The massive 650-berth cruise ship the Discovery sets sail across the Pacific Ocean en route to the Galapagos Islands, the world's best-preserved tropical archipelago. When it reaches this isolated rabble of volcanic islands in just over one month's time, it will set a worrying precedent, says Graham Watkins, the director of the Charles Darwin Foundation, which coordinates conservation research in the islands.
The Discovery will become the largest tourist vessel operating in the Galapagos, carrying over five times as many passengers as any other. This trend towards large-scale tourism is pushing out small, local operators, Watkins says. What's more, it could herald the arrival of other vessels, increasing the pressure that tourism is placing on this world heritage site.
When Watkins spent a year in the Galapagos as a tourist guide in the late 1980s, the annual number of visitors to the islands was about 40,000. Last year, that figure reached 100,000. The arrival of the Discovery, which plans to pass through the islands twice a year, suggests that this upward trend will continue.
The local population has grown at a similar pace. The last census, in 2001, reckoned the permanent population to be more than 18,000. It is now the fastest growing province of Ecuador, and 27,000 people may be crammed into the 3 percent of the islands that is not designated as a national park. This figure is set to double in the next 7 to 12 years.
As the population expands, the strain on natural resources increases.
"There is greater demand for construction materials, fresh water and energy. Perhaps most importantly, outsiders coming to the archipelago rarely come with a conservation mindset and find it difficult to understand the realities of island living," Watkins says. The cultural change necessary to preserve the islands is an immense challenge, he says. "If the population boom continues, the islands could soon be beyond saving."
Since the first efforts to conserve the Galapagos in 1959, the problems have changed dramatically. Then, the challenges were largely biological, such as working out the conditions to breed giant tortoises in captivity or limiting the damage caused by introduced species such as the goat. These problems do not go away, but the relentless marketing of the Galapagos as the world's premier eco-tourism destination has contributed to a new set of social challenges.
A fresh approach to conservation is needed, Watkins says. "The only future for conserving the Galapagos is one in which all the different human interests on the islands work closely together."
"Biologists can no longer work in isolation, advising park managers on what makes scientific sense. They have begun to open up and communicate more effectively with other interests in the archipelago," he says. "This is a real challenge for many scientists.
If you're doing straight, old-style conservation biology, you're dealing with animals. They're not very predictable but they're a lot more predictable than people."
Since the early 1990s, there has been a tension between the needs of conservation and the needs of the local people. At the height of hostilities in 1995, disgruntled fishermen levelled death threats at Lonesome George, the only surviving giant tortoise from one of the islands, a huge tourist draw and something of a poster-boy for the conservation enterprise. But the Special Law of Galapagos, passed in 1998, signalled a new era of cooperation.
Among much else, the Special Law created the Galapagos Marine Reserve, a protected area around the islands and put in place a joint management participatory board, or "junta" as it's known locally, to manage it. This brought scientists, park managers, fishermen, tourism industry representatives and professional guides around the same table for the first time.
The junta has had successes. All parties agreed on a calendar of when commercial species can and cannot be fished, and a provisional zoning scheme for the marine reserve, which identifies who can do what and where. But the junta did not produce new business for the fishermen soon enough, dissatisfaction resurfaced and the fishermen pulled out, Watkins says.
To complicate matters, there have been 11 directors of Galapagos National Park Service in the past two years.
When Watkins took over just over a year ago, after a stint directing the Iwokrama International Centre for Rain Forest Conservation and Development in Guyana, his priority was to work with the other organizations to bring the fishermen back to the negotiating table.
In the case of the sea cucumber, for example, data suggested that they had all but disappeared from Galapagos waters. Nevertheless, the fishermen were allowed to continue fishing for them. The alternative -- to try to enforce a ban -- would have achieved very little.
"We would have had our conflict and they would have fished anyway," Watkins says.
Sending out scientists with the fishermen has been critical to fostering cooperation.
"It has allowed us to maintain and develop discussions about sustainability and about why this has happened," Watkins says.
But it's the success of the Galapagos tourism industry that is the key to a sustainable future for the islands, Watkins says. At present, the fishing industry in the archipelago makes, at most, a few million dollars a year, whereas tourism turns over about US$200 million.
Unfortunately, very little of this money finds its way into the conservation coffers.
"These companies, many of which have invested heavily in Galapagos, need to show more social responsibility and think more about conservation and sustainable development," Watkins says.
"Conservation of the Galapagos can only work if the biodiversity in the archipelago is owned in the hearts and minds of those that live there. If the local community does not benefit, it's not going to support conservation," Watkins says.
"It is still possible to meld conservation and sustainable development in the islands," he says. "We still have time but we've really got to focus our efforts."
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers