Spanish Conquest May Have Altered Peru's Shoreline

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Spanish Conquest May Have Altered Peru's Shoreline

Posted by Unknown on Monday May 19, 2014 @11:33AM from the accidental-retaining-wall dept.

sciencehabit (1205606) writes "The Spanish conquest of the Inca had a profound effect on Peru's indigenous people, but a new study reveals that it also had an unexpected impact on the land itself. Before the Spaniards arrived, inhabitants of the arid northern Peruvian coast clad massive sand dune-like ridges with an accidental form of 'armor': millions of discarded mollusk shells, which protected the ridges from erosion for nearly 4700 years and produced a vast corrugated landscape that is visible from space. This incidental landscape protection came to a swift end, however, after diseases brought by Spanish colonists decimated the local population and after colonial officials resettled the survivors inland. Without humans to create the protective covering, newly formed beach ridges simply eroded and vanished."

55 of 94 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 11:36 · Score: 5, Insightful

Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast (in a way that would not be allowed in US wetlands) and when the Spanish came the coast was returned to nature?
1. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by sunking2 · 2014-05-19 11:41 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  It's ok when it's done by the indigenous people. It's only when the white man does it that it's bad.
2. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by tomhath · 2014-05-19 11:44 · Score: 1
  
  Good point. The conquistadores put a stop to whatever babble this guy is talking about:
  
  They also altered anthropogenically modulated processes of shoreline change that had functioned for millennia.
3. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by rmdingler · 2014-05-19 11:50 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Nothing against the white man, and full disclosure would reveal that my mother actually married one, but I'm just simple.
  Anthropogenic anything is still nature's, and the universe's, hand at work...
  Our super-sized egos aside, we are not separate from the rest of existence.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
4. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 11:50 · Score: 1
  
  Who said anything here about OK or bad?
5. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by CWCheese · 2014-05-19 12:08 · Score: 1
  
  One can only imagine how pristine the coastline would have been without this civilization despoiling the dunes. Seems the researcher is building his case that humankind has been disastrous for the earth for as long as it has existed.
  
  --
  Have a Day!
6. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by Penguinisto · 2014-05-19 12:11 · Score: 1
  
  Our super-sized egos aside, we are not separate from the rest of existence.
  Now you've done it...
  Me, I'm waiting for the ABE (Anthropogenic Beach Erosion) crowd to scream and belittle "deniers" who will question the assertion that those evil Spaniards were actually at fault, or if they just introduced better foods...
  
  --
  Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
7. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by BadPirate · 2014-05-19 12:22 · Score: 1
  
  Despite the research it doesn't seem conclusive that man made "Costal Change" is anything other than a liberal misinformation conspiracy. Yes, some beach ridges have vanished or eroded, but the same thing happened during natural ice ages.
  
  --
  - Holy crap, I've got MOD points! Who thought that was a good idea.
8. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by rmdingler · 2014-05-19 12:54 · Score: 1
  
  Yes, and I find it fortuitously absurd that life in the form of us is at the front of the pack as far as we can tell.
  Infiltrate yourself into every little nook and cranny that can sustain you.
  And, if evolution has given you the right mix of large brain and clever hands, you can alter the nooks and crannies to suit you.
  
  --
  Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
  Ernest Hemingway
9. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by ColdWetDog · 2014-05-19 13:07 · Score: 1
  
  Disastrous - well, that's a loaded term. One organism's disaster is another's dinner. The world / universe just is.
  But humans, along with all sorts of other plants and animals, have been changing the environment for a very long time.
  For quite a bit more detail on South America, read 1493 and some of his other books.
  TL;DR - there is no such thing as purely 'natural'.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
10. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by kwbauer · 2014-05-19 15:24 · Score: 1
  
  isn't the point of the article that it was altering the ecosystem? Now how do we differentiate between harm and alter?
11. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by LynnwoodRooster · 2014-05-19 20:49 · Score: 1
  
  How DARE you bring logic and reason into an environmental/anti-man screed! Don't you know we have hand-wringing to do?
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
12. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by LynnwoodRooster · 2014-05-19 20:51 · Score: 2
  
  By definition, some types of wetland cannot form along coats.
  You clearly have not been out in a good strong rain in Seattle. That wet land most definitely can form along - and through - coats.
  
