This assumes that farming methods have remained identical since the 1950s or 70s, but they haven't. I don't know if the parent poster is correct, but I don't think is a good argument unless you also account for changes in agricultural practices in the last 50+ years.
Do you have any data to back this up?
Also, the problem is that not many insects ARE going to survive.
> The insect populations have only noticeably declined in the last few decades.
This is probably outright misleading, since you don't have the data prior to those decades. The common mistake is that people use their own lifespan as a measure for things.
---
Everybody talks about the gender pay gap and ethnic diversity these days, but biodiversity is not on the radar :(
Pesticide resistant insects are another example. Now, this assumes we don’t keep altering pesticides, but we do. If we keep trying to reduce insect populations we can, so I don’t think it’ll happen unless we allow it to happen.
As for the other comment, my point is really we have records showing massive amount of insects all throughout history until the introduction of pesticides. Even during the Great Depression in the US we had massive swarms of insects. Once pesticides were introduced at scale we noticed a decline in recorded swarms until now we don’t even see them on windshields.
The words "specialist" and "niche" are incredibly misplaced as it comes to insects. Consider butterflies, many depending on specific host plants. The host plant is in decline hence the butterfly disappears.
Weak species. Not "robust". The point that is being missed here is that the host plant is supposed to be widely available in any half-decent ecosystem. It isn't rare, would normally be widespread, and it has very low needs. Just a tiny bit of space and healthy soil.
We're not wiping out specialists, we're wiping out the underlying habitat and ecosystem altogether.
Were big cats such as mountain lions and bobcats not robust enough in America? Because they've been eradicated due to habitat loss.
Is it really a surprise that animals that have evolved over millions of years to fit within the balance of nature are having difficulty adapting in just decades to humanity's technology destruction of that balance? The fact that some are able to make it through that imbalance is not a justification.
It's weird that you basically seem to blame evolution.
I wonder how common this sort of thing is. Insects evolve to feed on certain plants, and not feed on others, but invasives could screw that up.
This a horrifying sentiment.
The modern monarch butterfly as a species is two million years old. In less than 200 years, we have mostly wiped it off the map, and the excuse is, "They weren't really robust to begin with"?
I also think it’s important to put it into context.
1. These insects weren’t really robust to begin with. Take the monarch butterfly in the North America. They actually needed primarily milkweed to survive. A single point of failure (milkweed) can cause the population to collapse. When we put up houses and converted land to farms, you’re correct we killed many of the native species, but those species were HIGHLY tuned to a particular niche. In 100-200 years it’s likely the insects that survived will re-occupy new niches.
2. Insects typically need a much smaller range to survive, so hikes in the same woods as when you were a kid doesn’t add up. Unless there was another massive environmental issue - such as pesticides or chemicals like DET which have a secondary impact. Personally, that bird egg analogy sounds exactly like what the US saw with DET and the collapse of the eagle population.
3. In the 1950s in the Midwest there had already been farmland all over for 50+ years. Same with Ireland (for hundreds). The insect populations have only noticeably declined in the last few decades. Unfortunately, we don’t have enough historical data to confirm what it is exactly. Even in the 1970s you’d have solid layers of bugs on windshields driving between cornfields. Now, nothing.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_in_insect_population...
To me, this indicates a chemical or set there of, as the most likely culprits.