• lunachocken@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      What about the cars prior that are objectively worse in more ways than one. That probably had a much higher kill rate on both people AND animals.

      • DogWater@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        2 days ago

        Yes, being concerned about putting creature habitat directly where trains run is trolling.

        it’s about not being stupid. You aren’t gaining anything useful putting grass between the rails of a metro besides potential problems.

        Someone said it’s been done successfully, which is surprising if true, but it’s still not really doing anything.

    • UnfairUtan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Tracks like these have been successfully used in a lot of cities already. It’s objectively better imo

      • DogWater@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        2 days ago

        Seems dubious, but I’m curious if animals genuinely have a comparable hit rate on regular tracks vs grass filled rails.

        • UnfairUtan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          It’s probably marginal.

          First of all, these are tramway tracks, and they’re usually inside of very urban areas which don’t have many animals roaming around.

          Secondly, I’m no expert, but I would argue that this sort of low cut grass will mainly attract insects. This might to birds being encouraged to find food there sure. But city birds are used to traffic and will most likely dodge tramways