Petition to regulate light pollution

[Physopto]

Just got confirmation it has already been posted on Astronomy Shed previously. But asked if it could be posted Front and Centre.

 

[psamathe]

I have found it interesting and disappointing that the major retailers are very happy to have all sorts of products pushed in the banners and on their main page but cannot spare any space to inform visitors about he petition.  Things like "Like us on Facebook" and animated banners pushing their products are more important than something important to use of that gear.

I see it as complete focus on ££££ and no space for the interests of the discipline.

And the thing is, whilst using every space only for pushing product, in practice people have a bias to buy from people they think have similar concerns and interests as they do and addressing light pollution will be something important to most of their customers.  So as a USP (when everybody sells at about the same price), informing people about a petition like this could actually be better for business in the longer term that selling one extra <whatever s push of the day>.

Certainly I'd have a strong bias in favour of a retailer who is acting in the interests of the activity they are involved with.

Ian

[Scott]

Please remember people that it is up to individuals to decide which course of action they take on this. If an individual/shop/website choses not to participate, that is their choice. 
Bare in mind that this is essentually a political thread (petitioning the govt) that that admin have chosen to turn a blind eye to so lets play nice . By all means, encourage others to participate but lets leave the negativity out.

The mod/admin team 

[Stub Mandrel]

A lot of businesses won't distinguish between 'politics' and 'Politics'.

[sheeprug]

1 hour ago, psamathe said:

I have found it interesting and disappointing that the major retailers are very happy to have all sorts of products pushed in the banners and on their main page but cannot spare any space to inform visitors about he petition.  Things like "Like us on Facebook" and animated banners pushing their products are more important than something important to use of that gear.

I see it as complete focus on ££££ and no space for the interests of the discipline.

And the thing is, whilst using every space only for pushing product, in practice people have a bias to buy from people they think have similar concerns and interests as they do and addressing light pollution will be something important to most of their customers.  So as a USP (when everybody sells at about the same price), informing people about a petition like this could actually be better for business in the longer term that selling one extra <whatever s push of the day>.

Certainly I'd have a strong bias in favour of a retailer who is acting in the interests of the activity they are involved with.

Ian

I agree.   I really can't understand it either - unless it's a condition of their web site host that they don't use the site to promote 'political' causes.  

There are two ways of making more money in business: get a bigger share of the pie, or make the pie bigger.   They all appear to be following the former method, whereas they could actively encourage amateur astronomy by conspicuously supporting measures to making it more attractive and thus making the 'pie' bigger.

But hell, I'm an engineer - what do I know about retail?   Though I do know I am more likely to support a business that I feel supports me!  

SR. 

[Physopto]

We are up to 3650 ish votes now with the help of many people here and friends we have messaged. If this becomes  a  political discussion I can see it being shut down, remember our rules.. Then we will most likely have shot ourselves in the foot. I just want us all to succeed, it is important for us all.

Please.

Derek

[Skipper Billy]

I don't see it as a Political cause - we might be looking for a Political solution but the cause is common sense on many levels. Its not as though anyone is discussing Brexit or Scottish independence etc.   I do find it strange that 9 million people watched a YouTube video of a woman laughing whilst wearing a Star Wars mask but we are struggling to get any viable level of  interest......

[Scott]

shakes head in despair

[sheeprug]

Oops -  Having read my comment again I realise it could be taken as a dig at FLO.  Not my intention, I like them a lot.  I was really referring to retailers in general. Apologies if I came over wrong.

SR    

  

[psamathe]

2 hours ago, Scott said:

Please remember people that it is up to individuals to decide which course of action they take on this. If an individual/shop/website choses not to participate, that is their choice. 
Bare in mind that this is essentually a political thread (petitioning the govt) that that admin have chosen to turn a blind eye to so lets play nice . By all means, encourage others to participate but lets leave the negativity out.

The mod/admin team 

My intent was not to be political (or Political) and not to be nasty.  I was rather expressing surprise.  Surprise in that I consider Astronomy to be something of a niche interest and something of a community.  Dive shops happily push thing of interest of scuba divers (that do not directly generate income), chandlers happily present (and push) issues facing the sailing community, surf shops help campaign for cleaner sewage free seas, etc.  And the thing they have in common is that they are part of the community of like minded people; common interest, etc.  So my post was expressing genuine surprise.

