Slashdot Mirror
Galapagos Islands Environment "In Danger"
cagrin writes "On Tuesday the UN's World Heritage Committee added the Galapagos Islands to the list of sites in danger from environmental threats or overuse. From the article: 'The Galapagos Islands, an Ecuadorian territory situated in the Pacific Ocean some 1,000 kilometers (625 miles) from South America, helped shape Charles Darwin's theory of evolution and in 1978 was the first site placed on UNESCO's World Heritage List.' Here is some background from Sea Shepherd on the insults facing the Galapagos."
Why the fuck are fishermen and roads and a cruiseship dock there in the first place? Here's a real easy way to save it. GO AWAY. Not just the tourists and fishermen either, everyone including the scientists. Just leave it alone. Maybe shoot all the stray dogs first. Put a patrol boat a mile out and sink anyone that gets close to the island. And don't whine about the displaced fishermen, build some fish farms. There isn't anywhere on earth with an ocean fishing industry where overfishing doesn't happen and the fishermen all wonder why there are so fewer fish. It's the clear cutting of the sea.
We are all just people.
Do you guys even understand how much US Conservatives HATE the Galapagos? They will always hold a grudge against it for inspiring Darwin's writings on evolution, despite the fact that proof of evolution is everywhere.
This is just another attack by conservatives on the world for not conforming to how they believe it should be. Pretty soon this planet will no longer be fit for human habitation, and the conservatives will get their wish. Because of the world can't be how they want it, they would rather it not be.
ok, you morgage your house and take out a personal loan to pay for it and i will. nice and easy to solve the worlds problems from an arm chair isn't it?
here's a thought, people were all over those islands before they knew any better, carefully controlled human presence on the island isn't going to make anything worse, maybe even better as research there can help give us more insight into how ecosystems like this work.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
What good are the Galapagos islands if no one can study or appreciate them? Perhaps you would like to generalize your solution to the entire earth?
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
Taking a cruise around the islands changed the way that I think of biology. The sheer diversity of unusual life-forms is astounding: flightless cormorants to marine iguanas to sea lions that don't flinch as you walk by them to the vast fields of blue footed boobies to the elegant but absurd courting dances of the albatrosses: it truly is a land of wonders.
But you get a sense of fragility walking around: from the bees infestation of an island to the sad lack of giant tortoises: the entire island is a tribute to an environmental sense, an acknowledgment that by changing the environment slightly, entrenched endemic species alter, die, dissipate.
Stricter controls are needed in order to help prevent this slide into desolation, but I hope even more that those that wish to take in the marvels of the land can, I have their minds changed and their appreciation of the world expanded.
In some ways it's like the Heisenberg principal: we change it by viewing it. I just hope we have the sense to remember that we should be careful at how much we kill as we gaze.
Nice violent post by the way...
Ok, there are, admittedly, some grey areas over how Sea Shepherd have handled some situations. They do not, however, "think any form of violence is justified". They have been careful not to harm anyone physically, although they have rammed other ships and sabotaged property. Got proof to back up your unsubstantiated claim of "any form of violence", Mr Scientist? No, thought not... (sorry, I guess that should be "Dr Scientist", I should show you more respect than you have others.)
They do have scientists on their board of directors, and they do consult with scientists.
They are an activist group, and as such are pushing an agenda -- usually for fundraising purposes. This alone means that their position does have to be questioned and considered before taking any action. In that though, they are no different from every other pressure group or NGO on the planet, of any type, political leaning, no matter how accepted, conventional, conservative or tame that group may appear to be.
At the end of the day it's just about money.
No - i am worth MORE then a fucking lizard or a bird, yes i am better then both. I would gain great enjoyment by a trip to those islands, a bird merely views it as a place to land, eat,shit and fuck.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
What an arrogant view of the world, to think that your "enjoyment" is more valuable than the preservation of an ecosystem. I don't think you're worth more than a lizard or a bird, how's that? We need to preserve these islands for their scientific and historical value. Preservation means limiting human impact. If you want to "enjoy" the islands, do so via low-impact guided tours or by watching Discovery HD.
"Save the planet" is all I seem to hear lately. The Earth will heal itself, and is not in jeopardy. Our ability to exist on this planet may be in question, but something tells me that even if we all die off the planet will remain.
