around.  They're not laying now because the days are short and I don't use artificial lights to keep them awake.  I must mention that my chickens are pets; they are also rescues.


----------



## Aunt Bea (Dec 26, 2017)

I think that it is an interesting idea. 

Reducing artificial lighting is a good idea in all areas including those that are densely populated.

My concern is that it will become one of those situations where we will spend billions of dollars to find ways to keep areas dark when all we really need to do is turn off the lights when and where they are not needed.


----------



## Traveler (Dec 26, 2017)

BigHorn, I am a hard-core carnivore and I think I can say with a great deal of confidence, that the day I give up meat is the day hell will freeze over. I have read enough studies to convince me that people who live primarily of meat protein, are taller, leaner, and more fit.


----------



## Big Horn (Dec 26, 2017)

Traveler said:


> BigHorn, I am a hard-core carnivore and I think I can say with a great deal of confidence, that the day I give up meat is the day hell will freeze over. I have read enough studies to convince me that *people who live primarily of meat protein, are taller, leaner, and more fit.*


If this thread were about being taller, leaner, and fitter, I wouldn't be posting on it.  I'm posting to express my preference for an earlier time when there were fewer people.  The population density of my county is 4 per sq. mile.  It's just about that in my specific location.  It's rather pleasant as I can drive twenty-one miles to Walmart in twenty to twenty-five minutes including 2½ miles of gravel.

P.S.: the comparative of _fit_ is _fitter_, not _more fit_.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Dec 26, 2017)

Aunt Bea said:


> Reducing artificial lighting is a good idea in all areas including those that are densely populated.
> 
> My concern is that it will become one of those situations where we will spend billions of dollars to find ways to keep areas dark when all we really need to do is turn off the lights when and where they are not needed.



I wouldn't want billions of dollars spent on this either Aunt Bea, but I don't see why they can't start to tone down the unnecessary lights on billboards, etc.  Or use covers to direct the light to the ground instead of having it go up and all over.  I've been in a lot of remote areas at night, an looking up at the night sky with no interfering city lights around is simply beautiful.  In town, you don't see many stars or anything else with all the excessive lighting going into the skies.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Dec 26, 2017)

When I lived in north Idaho, I was far enough out of town, and up on a hill above town, and there was a beautiful view of the stars at night, and I loved going outside and just looking at the expanse of stars across the sky. Here, we are in town, as well as surrounded by huge trees, so even if the town were completely dark, it would be hard to see many of the stars above us, plus it seems like the sky here is cloudy a lot more than it was in Idaho. 
I think that having an area of dark sky is not a bad thing, per se, however, the government already seems to own so much of the land, especially in the western states, that I am not in favor of them having even more control over this land of ours, regardless of the reason why they have it. 
I agree that much of the electrical power is wasted on commercial usage, and it goes on 24 hours per day in many cases. When we had the tornadoes here in 2011, and had no electricity for over a week, as soon as they started getting some of the poles replaced and power restored, places like Burger King and convenience stores were flashing their large billboard signs again, even though the power company had asked us not to use any unnecessary electricity because they were still working on getting all of the connecting main lines hooked up and running again. 

I agree with Big Horn, we waste a lot of our resources growing grain for livestock that is used for meat, and it is not even good for the meat when the animal is raised in a feedlot with no exercise and no pasture to graze on. 
We are very disconnected from our food sources today, and I think that if people had to hunt, kill and cut up their own meat (like people have done for centuries) then there would be a lot less meat eaten in this country.


----------



## Big Horn (Dec 26, 2017)

Happyflowerlady said:


> ...I agree with Big Horn, we waste a lot of our resources growing grain for livestock that is used for meat, and it is not even good for the meat when the animal is raised in a feedlot with no exercise and no pasture to graze on.
> We are very disconnected from our food sources today, and I think that if people had to hunt, kill and cut up their own meat (like people have done for centuries) then there would be a lot less meat eaten in this country.


I read an interesting article years ago which is relevant.  The author suggested that if people wished to eat meat, they would be required to spend a day working in a slaughter house every year.  A slaughter house is far different from the field.


----------



## Happyflowerlady (Dec 26, 2017)

Well said, Big Horn, and I so totally agree. Probably a lot more of us would become vegetarians  (if not vegans) if we had to kill our own animals, or even watch them being slaughtered and processed. 
Then you add to that, that the Chinese own Smith Farms (which produces most of our pork), and that fish which we can grow right here, like catfish , tilapia, and crawfish, are now shipped in from overseas, where there is no control of farming conditions, and most of the beef, pork, and chickens are all raised on a grain diet, and overloaded with HGH to make them grow faster, and antibiotics to keep them alive until we are ready to kill them. 
Unless you grow your own food, and process it yourself, which most of us do not want to do (or even cannot do), we have no idea how our food has been grown and processed. 
I have gotten to the point now where I even do not like to catch fish, and clean them to eat; and if I had to butcher my own meat, I am one of those who would likely become a vegetarian. 
SeaBreeze, I am sorry to be so far off-topic on this post, but Traveler started it when he brought up how important meat-eating is to him.


----------



## Traveler (Dec 26, 2017)

Happyflowerlady said:


> SeaBreeze, I am sorry to be so far off-topic on this post, but Traveler started it when he brought up how important meat-eating is to him.



I am sorry to disagree with you, Flower, but I did not bring up the topic of meat consumption and agriculture. If you will look at Bighorn's post # 4 you will see that he made reference to that as a means to reduce light pollution. 
For the life of me I don't see any connection between growing wheat, corn etc and then feeding it to animals and light pollution. I lived on a farm when I was young and I do not recall doing any farming at night.  How anyone could think that stopping agriculture, or at least reducing it could possibly help in reducing light pollution, totally escapes me. 

In any event, the only way to stop light pollution would be to make turning on any light bulb, illegal across the nation. Does anyone actually think that possibly happen ? I've heard of some truly goofy ideas in my time but that takes the cake for the goofiest of all.


----------



## OneEyedDiva (Dec 26, 2017)

Very cool. I often wish we lived somewhere where we could look up and see the night sky full of stars. The closet we've ever come was when we went to South Carolina almost two decades ago and when I visited my BFF in Florida, also a long time ago.


----------