I think that from the politics/Politics aspect the campaign is not campaigning against government policy.  I regard it in the same way as people objecting to a planning application.  I don't see that because the word "government" is involved it automatically becomes political.  I recently had an argument with DVLA because they charged me £2-50 extra when paying for my VED with a debit card.  They are government, I was objecting to what they did but it was not "political".

Anyway, not arguing against your "take it easy" sentiment, just expressing the background to my post that I think you thought not in the spirit you would have wanted.

Ian

[astronymonkey]

On 05/22/2016 at 18:57, astronymonkey said:

3537 at the moment ....

Lets be  positive about this folks, I rarely have the opportunity to quote myself but just over 24 hrs ago there was 3537 signatures and now there are 3727 sigs, so nearly 200 more in 24 hrs.

 

we have only had this thread running for less than two weeks so my focus is on sharing and repeating the message over an over again until it sticks,

 

Keep up the good work!

 

[Dave Lloyd]

I can certainly understand why retailers don't  get involved. Some issues can be very emotive and they are simply selling a product, it's up to us to try and change things we find unacceptable.

[psamathe]

I've provided the link on a couple of wildlife forums I'm a member of (though don't participate in much any more) and had a couple of "Signed" responses.  But I do think that the Wildlife aspect brings in another massive group of people who should have similar interests in reducing light pollution.

I wonder if providing the link to e.g. the various regional Wildlife Trusts http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/your-local-trust might give them the option to pass it around their membership.  I think such approaches are best by an existing member or supported (I'm not any more - is anybody else ?).  Similarly conservation groups, etc.

Not wanting to be pessimistic but, when the "word is spread" often you get a peak then things slow down.  The nature of the way the "word is spreading" in this case probably means it would be a lower peak and spread over a longer period but I do think to get a lot more signatures we need to let people know who are in other interest areas - and wildlife is the only one I can think of right now.

Ian

[Stub Mandrel]

The company I edit for has never complained about its editors campaigning on legislation that might adversely affect another hobby. The main problem though is readers mis-interpreting proposed legislation.

Not the case here and I can see no reason why the astro-magazines shouldn't champion the cause (except Sky @ Night because it's the BBC and they don't campaig

n except when they do...)

1 minute ago, psamathe said:

I've provided the link on a couple of wildlife forums I'm a member of (though don't participate in much any more) and had a couple of "Signed" responses.  But I do think that the Wildlife aspect brings in another massive group of people who should have similar interests in reducing light pollution.

I wonder if providing the link to e.g. the various regional Wildlife Trusts http://www.wildlifetrusts.org/your-local-trust might give them the option to pass it around their membership.  I think such approaches are best by an existing member or supported (I'm not any more - is anybody else ?).  Similarly conservation groups, etc.

Not wanting to be pessimistic but, when the "word is spread" often you get a peak then things slow down.  The nature of the way the "word is spreading" in this case probably means it would be a lower peak and spread over a longer period but I do think to get a lot more signatures we need to let people know who are in other interest areas - and wildlife is the only one I can think of right now.

Ian

 

I'm ex-Wildlife Trusts and I tipped a lot of folks off, some of whom signed including a national PR guy. I'm not convinced they see it as a priority wildlife issue :-( but we have to accept they will campaign on a limited number of issues at any one time to avoid diluting their message and giving supporters campaign fatigue. But if anyone here is a Wildlife Trust, National Trust, Woodland Trust or RSPB member - email, tweet or ring up your local contact and demand they do something!

[Scooot]

How about tweet Tim Peake, he often takes images of light polution and has thousands of followers? I don't have an account but my wife shows me his pics sometimes.

[Stub Mandrel]

@astro_timpeake

[caracol_uk]

Earlier this evening I contacted the secretaries for each of the astronomical societies  based in the UK asking them if they would notify all of their members of this petition. I used the list of societies registered with the FAS so should have reached most societies. I've had many responses, the vast majority were positive notifications that they have circulated the details of the petition to their members. I did receive one reply stating that they would not forward my email as they wished not to affiliate themselves with other societies (I won't drop names).  

Im not sure how much difference it will have made but the number of signatures has increased over 100 in the past 4 hours so can't be a bad thing. I agree that we need to approach other organisations/interests of we are to reach the target. Birdwatching is an obvious choice, though perhaps camping societies would have a much greater reach, though I doubt light pollution would be enough of a concern to persuade many of them to sign a petition. If only we could tap into a small fraction of the number of people interested in popular sports!

One thing to remember is that family members can also sign up. Dont forget our spouses can sign up too which should help boost the numbers a bit.