  --
  Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
13. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by fellip_nectar · 2014-05-19 23:42 · Score: 1
  
  Posting to undo incorrect moderation
  
  --
  Worst. Signature. Ever.
14. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by swillden · 2014-05-20 00:37 · Score: 1
  
  And, if evolution has given you the right mix of large brain and clever hands, you can alter the nooks and crannies to suit you.
  It's worth extending this thought a bit further to recognize that virtually all human life is based on altering the nooks and crannies. If you were to require humans to live in the world as-is -- no buildings, no farms, heck, even making clothing is arguably altering the environment to make it more livable -- there's very, very little area of this planet that could support human life. And even in the few regions that could support human life, that life would be harsh, dangerous and unpleasant.
  We live by altering the world to suit us. Period. That doesn't mean we should alter it thoughtlessly, nor that there isn't value in preserving some areas unaltered. But anyone who thinks our goal should be to avoid altering our environment really hasn't thought it through, because the only way to achieve that goal is for us to cease existing.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
15. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by Tanktalus · 2014-05-20 01:05 · Score: 1
  
  But anyone who thinks our goal should be to avoid altering our environment really hasn't thought it through, because the only way to achieve that goal is for us to cease existing.
  There are people who believe that those espousing "avoid altering our environment" have thought it through, and their goal really is for humans to cease existing. I'm currently leaning toward believing these people.
16. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by swillden · 2014-05-20 02:44 · Score: 1
  
  But anyone who thinks our goal should be to avoid altering our environment really hasn't thought it through, because the only way to achieve that goal is for us to cease existing.
  There are people who believe that those espousing "avoid altering our environment" have thought it through, and their goal really is for humans to cease existing. I'm currently leaning toward believing these people.
  If there are any such people, it would seem appropriate for them to start by removing themselves. I don't wish anyone ill, but it would be the logical step.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
17. Re: Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by caveqat101 · 2014-05-20 02:56 · Score: 1
  
  Au contrair Mon fear. Colonization a white person invention? That's racist. Colonization was a Arab ormesopitian proclivity, as well, even Egyptians practiced it. As far back as we can see, it was practiced. Each race,each city group, each family or clan practiced it. I know you are referring only to the English version of it, but the baddest ass of every group practiced colonization, taking over the next territory, or clan to improve their livelihood or survival ability. So back to your little ivory tower and spew more claptrap.
18. Re: Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by caveqat101 · 2014-05-20 03:00 · Score: 1
  
  So they were stabilizing dunes,after the party, with shells. How neat. Stop the dunes from the inundation of their village. Wow, geoengeering at the lowest form. Cool.
19. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by OakDragon · 2014-05-20 03:16 · Score: 1
  
  But anyone who thinks our goal should be to avoid altering our environment really hasn't thought it through, because the only way to achieve that goal is for us to cease existing.
  There are people who believe that those espousing "avoid altering our environment" have thought it through, and their goal really is for humans to cease existing. I'm currently leaning toward believing these people.
  If there are any such people, it would seem appropriate for them to start by removing themselves. I don't wish anyone ill, but it would be the logical step.
  See, they know you won't follow through after they're gone. That's why only they can be trusted to manage the process.
  
  --
  Dark Reflection
20. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · 2014-05-20 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  The indigenous peoples didn't get the permission of regulators appointed by politicians elected by giant concrete canyon cities choking with people desirable of dictating what happens in states and regions that do not belong to them because yay democracy.
  If this brutally honest description upsets, oh well.
  
  --
  (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
21. Re: Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by OakDragon · 2014-05-20 03:18 · Score: 1
  
  When did Slashdot get invaded by Anonymous Cowards?
  
  --
  Dark Reflection
22. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by swillden · 2014-05-20 03:40 · Score: 1
  
  See, they know you won't follow through after they're gone. That's why only they can be trusted to manage the process.
  But how do I know they will follow through?
  Actually, I probably don't have to worry about that, since their ability to survive without supermarkets and the global supply chains which stock them is basically zero. They'll die even if they change their minds. So, I suppose I have to bow to their logic. Except that they can bite me, of course.
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
23. Re:Weren't the Peruvians altering the coast? by AF_Cheddar_Head · 2014-05-20 06:25 · Score: 1
  
  I agree with your premise but will say this regarding human alterations to the environment:
  -- Slow changes allow the local flora and fauna to adapt, aka the oyster shell accumulation occured likely over many decades if not centuries allowing different plants to make their way in and establish themselves resulting in an environment that animals can then inhabit.
  -- Fast changes are more likely to cause local flora and fauna to disappear, aka plowing up the prairie in North America in the space of a few decades resulted in the loss of many native plants and animals without the opportunity for replacement or adaption, unless you consider corn and wheat a suitable replacement for the prairie plants.
  Man altering the environment slowly results in a more stable adaption versus quick alteration.
Hey that's not bad.... by Rick+Zeman · 2014-05-19 11:53 · Score: 1, Insightful

