this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
135 points (90.9% liked)
Asklemmy
43947 readers
638 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
Search asklemmy ๐
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Oooh that one is rough, especially since you just said generic "wasp". That would get rid of a monumental amount of pollinators, specialist ones. And scavengers and predators that help manage other pests. And a large number of wasps are smaller and don't sting, instead they have ovipositors. I won't get into detail what they do with em, but they are harmless to humans and often amazing at taking out populations of agricultural pests, like hornworms
I know you meant the ones that you don't want to get stung by, but even those don't exist to sting you, they are important predators and scavengers of their environments, and their loss would still have negative effects.
Plus, the context of the post is discussing the possible negative impacts if certain animals just disappear, so I used your phrasing as an excuse to talk about something I think is interesting. I mean, without wasps, you don't have figs anymore, at all, and all sorts of other stuff. I think that is neat.