I’ll just edit instead!

  • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    8 months ago

    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

    • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      The stingers, the large hornets that can kill with sting, I mean those ones. Most people know what wasp means in context of post, and the menace they are.

      • Stoneykins [any]@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        8 months ago

        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.