Bowermaster’s Adventures — The Charles Darwin Research Center

While in the Galapagos filming we ran into an American writer living in Puerto Ayora, the big town on the island of Santa Cruz, researching a book about exactly the same subject of our film – the current state of affairs across the archipelago.

Carol Ann Bassett’s book is just out, published by National Geographic, fittingly titled “Galapagos at the Crossroads: Pirates, Biologists, Tourists and Creationists Battle for Darwin’s Cradle of Evolution,” and it’s a fantastic tutorial for anyone curious about the natural and human health of the island state today.

I was particularly curious about her reportage on Darwin’s initial reaction to the islands that will forever be linked with his theory of evolution.

Like other biographers of Darwin – who first visited in 1835 as a curious but inexperienced 26-year-old, born the same day as Abraham Lincoln – she labels his role as evolutionary mystery solver as “one of the greatest myths of the history of science.” Citing a study by Harvard professor and MacArthur Foundation “genius” Frank Sulloway, the book details how little Darwin actually took away from the Galapagos after his five-week visit. He had “no eureka flashes of enlightenment,” she writes, “it would take decades before his final theory transcended his religious beliefs and his enduring doubts.”

In his book “Voyage of the Beagle” Darwin referenced the Galapagos sparingly; in his “On the Origin of Species,” published twenty years later, he never mentioned the finches – mistakenly thought by many to be the linchpin of his evolutionary theory – and which are named for him.

It took those twenty years between publications for the significance of the Galapagos to sink in on Darwin. For two decades he wrestled with the history of creationism and its relevance to species diversity. In the end, he came down on the right side of the argument (unless of course you are among those who continue to believe the planet is only 6,000 years old and that life as we know it was created in six days). That his name and theory are so inextricably linked with both evolution and the Galapagos is something Darwin could have never predicted. Nor could he have predicted the clash of economics and the environment, which so wrack the place today.

%Gallery-77068%

The Charles Darwin Research Center sits atop a long hill climbing up from Puerto Ayora, on the big island of Santa Cruz. Part of the Charles Darwin Foundation established in 1959 – the lone international research and advisory institution dedicated to exclusively studying the Galapagos – the CDRS is both an archive of historical scientific study and site of various laboratories engaged in today’s most cutting-edge research in the islands. Many of the world’s most-expert Galapganian scientists either have worked here or still do and we’ve walked up the hill to visit with one, marine biologist Alex Hearn … who we find with his hands in a tank, coddling one of the darlings of local marine life, the sea cucumber.

Sitting on a second-story deck overlooking the blue ocean that is his backyard we talk about the impacts of over fishing here. Some highlights:

“You know the Galapagos has a history of over-exploitation that goes way back to the whalers of the sixteenth century. Ever since we’ve had successive waves of boom-bust fisheries. The latest being the sea cucumber which started in the early Nineties as a result of the resource collapsing on the continent followed by a sizable migration of fishers who had already successively depleted the sea cucumber along the coast of Ecuador moving to the islands and hammering the resource here. At the time it was unregulated and there was no way of stopping it because there was no Marine Reserve. By the time the Marine Reserve was created a lot of the damage had already been done. Sometimes we forget that the Marine Reserve management system inherited a lobster resource which had already collapsed in the Eighties, and a sea cucumber resource that had already been heavily fished for ten years ….”

“In terms of coastal fishing, the number of local fishermen — who are the only ones legally allowed to fish here — has nearly tripled during the Nineties, from about 400 to over 1,000. Fishing around the coast has increased dramatically and we haven’t been very successful in managing it. In part because it’s a group with a lot of political power as well as the perception of an immediate need. Since 1998 this local management system has failed to take into account the sustainability of both lobster and sea cucumber. The result is that both are suffering, badly ….”

“When you’re at university or when you’re studying a particular species biologically you’re focused on the species. When you’re looking at the fisheries, the actual biology of the species is the least important thing really, your job becomes more about managing people. Getting them, first of all, to trust that our advice is first and foremost because we are scientists and is focused on sustainability. Our motivation is not about eliminating or prohibiting fishermen. There is a big lack of trust here, partly due to the fact that we’re both a science and conservation organization and carry a fair amount of political power as well. As a result we vote on the system as a conservation sector but we also provide the technical advice, which may sometimes seen as a little bit suspect. Some locals, fishermen, will say ‘You’re providing the advice just to justify your position.’ It can get very complex. It’s about building trust and showing them that the long-term impacts of over fishing and are very difficult to prove but that we still need to make changes now ….”

“Working in Galapagos is like a rollercoaster. There are times when it’s immensely frustrating and there are times when it’s just paradise. To tell the truth, for me, as a young scientist coming to Galapagos straight out of university, to be able to develop lines of research, to be able to publish, to be able to take the research from the sea to the government and follow that entire process is something you really don’t get in many other places. On a personal level I am eternally grateful for Galapagos. Besides, Galapagos also gave me a wife and a baby. So what can I say?”

%Gallery-77075%

Five reasons to stay on hiking trails: One can save your life.

As spring beckons people to outdoor endeavors, it doesn’t hurt to do a run-down of what is the best outdoor behavior to stay safe and not damage nature in the process of enjoying it. Here are five reasons for staying on a trail when hiking. They are not in any order of importance except for the last one. That one is the most important.

After Pat Quackenbush, the naturalist at Hocking Hills State Park in Ohio introduces himself at the beginning of the naturalist led night hike to Ash Cave, he talks about the three-foot drop on the right side of the trail further along the path. When I took such a hike, he advised the 150 plus people who had come to be wowed to stay closer to the left and watch out for that drop. This leads to Reason Number 1.

  • Reason 1: There may be places where the trail has eroded at the edges or where there is a dangerous spot to be aware of. Paying attention to the trail also helps you see roots, rocks or branches along the path that may twist an ankle or cause a fall. This also helps keep you aware of slick spots caused by mud or wet leaves.
  • Reason 2: It protects the environment. When you step off trails, you damage the ecosystem. Often there are rare plants, moss, lichen, bugs or whatever that are in balance with each other. Your boot or sneaker-clad foot can do enough damage in one second that takes years to undo.
  • Reason 3: Depending upon where you’re hiking, birds can be nesting near the trail. Your intrusion can mess up the procreation process. Even worse, you could step on a nest and take out the bird family.
  • Reason 4: Staying on a trail helps prevent you from getting lost. You still might get lost, but at least if you’re on a trail, there’s a path for people to follow to find you. If you go bushwhacking in the woods, lots of luck with that.
  • Reason 5: It can save your life! During his talk Quackenbush also said that hiking at night without a naturalist at Hocking Hills State Park is not allowed. This is for good reason. The park has cliffs and drop-offs galore. If you don’t know where they are, you can fall. In the best case scenerio, you twist an ankle. In the worst case, you die. That’s what happened this past weekend at one section of the park. A 20-year old woman scrambled up off the trail, only to fall. She later died at the hospital.

Bonus Reason: Reason 5 reminded me of this reason. If you die while hiking, your family and friends could be forever haunted by your fall. When my husband was in his 20s, one of his friends fell off a cliff in Glacier National Park in Montana. My husband was working with him at one of the lodges the time. Years later, my husband still talks about that day as if it just happened.

Seriously, folks. Stay on that trail. It’s a trail and it’s marked for good reason.

*The first photo was taken by desparil on a mountain summit in Corsica, France.