Why can agricultural interests get their shit together on eradicating a harmful species while when it comes to human health, eradicating disease-carrying mosquitoes leads to endless hand wringing about playing god and whatnot?
Mosquitoes need standing water for their eggs to hatch. That significantly limits where the things can breed. There are more than a few water additives that will kill off a population of mosquitos. However, there's always at least some resistance to wide deployment of those programs because of "playing god".
If you area suffers from mosquitos it's almost certainly because a group of anti-mosquito abatement folk got together to lobby against those programs being implemented.
If you've spent any time in the eastern or northern United States, you'd realize that standing water is more or less ubiquitous.
Mosquitos need very little water to breed.
> If you area suffers from mosquitos it's almost certainly because a group of anti-mosquito abatement folk got together to lobby against those programs being implemented.
Strong opinion, poorly informed.
I’m reminded of the old “I don’t see why cholera is such a problem when everyone has chlorinated tap water” geniuses.
Mosquito abatement programs generally involve treating large swaths of area with larvicide at the right time, often by plane.
The reason counties in state like Louisiana doesn't do that more frequently is the cost of the larvicide and plane charter along with the area that needs to be sprayed. That is a budget issue that ultimately also faces uphill battles because people will accuse the abatement program of wanting to just drain all the swamps (just like you did).
These aren't impractical programs, they do cost money.
Oh, and not for nothing, cholera is a problem when you leave water management up to people putting their septic tanks next to their well water. It's a problem of the lack of investment in water infrastructure. Much like mosquito management is something addressable with pubic investment.
The larvicide and pesticide treatments are highly effective and can be highly targeted either by airplane delivery or on foot treatments. It takes very little at the right time to have a huge impact on the mosquito population.
I think climate change plays a role in my area as well by increasing the length of the breeding season.
This is contradicted by my entire lived experience.
Where have you seen mosquitos without birds and other wildlife?
This was never a serious proposal.
Countless local and regional efforts to eradicate mosquitoes exist. Opposition seems rare until you propose exterminating a species globally
The proposals are all very local. Sterile mates, for example. Even e.g. gene drives work regionally.
We'd need some hostile alien species to even consider that.
There are many, many international agreements that >100 countries agree to. The EU requires consensus for many things (what does that mean exactly? zero 'no votes?) as does NATO, which requires unanimity for some things. US Congress passes bills 'without objection' as a normal thing.
Maybe you are reading too many inflammatory stories? Humans are social creatures who are hard-wired to cooperate.
Last I heard, the type of mosquito that attacks humans is also an invasive species in most places outside Africa.
Tl;dr: Some species only mate once in individuals' lifetimes. Consequently, if that mating is with a sterile partner, no offspring will be produced. Thus severely limiting the size of the next generation.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340467372_Efficient...
Do we have evidence about whic his worse? Anyway, that sort of argument assumes there are no other solutions.
https://foe.org/news/ge-mosquito-experiment-halted/
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/community/florida-key...
Certainly false; there is a lot of construction in those places and currently most other places.
YAALS (yet another anti-liberal strawperson)? The term 'hand-wringing' seems to signal it, but I can't read anyone's mind.
The burden of proof is on you.