 

Regards

Simon

[psamathe]

51 minutes ago, caracol_uk said:

Earlier this evening I contacted the secretaries for each of the astronomical societies  based in the UK asking them if they would notify all of their members of this petition. I used the list of societies registered with the FAS so should have reached most societies. I've had many responses, the vast majority were positive notifications that they have circulated the details of the petition to their members. I did receive one reply stating that they would not forward my email as they wished not to affiliate themselves with other societies (I won't drop names).  

Im not sure how much difference it will have made but the number of signatures has increased over 100 in the past 4 hours so can't be a bad thing. ...

I suspect it helped a lot.  Apparently one of the societies I'm a member of sent round an e-mail this evening with details and link to the petition site.

Ian

[astrotyke]

Well done Simon for your work, sounds like a  good move.

That society that didnt want to affiliate themselves with another society sound like a friendly bunch dont they, not lol

 

 

[mapstar]

Great work by all, keep raising awareness and keep the thread on track where it should be guys.

Lot's of signatures today so a credit to all who are putting the effort in here and  behind the scenes.

 

[caracol_uk]

I was giving this some thought last night and one thing that occurs to me is that as things stand we are preaching to the converted. Perhaps what we need to do is to bring this to the attention of the general public. While most won't be interested, and some will have entirely opposite views to ours, we might find that even a response from a small percentage of them is enough to reach our goal of 10k signatures. I was thinking along the lines of an article in the local papers. It would need to be very well written of course and kept concise. I think it's important not to start scaremongering (I.e. Leaving out the potential links to cancer) and make it clear we're not advocating turning off lights, just making sure those that are installed are creating light where it's needed. I think it needs to convey our passion for protecting the night sky......I for one want to be able to show my daughter the constellations when she grows up, ideally without having to shield my eyes from nearby street lights as we stand on our own garden.

I don't know how much it costs to run an article in local newspapers, but I'd like to do this in my local paper. The important thing is that we don't come across as sandal wearing hippies. Not too long ago, while on holiday in Nevada, I overheard a child ask his dad what the lights in the sky were. He was referring to the Milky Way, something he had obviously never seen before. When I hear things like that it really hits home. If we don't take action, who will?

Regards

Simon

 

[Physopto]

Just looked and number of signatures now 3788.

[psamathe]

1 hour ago, caracol_uk said:

I was giving this some thought last night and one thing that occurs to me is that as things stand we are preaching to the converted. Perhaps what we need to do is to bring this to the attention of the general public. While most won't be interested, and some will have entirely opposite views to ours, we might find that even a response from a small percentage of them is enough to reach our goal of 10k signatures. I was thinking along the lines of an article in the local papers.....

 

Be very careful.  If people feel in any way that the campaign might affect their street lighting being on 24/7 then you may easily create a backlash (letters to MPs, letters to local Councillors, contact to Parish Councils, counter petitions, etc.).  I have seen similar effects with cycling where some pro cycle lane or pro cycle facility letter has been written to local paper and the following week you get 6 letters published arguing against all these horrible unsociable cyclists creating danger and hazards for people out for a quiet walk ... and it all works out counter productive for those who started it all. Ignoring the rights and wrongs of any case, if people feel that in any way something they even don't use might be threatened there is a risk.  And people will happily ignore research and fact and prefer believe their own prejudice (e.g. present them fact about the health impacts, child development impacts, etc. and it will all be ignored if it suits their emotion at that time).

Dealing with "public opinion" is difficult.  With petitions like this we are largely trying to get the already converted motivated (already converted being astronomers, wildlife enthusiasts, etc.).  And even if you say "this will not impact our essential 24/7 street lights" it will only take one person to do the "now our street lighting is under threat" (and they probably wont even have read beyond the letter/article title).

Ian

[Physopto]

Now 3818 signatures. This has been followed by us for 13 days in total and we now have about 100 + per day signing. I know it is varying but if the average stays at 100 there will be over 10,000 signees by the end date. The last couple of days have seen a rise in people putting their name to it but this may fall off. As more become aware surely the message to try saving some of the visible sky will achieved.

 

I have just emailed Airdrie Astronomical Association & Airdrie Observatory, to inform them. Hopefully if they do not know that may help.

[caracol_uk]

I've sent a slightly modified version of the email I sent yesterday to a list of all the registered birdwatching/RSPB groups in the UK. The list was comprised of about 200 or so email addresses, so similar to the number of astronomical societies. I don't suppose it will receive quite as positive a response, but let's hope the number of signatures continues to rise.

Regards

Simon