If there are changes in the environment, the strongest/fittest will survive, adapt, evolve to the new conditions. I am not saying that we should run out an trash the place up, whether we're talking about the islands in question, or the planet. We need to stop trying to save every little creature on the planet. Species will come and go, ever hear of dinosaurs?
Funny thing is, every time I hear about all of this, I think back to SimEarth, where the climax of your civilization is when cities are fitted with engines to exodus the Earth and leave it as a large zoo.
Ramen
And fundraising to boot. Agree or not, this doesn't belong in science, and probably doesn't belong on /.
It never ceases to amazes me that people as narrow-minded as you exist.
That bird that "merely views [the Galapagos Islands] as a place to land, eat,shit and fuck" is part of the natural ecosystem of this islands.
In its small way, it's a vital part of the food chain and the environment of that area, yet your personal right to a pleasure cruise is more important than the survival of the local ecological community?
I'm sorry, but you have an inflated sense of your own worth, or a lack of appreciation of the order of things, or both. How would you like it if I destroyed your home and your way of life for personal pleasure? Would that be OK with you? After all, that's no different to what you're proposing, right?
The eradication of a species just for the convenience of fishermen, or the destruction of a unique and irreplaceable wildlife habitat for the convenience of tourists are selfish and short-sighted acts. But I suppose that those are moral and ethical arguments that are wasted on you.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Your god does not exist, but mine does. Now we shall all go to war to settle the matter.
If you do not go, it does not mean there will be one less person visiting the island.
The tourism slots are there regardless of your going. If you do not go, someone else who may be less environmentally aware may go in your stead and litter or reward bad native behaviour otherwise alter the environment more than you would.
I say, if you can go go, and appreciate what is there, while it is still there. What is something happens to it even totally natural in nature? The best way to preserve it in that case, is through memory.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm a person. My sense of right and wrong is based (simply put) on the wellbeing of people--not on the preservation of "natural" systems for their own sake. I place "natural" in quotes because human beings, and everything human beings do and build, are a part of nature--indeed, human beings are the only part of nature that is even capable of making determinations of right and wrong. If we should let "nature" exist, unperturbed by human hands, then by that reasoning it's our duty to extinct the entire human race.
Not allowing scientists or (careful) observers to even visit or observe the Galapagos is stupid and wasteful. Of course it should be preserved from damage, but if we kill people for coming within one mile of them by boat, then they might as well not even be there.
In Repressive Burma, it's not just your connection that dies. slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=314547&cid=20819199
What? You think throwing money at the starving of Africa is going to solve their problems?
1 8,363604,00.html]. They need economic, agricultural, political, and health aid. Also, in Africa you have crazy war mongers creating extremely unstable environments in numerous African nations, committing genocide and human rights violations left and right. I don't know what sort of aid will solve this, but trust me, I don't think anyone is going to be willing to give it.
t p://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudden_oak_death]. And, whatever an environmental psychopath society will spend to solve the issue, I think it will certainly be vastly less than what is needed to help the rest of the world. I'm sure that people are still donating towards causes like Africa, and on top of that there will be donations/funding for the protection of the Galapagos Islands. I realize the severity of both issues are different, but I'm certain we're not going to end up sending 50 million to the Galapagos and 1 million to Africa; rather, people will spend what is needed in the Galapagos, but whatever is going to Africa will most likely dwarf that.
Africa's got a shitload of problems that, in order to be solved, need more than rich fucks funneling money in their direction. Billions have already been poured into Africa, and damn near ZERO (I exaggerate, but it feels like it) progress has been made [http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,15
With it's problems, Africa needs more than money. It needs help from the international community/UN. All that will probably require a gross monetary sum larger than what would be required for the restoration of the Galapagos, and if we really want to fix things in Africa, it'll probably cost lives too. Even helping 3rd world countries develop infrastructure is going to be a bitch. You can't just develop it for them; you have to teach them a whole lot of shit too. Like the saying goes, give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to fish and he'll eat every day for the rest of his life.
Lastly, you can't just write off the loss of the Galapagos animals as non issue. You have no idea how this will impact the overall ecosystem. Time and time again, we have been shown that biological changes in a location have vast impacts, usually negative, on the surrounding ecosystem [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coral_bleaching][ht
Oh Yeah. Stupidity gets people killed, sure, but it also wastes money by throwing it at a problem and hoping it will go away.
I read the context. If I wanted to talk to the other guy, I would have responded to the other guy. I wanted to respond to what *you* said, so I did. My sentiments about what you said are the same regardless of context.