This incidental landscape protection came to a swift end, however, after diseases brought by Spanish colonists decimated the local population
Can't be too bad since decimate means reduce by a 10th....
1. Re:Hey that's not bad.... by Opyros · 2014-05-19 12:56 · Score: 1
  
  decimate means reduce by a 10th
  Not necessarily.
2. Re:Hey that's not bad.... by Rick+Zeman · 2014-05-19 13:03 · Score: 2
  
  decimate means reduce by a 10th
  Not necessarily.
  People could say "decimate" means "blue" but that still doesn't make it right, nor contravene its etymological origins. Hard to get around "deci" in there.....
3. Re:Hey that's not bad.... by Wycliffe · 2014-05-19 15:34 · Score: 1
  
  decimate means reduce by a 10th
  Not necessarily.
  People could say "decimate" means "blue" but that still doesn't make it right, nor contravene its etymological origins. Hard to get around "deci" in there.....
  You mean like September, October, November and December? Words change.
4. Re:Hey that's not bad.... by allcoolnameswheretak · 2014-05-19 18:56 · Score: 1
  
  Are you sure? In latin, "decima" means 1/10, so I figured to decimate means to reduce TO 1/10, so BY 9/10.
5. Re:Hey that's not bad.... by Rick+Zeman · 2014-05-20 12:57 · Score: 1
  
  Actually, if enough people use "decimate" to mean "blue" such that it's commonly understood that when you say "decimate" you mean "blue", then it would indeed make it right! Likewise, if someone were to say that "decimate" means "reduce by a tenth" when it is almost never used that way, that person would be incorrect. Language is defined by usage.
  I mean, unless you value language more for its ability to serve as a class/racial/national marker than its ability to facilitate communication.
  And if half the people mean "blue" and the other half don't? What does that do for communication?
The Spanish Inquistion by Irate+Engineer · 2014-05-19 11:59 · Score: 4, Funny

I bet they weren't expecting that.

--
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
1. Re:The Spanish Inquistion by DigiShaman · 2014-05-19 13:10 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  That event was a more notable for historical and cultural reasons to European history. However, most of the deaths were caused by diseases and civil war.
  While numbers are unavailable, Spanish records indicate that the population was so devastated by disease that their forces could hardly be resisted. However, whether the illness of the 1520s was actually smallpox has been contested; a minority of scholars claim that the epidemic was actually due to an indigenous illness called Carrion's disease. In any case, a study by N. D. Cook, the results of which were published in 1981, show that the Andes suffered from three separate population declines during colonization. The first was of 30–50 percent during the first outbreak of smallpox. Then, when smallpox was followed with the measles, another decline of 25–30 percent occurred. Finally, when smallpox and measles appeared together, which occurred from 1585 to 1591, a decline of 30–60 percent occurred. Collectively these declines amounted to a decline of 93 percent from the population pre-contact in the Andes region.[15]
  When Pizarro arrived in Peru in 1532, he found it vastly different from when he had been there just five years before. Amid the ruins of the city of Tumbes, he tried to piece together the situation before him. From two young local boys who he had taught how to speak Spanish in order to translate for him, Pizarro learned of the civil war and of the disease that was destroying the Inca Empire.[3]
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...
  
  --
  Life is not for the lazy.
2. Re:The Spanish Inquistion by Nosretep1 · 2014-05-20 04:52 · Score: 1
  
  Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.
Visible from Space by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 12:00 · Score: 4, Funny

Protip: If you are going to submit an article about something "visible from space", you should have a picture of said something taken from space.
1. Re:Visible from Space by sumdumass · 2014-05-19 12:16 · Score: 2
  
  Show me a satalite that was around back then and I will find you a pick. Wait...
  --=-..-=-- There is an artist's rendition for you.
2. Re:Visible from Space by ColdWetDog · 2014-05-19 13:08 · Score: 1
  
  Since you can get a readable snap of a license plate from space with the appropriate satellite I'd say odd are pretty high "visible from space" is accurate.
  Yeah, that phrase doesn't really mean much these days. Basically anything that is macroscopic.
  
  --
  Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
3. Re:Visible from Space by Livius · 2014-05-19 13:35 · Score: 2
  
  But visible from space in the 16th century was *very* impressive.
4. Re:Visible from Space by swillden · 2014-05-20 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  you can get a readable snap of a license plate from space with the appropriate satellite
  Cite?
  
  --
  Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Now I'm conflicted by Anonymous Coward · 2014-05-19 12:16 · Score: 1

I've been trained to loath dirty Europeans and their expansionist ways.... yet here they can claim allegiance to Gaia by stopping the coastal disruption of thoughtless natives altering the land for their own benefit.
What's a libtard to do!?
Loath everyone. As usual.
1. Re:Now I'm conflicted by Irate+Engineer · 2014-05-19 12:45 · Score: 1
  
  Now now, self euthanasia is always a politically correct option.
  
  --
  Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
  Vote for Bernie in 2016!
So ... by cascadingstylesheet · 2014-05-19 12:43 · Score: 1

So ... the Spanish stopped them from littering?
I blame the mollusks by viperidaenz · 2014-05-19 13:18 · Score: 1

I they were tasty enough that the people travelled back to the shore to eat them, the shoreline wouldn't be eroding.
1. Re:I blame the mollusks by Intrepid+imaginaut · 2014-05-19 13:49 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Very shellfish of them. ...thank you, I'll be here all night, try the veal!
Re:Quit misusing decimated! by AK+Marc · 2014-05-19 13:20 · Score: 1

Ten how about dekamate? Kills 10 of every 11?

--
Learn to love Alaska
Re:Quit misusing decimated! by Wycliffe · 2014-05-19 15:32 · Score: 1

You sound like a moron when you write 'kill one of ten" when you mean "kill most of."
I could accept the changing use of the word if the damn prefix for one-tenth iwasn't part of it!
September, October, November, and December must drive you nuts then.
For some unknown reason, my favorite though is the divergence of Awful and Awesome.
Completely offtopic but I think 13 months each exactly 4 weeks long (or practically anything else)
would make more sense than what we currently have. We could just have the extra day or two
fall on a holiday so that the months/days/weeks always stay lined up.
I think it's racist by MPAB · 2014-05-19 20:37 · Score: 2

To consider what the non-white natives did worldwide as "natural" means giving them the same dignity as ants or beavers. "Then came the 'civilized human' (AKA white) and trampled it.
1. Re:I think it's racist by drinkypoo · 2014-05-20 00:29 · Score: 1
  
  To consider what the non-white natives did worldwide as "natural" means giving them the same dignity as ants or beavers. "
  Beavers maybe, not ants. Even shamen (yeah that word is specific, but you know what I mean) don't claim to understand the ant mind, the world over. But what's wrong with the noble beaver? They create lakes. The natives certainly wouldn't mind the comparison, except for how you mean it.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Re:Quit misusing decimated! by mark_reh · 2014-05-19 22:08 · Score: 1

Sounds more like having sex with 10 out of 11 to me.
The Spaniards probably did that, too.
Re:Slashdotters to the rescue! by Ol+Olsoc · 2014-05-20 01:01 · Score: 1

Dude, have a glass of wine and relax. You'll live longer (especially if it's red wine).
Sorry OM, I'm Tequila fueled.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re:Slashdotters to the rescue! by Ol+Olsoc · 2014-05-20 01:05 · Score: 1

Chief accepts your challenge, Good sir (or Ma'am).
When the American Native started getting "illegally obtained" firearms, they started getting a little more respect; not much, but enough to suppress complete annihilation.
Not bad, not bad.
Care to go for the gold and relate the Peruvian's downfall to gay marriage? 500 bonus points to be had.

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Re: Slashdotters to the rescue! by Ol+Olsoc · 2014-05-20 04:55 · Score: 1

Naw, screw that. Those points are only redeemable for an NPR coffee mug.
Screw you, MeeShell Norris (Norris!) and you too, Ira Plato. (but now lets all tune in to Diane Rehm)
I wonder whatever happened to Nina Totenbag?

--
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
That's Right, Blame the Spaniards by Toad-san · 2014-05-20 05:11 · Score: 1

Since the slowing or cessation of dune / ridge formation started about 2800 years ago (according to one paper), one might want a little more evidence before blaming it all on the Conquistadors or the following Spanish occupiers.
Re:hmm by kaatochacha · 2014-05-20 06:16 · Score: 1

I think it might only be you.
The last time I was in Spain ( ten years ago), a bunch of drunken youths were sitting around in the town center throwing bottles, yelling loudly, and annoying everyone.I'm sure they would have fought us if we hadn't ignored all the shit we were saying as we walked by.
An older local I knew believed that nothing was done because nobody wanted to go back to the days of Franco-Fascist-Can't-Do- Anything, which everyone hated with a passion,and as a result were tending to lean too far in the direction of letting the kids do anything they wanted to.
Your Tequila is showing by AF_Cheddar_Head · 2014-05-20 06:32 · Score: 1

Especially on that post.
Re:Clue: We don't use Latin anymore ... by HornWumpus · 2014-05-20 13:41 · Score: 1

Devastate is a perfectly good word.

--
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'