The islands had been on the list since 2007 because of the increase in tourism, over-fishing and the introduction of invasive species. The committee decided Ecuador’s government was committed to improving the state of the archipelago

The Galapagos Islands are among the most stunning places on earth. The unparalleled biodiversity and spectacular wildlife makes it a travel destination the world over. But it’s also in big trouble.

Two years ago I worked as a researcher at the Charles Darwin Foundation, an international not-for-profit organization that provides scientific research and technical information and assistance to ensure the proper preservation of the Galapagos Islands. During my time I already realized that Galapagos was under a lot of pressure, mostrly from tourists, fishermen and invasive species. Before my visit I had a very romantic idea of the Galapagos Islands, thinking it would be one big nature reserve. Galapagos now a days receives more than 100.000 foreign visitors per year, also atracting a log of Ecuadorians to the islands who want to benefit from the economic development. Puerto Ayora on Santa Cruz island has become a small city. This has  an enormous impact on the delicate ecosystems of the Galapagos Islands. And while Galapagos is one of the largest marine reserves in the world, there is constant pressure from fishermen, notably from Costa Rica, Guatemala and Panama, who sneak in during night time with long lines to catch sharks for their fins.

So why was Galapagos this week removed from the UN endangered sites lists? The Ecuadorian government has welcomed this removal because it allows them to futher develop Galapagos as a tourist destination. While Galapagos is a world heritage, Ecuador (one of the most corrupt countries in the world) chooses for the short term and the existence of the islands at risk. I find it difficult to accept that we have failed to conserve the most unique natural heritage site in the world.

Two words that sound pretty innocent, but have a very serious meaning to them. I had never heard of them before, maybe because I did not pay much attention during chemistry classes. These two ‘dispersants’ were used by Bitrish Petroleum to ‘clean up’ the oil in the Gulf of Mexico, without any consent of the US Congres or basicaly anyone (but themselves). But what exactly are the effects of Benzene and Toluene on natural systems (since they are both chemicals)?

“Benzene targets liver, kidney, lung, heart and the brain and can cause DNA strand breaks, chromosomal damage etc. Benzene causes cancer in both animals and humans.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benzene

“Toluene may enter the human system not only through vapour inhalation from the liquid evaporation, but also following soil contamination events, where human contact with soil, ingestion of contaminated groundwater or soil vapour off-gassing can occur. The toxicity of toluene can be explained mostly by its metabolism. As toluene has very low water solubility, it cannot exit the body via the normal routes (urine, feces, or sweat). It must be metabolized in order to be excreted.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toluene

Without doubt, introducing these substances into the worlds oceans creates a risk to all marine life and a world wide risk to the food chain. I do not want to judge anyone, but I honestly think we can do so much better than this.

Dead zones are low-oxygen areas in the world’s oceans, the observed incidences of which have been increasing since oceanographers began noting them in the 1970s. These occur near inhabited coastlines, where aquatic life  is most concentrated. The size and number of marine dead zones—areas where the deep water is so low in dissolved oxygen that sea creatures can’t survive—have grown explosively in the past half-century. NASA just released the map above, which shows a quite disturbing image. According to Treehugger:

The good news is that dead zones are reversible. Fertilizer is often used in much greater quantities than required because farmers have no way to know exactly what the right quantity is, so they prefer to put more than not enough, leading to a lot of the extra finding its way to the sea. Better ways to monitor crop fields with sensors and satellites can help farmers reduce their fertilizer use and thus reduce runoffs.