climate change vulnerability assessment of the...

Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st Century │ Chapter 1

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the GalápagosIslands

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos Islands

Climate ChangeVulnerability Assessment

of the Galápagos IslandsTechnical Report based on an

International Expert Workshop

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF


Edited by Irma Larrea Oña (WWF) and Giuseppe Di Carlo (CI)Cover Picture: Galápagos cormorant © Eunice Park / WWF Back Cover Pictures: Galápagos landscape © Eunice Park / WWF; Sally ligthfood © Eunice Park / WWFDesign and Printing: AH/editorial, [email protected]

© Copyright No. 035184 ISBN-978-9942-03-454-0

How to cite this publication:Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos Islands. 2011. Eds. I.Larrea and G. Di Carlo. WWF and Conservation International, USA.

How to cite a chapter of this publication:Sachs J, Ladd N. 2011. Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st

Century: Expected Changes and Research Needs. In Climate Change VulnerabilityAssessment of the Galápagos Islands. 2011. Eds. I. Larrea and G. Di Carlo. WWFand Conservation International, USA.

Source must be cited in all cases. Parts of this publication can be reproduced without previous written permission if the source is cited. For the total reproduc-tion of this document, CI and WWF must be previously informed. Contents andopinions expressed in this document are exclusive responsibility of the authors.

Published in Quito, Ecuador by Conservation International and WWF © 2011.All rights reserved by CI and WWF.

PREFACE

The Galápagos Islands are among the many places in the world already experiencingthe impacts of climate change. It is predicted that climate change will cause risingsea level, higher ocean temperatures and more acidic waters. As the ocean largelyregulates the climate, changes in ocean temperatures and currents are already al-tering the frequency, intensity, and distribution of storms, floods, heat waves, andthe amount and distribution of rainfall. The unique and endemic biodiversity of theGalápagos is at risk. In addition, the loss of Galápagos biodiversity directly impactsits local human communities as their livelihoods are dependent primarily on nature-based tourism, fisheries, and agriculture, all of which are dependent on these threat-ened natural resources.

In September 2008, Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), incooperation with the Ministry of Environment of Ecuador and the Galápagos NationalPark, conducted a vulnerability assessment to gauge the likely impacts of climatechange on marine and terrestrial ecosystems of the Galápagos and the human com-munities that are dependent upon them. The assessment evaluated the vulnerabilityof the Galápagos Islands to climate change and determined the priority actionsneeded to ensure that the Galápagos can adapt to future climate conditions.

This study –including an international workshop– was conducted as part of a year-long commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Galápagos National Park andbrought together experts on the Galápagos marine and terrestrial environments, cli-mate scientists, social scientists, government officials and local stakeholders, allworking under a common agenda: the need to maintain and increase the resilienceof Galápagos biodiversity. This agenda turned into a real commitment under the Dec-laration of Santa Cruz, signed by the Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment, theGalápagos National Park Service, Conservation International, WWF, the experts thatcontributed to this study and all the workshop participants.

This report contains the scientific studies that underpin the immediate and substan-tial actions needed to increase the adaptive capacity of Galápagos’ ecosystems andthe people that depend on them. Adapting to climate change is the only solution toensure ecosystems and human societies can survive and maintain their well-beingwhen exposed to climate change impacts. These studies will support the developmentof the Climate Change Adaptation Plan for the Galápagos Islands, an initiative ofthe Ministry of Environment’s Climate Change Undersecretary, integrated into theNational Climate Change Strategy of Ecuador.

Conservation International and WWF are committed to continuing our support tothe Ministry of Environment and the Galápagos National Park in their efforts to-wards ensuring that the biodiversity of the Galápagos is protected and can adapt tofuture conditions for the benefit of the Galápagos society and its future generations.

Luis Suárez Eliécer Cruz B.Executive Director Ecoregional Director

Conservation International Ecuador WWF-Galápagos Program


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document is the result of a collective effort and would not have been possiblewithout the contributions of many people and organizations.

Conservation International and WWF would like to acknowledge the organizationswhose support made the production of this document possible. In particular, we wouldlike to thank the Charles Darwin Foundation, the University San Francisco de Quito,North Carolina State University and CIIFEN (Centro Internacional para la Investi-gación del Fenómeno de El Niño).

This study would not have been possible without the kind support and contributionof Abga. Marcela Aguiñaga, Ecuador Ministry of the Environment; the Ministry ofAgriculture, Farming, Aquaculture and Fisheries; the Galápagos National Park Serv-ice; the acting Mayor of Puerto Ayora, Ing. Virgilio Santos; David Arana, Director ofAgrocalidad-SICGAL; José Cajas Cadena, Agrocalidad; Commander Patricio Goyes,Director of INOCAR (Instituto Oceanográfico de la Armada); the Coffee ProducersAssociation and Filemón Cueva; SENPLADES (Secretaría Nacional de Planificacióny Desarrollo) and Camilo Martínez; National Institute of Galápagos (INGALA);Chamber of Tourism of Galápagos (CAPTURGAL); Stuart Banks, Charles DarwinFoundation; and Factor Verde.

We also express our gratitude to each of the workshop participants and their homeinstitutions and to the numerous staff at CI and WWF that was involved in severalstages of this project and the final workshop and provided feedback and input to sev-eral stages of the project. Particularly, we would like to thank Noémi d’Ozouville,Fernando Ortiz Quevedo, Free de Koning, Leah Bunce Karrer, Lee Hannah, JeffPrice, Mauricio Castrejón, Emily Pidgeon, Lauren Spurrier, Carolina Carrión andEmili Utreras.

Finally, Conservation International and WWF are grateful to their donors for theirgenerosity which made this study possible.


7

TAbLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 11Giuseppe Di Carlo, Noémi d’Ozouville, Scott Henderson, Free de Koning, Irma Larrea, Fernando Ortiz, Emily Pidgeon, Lauren Spurrier and Luis Suárez

ChAPTER 1 17Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st Century: Expected Changes and Research NeedsJulian Sachs and S. Nemiah Ladd

ChAPTER 2 29Terrestrial Ecosystems in Galápagos: Potential Responses to Climate ChangeMandy Trueman, Lee Hannah and Noémi d’Ozouville

ChAPTER 3 47A Review of Galápagos Marine habitats and Ecological Processes under Climate Change ScenariosStuart Banks, Graham Edgar, Peter Glynn, Angela Kuhn, Jerson Moreno, Diego Ruiz, Anna Schuhbauer, John Paul Tiernan, Nathalia Tirado and Mariana Vera

ChAPTER 4 69Galápagos Marine Vertebrates: Responses to Environmental Variability and Potential Impacts of Climate ChangeDaniel M. Palacios, Sandie K. Salazar and F. Hernán Vargas

ChAPTER 5 81Dealing with Climate Change in the Galápagos: Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing SectorsDiego Quiroga, Carlos Mena, Leah Bunce Karrer, Haruna Suzuki, Alexandra Guevara and Juan Carlos Murillo

ANNExES 109

Annex I: List of participants - International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis of the Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate Change in the Galápagos Islands

Annex II: Declaration of Santa Cruz


9

AcronymsCAPTURGAL Chamber of Tourism of Galápagos, acronym in SpanishCDF Charles Darwin FoundationCI Conservation InternationalCIIFEN International Center for the Research of El Niño Phenomenon,

acronym in SpanishCIMEI Inter-institutional Committee for the Control and Management of

Introduced Species, acronym in Spanish. CPUE Catch per unit effortEN El NiñoENSO El Niño-Southern OscillationEUC Equatorial UndercurrentFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeGAIAS Galápagos Institute for the Arts and Science, University San Fran-

cisco de QuitoGMR Galápagos Marine ReserveGNP Galápagos National ParkINGALA National Institute of Galápagos, acronym in SpanishINOCAR Naval Oceanographic Institute, acronym in SpanishIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeITCZ Inter-tropical Convergence ZoneIUCN International Union for Conservation of NatureLN La NiñaMMA Marine Managed AreaMPA Marine Protected AreaNGO Non-governmental organizationNOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationOAGCM Ocean-atmosphere general circulation modelPDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation SENPLADES Ecuadorian Secretary for Planning and Development, acronym in

SpanishSICGAL Galápagos Inspection and Quarantine System, acronym in SpanishSLP Sea level pressureSSH Sea surface heightSST Sea surface temperatureUN United NationsUSFQ University San Francisco de QuitoWWF World Wildlife Fund

Introduction

Giuseppe Di Carlo1, Noémi d’Ozouville

4, Scott Henderson

3,

Free de Koning3, Irma Larrea

2, Fernando Ortiz

3,

Emily Pidgeon1, Lauren Spurrier

1and Luis Suárez

3

1. Conservation International, USA.2. WWF-US.3. Conservation International, Galápagos, Ecuador.4. Integrated Water Studies Program, Université de Paris, Paris, France.

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

T he Galápagos Islands arerenowned worldwide for theirunique biological diversity. Lo-

cated in the Eastern Tropical Pacific,600 miles west of the coast of Ecuadorin South America, the Galápagos Is-lands lie at the confluence of both warmand cold ocean currents. Such condi-tions provide habitats for tropicalspecies, such as corals and red-footedboobies, temperate species like sea lionsand macro-algae (kelp), and cold waterspecies such as penguins and fur seals.On land unique ecosystems have devel-oped to adapt to either harsh arid con-ditions or variably wet conditions.

The extreme weather and ocean condi-tions brought to the region every 2-8years by the El Niño phenomena, whichare associated with high ocean temper-atures, and torrential rainfall, meanthat the species and habitats of theGalápagos Islands face cyclical climateshifts. For this reason, the Galápagosprovides a globally-unique ‘field labora-tory’ for assessing impacts of climatechange on biodiversity.

Climate change is predicted to increasesea levels, change ocean temperaturesand alter oceanic currents around theIslands, and change the amount anddistribution of rainfall. Acting togetherwith current human influence and pres-sure on the natural ecosystems, all ofthese effects will result in acceleratedspecies losses. The loss of the Galápagosbiodiversity will directly impact thelocal communities as their livelihoodsare primarily tourism, fisheries, andagriculture, all of which are dependenton these threatened natural resources.

To ensure the long-term survival of thebiodiversity and the people of the Galá-pagos, it is essential to understand thevulnerability of this region to climatechange and to define the urgent priorityactions we must take to face these chal-lenges.

In July 2008, growing awareness of cli-mate change in the Eastern TropicalPacific and potential impacts on Galá-pagos ecosystems and human well-being, especially combined withgrowing pressure on the natural sys-tems, compelled WWF, ConservationInternational (CI), and the CharlesDarwin Foundation (CDF), in partner-ship with the Ecuador Ministry of En-vironment and Galápagos NationalPark (GNP), to initiate a climatechange vulnerability assessment of theGalápagos Islands. In September 2008,a preliminary meeting was held inGalápagos to begin the vulnerability as-sessment planning process, includingthe review of existing data on the effectsof climate change on the Galápagosecosystem and the services they providefor human well-being. Within the fol-lowing months, research was conductedto integrate existing and new data to fillin knowledge gaps. Simultaneously, CIand WWF engaged local stakeholdersand developed an effective strategy tocreate buy in and mainstream the out-comes of the vulnerability assessment.This process culminated in the vulner-ability assessment expert workshopheld in April 2009 in Puerto Ayora,Galápagos. At the workshop, local, na-tional and international experts, scien-tists and decision makers reviewed theexisting data, integrated data across

INTRODUCTION

13

disciplines and provided recommenda-tions and priority actions for the nextsteps in ensuring Galápagos can adaptto the impacts of climate change.

The objectives of the vulnerability as-sessment were:

• To determine the potential impactsof climate change on the biodiversityand related human welfare of theGalápagos;

• To provide recommendations for man-agement that addresses these im-pacts;

• To build in-country support for ad-dressing the impacts of climate;

• To provide working examples ofadaptation for the Eastern Pacific.

Vulnerability AssessmentExpert Workshop 2009

Five keynote presentations were pre-sented during the first morning of theworkshop with a participation of over150 people including local schools, nat-uralist guides, local NGOs and institu-tions. Expert presentations ranged fromdescribing known climate change im-pacts in the Eastern Tropical Pacific toclimate change modeling and analysisof current trends in oceanographic data.Key presentations about predicted im-pacts of climate change on marine andterrestrial biodiversity and the vulner-ability of the local Galápagos commu-nity were also presented.

During the second day of the workshop60 participants split in four workinggroups to discuss in detail about physi-cal oceanography, terrestrial impacts,marine biodiversity and socio-economicimpacts. Results from each workinggroup were presented and discussed inplenary sessions. Also, a representative

from the Ecuadorian Secretary forPlanning and Development (SEN-PLADES) made a keynote presentationexplaining the national frameworkwithin which adaptation plans and cli-mate change-related programs shouldbe developed.

On the last day of the workshop, a spe-cial round table was created to discusswith key authorities and stakeholderspreliminary results and recommenda-tions from the workshop. The roundtable was attended by the Minister ofEnvironment of Ecuador, the Director ofthe Galápagos National Park, the actingMayor of Puerto Ayora, the Director ofAgrocalidad-SICGAL, the Director ofINOCAR and a representative of theCoffee Producers Association. Each oneof them also presented their views onclimate change and its relationship withtheir institutions and its activities.

Key Recommendations forAdapting to Climate ChangeImpacts

The extent of losses to the diversity oflife in the Galápagos, and, in turn, tothe people who depend on those re-sources, will depend on how quickly andstrategically the islands prepare for thecoming changes. As climate change hasalready altered the balance of theoceans with serious and irreversibleconsequences for marine ecosystemsand the services they provide, it be-comes imperative to take actions to in-crease the adaptive capacity of coastalmarine ecosystems and the people thatdepend on them. Adapting to climatechange is the only solution to ensureecosystems and human societies cansurvive and maintain their well-beingwhen exposed to climate change im-


14

pacts. Adaptation planning in theGalápagos should consider the follow-ing broad principles that reflect theunique economic and ecological condi-tions in the Islands.

Protect especially vulnerablespecies and ecosystems

Strengthen management measures toreduce existing pressures on marine re-sources, increase ecosystem resilienceand integrate the management ofcoastal marine resources and continen-tal protected areas with that of Galápa-gos. Protect climate vulnerable species,such as those that depend on thecoastal zone for nesting and breeding.

Protect emblematic species tosustain tourism

Species such as giant tortoises, Galápa-gos penguins, and blue-footed boobiesdraw tourists that not only supportthousands of Galápagos families, butalso help fund local governments andconservation work in the islands. Pro-tecting these species with actions thataddress the specific threats each facewould have far-reaching economic andconservation benefits.

Strengthen the quarantine systemto limit the introduction ofinvasive species

Regulate cargo access from the main-land to limit introduction of pests andinvasive species. Adopt clean-cargo pro-tocols in ports that service the islands,and develop better procedures to detectand respond to pests on arriving vessels.

Improve management of coastaland offshore-water fisheries

Improve management of fisheries andestablish offshore no-take zones to an-

ticipate shifts in fishing pressure as cli-

mate change will induce coastal fish

stocks to move away from coastal wa-

ters due to increase in ocean tempera-

ture and increasing fishing pressure.

Promote climate research andestablish climate-responsemonitoring protocols

Establish a monitoring and early warn-

ing system to detect the impacts of cli-

mate change on the ecosystems and

species of the Galápagos. Promote re-

search to fill in gaps on how species and

ecosystems may respond to climate

change and to enable managers to take

adaptation actions.

Adopt a sustainable eco-tourismapproach and coastal development

Promote the use of freshwater conser-

vation, waste management and boat op-

erations to avoid loss of species (sea

turtles) and habitat (e.g. mangroves,

coral reefs). Implement guidelines and

best practices for coastal and foreshore

development planning that take into ac-

count the potential for increased storm

activity, salt water intrusion, and other

climate change impacts. Improve and

retrofit existing infrastructure to make

sure they can sustain climate impacts.

Improve education opportunitiesand promote communityawareness

Education and awareness are key

strategies to increase language and

communication capacity that will en-

able people in the Galápagos to occupy

jobs in the tourism and service sectors

or by providing credit lines to allow a

shift from coastal to offshore fishing,

which requires sturdier, better-

equipped boats. Outreach programs

INTRODUCTION

15

can help create awareness and engagecommunities on climate.

The workshop concluded with the sig-nature of the Declaration of SantaCruz, where the Government ofEcuador, represented by the Minister ofthe Environment, together with part-ners and all participants agreed to sup-port and invest in future climate changeresearch for Galápagos and on the needto translate the recommendations pro-posed during the workshop into adap-

tive management actions to protect theGalápagos biodiversity and the islands’communities. (See Annexes I and II)

The present publication aims to supportefforts to tackle climate change in theGalápagos and use the recommenda-tions and priority actions from theworkshop to implement an adaptationplan for the islands, and work towardincreasing the resilience and adaptabil-ity of Galápagos in view of the uncer-tain future climatic changes.


16

CHAPTER 1

Climate and Oceanographyof the Galápagos in the 21st Century:

Expected Changes and Research Needs

Julian P. Sachs1*and S. Nemiah Ladd

1

1. School of Oceanography University of Washington Seattle, WA 98195 USA* Corresponding Author: [email protected]

17

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

AbSTRACT

With the expectation that levels of carbon dioxide andother greenhouse gases in the atmosphere will continueto increase for the next several decades, and that theplanet as a whole likely will warm as a result, we ex-pect the oceanography and climate of the Galápagos tochange. Based on the analysis of observational studiesand climate models, we expect the following primarychanges in the Galápagos in the coming decades: (1)warmer sea surface temperatures, (2) continued ElNiño and La Niña events, some of which will be intense,(3) a rise in sea level of several centimeters, (4) in-creased precipitation, (5) lower surface ocean pH, and(6) a reduction in upwelling. These changes in theoceanography and climate will likely alter the marineand terrestrial ecosystems of the Galápagos in waysthat are difficult to predict.

Major uncertainties exist concerning the relationshipbetween the expected changes in ocean temperatures,upwelling, seawater pH, and precipitation on the re-gional scale that most climate models consider, and thelocal scale of the Galápagos Islands that was the centralfocus of this study.

1. TEMPERATUREChANGE

There has been no discernible trend insea surface temperature (SST) in theregion of the Galápagos (a 2° x 2° gridbox, or about 200 x 200 km on a side,centered on 0°N, 90°W) since the startof the Industrial Revolution (the last127 years; figure 1a), the end of WorldWar II (the last 62 years; figure 1b), orsince 1981 (the last 26 years; figure 1c)(Smith et al. 2008). Nor has there beenany trend in local SSTs at Santa CruzIsland in the Galápagos over the last 44years (Trueman, Hannah and D'Ozou-ville, chapter two in the current vol-ume). Yet the larger equatorial Pacific,as indicated by the Niño 3 index of SSTin the region 90°W—150°W and 5°S—5°N, has warmed 0.4°—0.8°C over thelast 40 years (IPCC, 2007b), and warm-ing throughout the region is expected tocontinue over the course of the 21st cen-tury, with the best estimates indicating1°—3°C of additional warming (IPCC,2007b). Whether local SSTs in the Galá-pagos will continue to buck the warm-ing trend observed in the greaterequatorial Pacific region over the last40 years is unknown. But it seems im-prudent to extrapolate from a failure tofollow the regional temperature trendwhen that trend is only 0.4°—0.8°C,and conclude that local sea surface tem-peratures (SSTs) will not rise in theface of the expected 1°—3°C of warmingin the equatorial Pacific region this cen-tury.

Additionally, despite the overall trendtowards warmer SST in the equatorialPacific, decadal variability very likelywill continue, but this variability maywell be stochastic, and there is a largeconsensus that its spectral character isvery red (Gedalof et al. 2002). One of themost prominent decadal variations, the

Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) is notnecessarily a forcing, and could simplybe the result of El Niño-Southern Oscil-lation (ENSO) (Newman et al. 2003).

A lack of understanding of the linkageof large spatial scale analyses (e.g.IPCC-type) to the local scale of theGalápagos remains, and addressingthis gap should serve as the focus for fu-ture research questions. There is a clearneed for more meteorological and hy-drographic observations, combined withwidespread data archiving, so existingtime series of SST and meteorologicalconditions can be made available. One

Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st Century │ ChAPTER 1

19

Figure 1: Monthly mean SST at 0°N, 90°W forthe periods (a) 1880-2007, (b) 1945-2007, (c)1981-2007. Data in black are derived fromNOAA’s historical merged SST analysis (Smith etal. 2008), and the data in red are derived fromthe Hadley Center’s global analysis of SST(Rayner et al. 2003). Linear least squares trendsare plotted for both time series, and both timeseries are referenced to have zero mean overthe plotting interval.

6.0

I (a)

40

2.0

0.0

-2.0

1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

6.0

(b)

40

2.0

0.0

-2.0

1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005

(c)

40

2.0

0.0

-2.0

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006

step toward achieving this aim wouldbe to reinstate the radiosonde programin the Galápagos.

Additional research should focus oncontinuing and expanding down-scalingmodel experiments, specifically by in-cluding more ensemble members andexploring methods for down-scaling at-mospheric models. It is important thatthe ocean-dynamics community be en-listed to help answer these questions.

Paleoclimate records are another toolthat can be used to link large spatial-scale analyses to the local scale of theGalápagos. Future research shouldfocus on generating new paleoclimaterecords, especially from the lowlands,and linking these records to extend in-strumental records. Calibration of thepaleoclimate proxies under modern con-ditions should be an integral part of thedevelopment of these records.

Finally, it is necessary that we developa better understanding of dynamics andthe interactions of both the PanamaCurrent and the Humboldt Currentwith the Galápagos, a topic we revisitin Section 6.

2. EL NIÑO

ENSO is the dominant mode of globalclimate variability on an inter-annualtime scale that strongly impacts theGalápagos (Cane 2005; Philander1983). During El Niño events, the sur-face ocean around the Galápagoswarms substantially and the islands re-ceive significantly more rainfall than innormal years. The warmer water is lessnutrient-enriched than the cool watersthat normally surround the Galápagosand the marine ecosystem consequentlybecomes disrupted, with mass mortality

of coral, seabirds, and marine mammalsoccurring during the strongest El Niñoevents, such as those in 1982-83 and1997-98 (Glynn 1988). Major disrup-tions of terrestrial ecosystems alsooccur with rainy conditions permittingthe establishment of new colonizingplants and animals, and dramatic in-creases in the biomass of herbaceousplants and vines at the expense of cacti(Holmgren et al. 2001).

Since 1880 A.D., El Niño events haveoccurred roughly every 2–7 years, withno clear periodicity (Philander and Fe-dorov 2003). The late 20th century wascharacterized by particularly strongand frequent El Niño events that ledsome researchers to conclude that ananomalous change had occurred inENSO that could be attributed to in-creased levels of atmospheric green-house gases (IPCC 2001; IPCC 2007a;Trenberth and Hoar). This claim hasbeen challenged by other researchersand at best is highly uncertain (Cane2005; Rajagopalan et al. 1997). The du-ration of the instrumental record of SSTand atmospheric pressure is simply tooshort to conclude that such a funda-mental change in ENSO variability hasoccurred (Wunsch 1999). Though sup-ported by some theory and models (Tim-mermann et al. 1999), a link betweengreenhouse-gas-induced global warm-ing and increased frequency or inten-sity of El Niño events remainsinconclusive (Collins 2000), with the av-erage of projections from coupled ocean-atmosphere general circulation modelsshowing no change in ENSO variabilityover the 21st century (Collins andGroups 2005; IPCC 2007b), but rathera tendency toward a more El Niño-likestate in the tropical Pacific.

In all likelihood, ENSO-related climatevariability will continue in the coming


20

decades and is very likely to modulateSST, rainfall, and sea level changes inthe Galápagos on inter-annualtimescales (IPCC, 2007b).

Future research in this area should in-clude continued efforts to understandthe long-term behavior of ENSO by theglobal climate modeling community(this is a major research thrust byIPCC-related researchers and model-ers). Additionally, it is necessary to de-velop ENSO indicators relevant to localconditions. For example, 2008 was char-acterized by very high rainfall amountsin the Galápagos even though it was notan El Niño year.

3. SEA LEVEL RISE

Global mean sea level has risen by about20 cm since 1880 A.D. as a result ofglobal warming (IPCC 2007b), and therate of increase has accelerated sinceabout 1930. However, the rate of sealevel rise since the mid-20th century hasnot been as significant in the easternequatorial Pacific as in other parts of theworld ocean (IPCC 2007a). Locally,there has been no discernible trend insea level over the last 26 years on SantaCruz Island in the Galápagos (figure 2).

Nevertheless, global mean sea level is

projected to rise by 20-50 cm (IPCC

2007b) or more (Rahmstorf et al. 2007;

Solomon et al. 2009) over the 21st cen-

tury and the Galápagos likely will be af-

fected by the increase. Subsidence of

some of the islands, or portions of the is-

lands, in the Galápagos, has the poten-

tial to exacerbate the local rise in sea

level in the coming decades.

Adaptation to sea level changes may be

viewed through the lens of strong El

Niño events, which cause sea level in

the Galápagos to increase by up to 45

cm, as occurred during the 1997-98 El

Niño-event. Recent land-use changes

(e.g. coastal development) have made

the Galápagos much more vulnerable to

even modest rises in sea level, and to

sea level rises associated with El Niño

(Clarke and Van Gorder 1994; Clarke

and Lebedev 1999).

Moving forward, it is important to de-

termine why local sea level in the Galá-

pagos has not been observed to rise in

concert with sea level in the eastern

equatorial Pacific, and to monitor local

rates of subsidence that may exacerbate

the rise in sea level associated with the

global mean thermal expansion of the

ocean. It would therefore be advanta-


21

2000

1900

1800

1700

1600

1500

1400

1300

1200

Sea Level (mm)

Year

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

Figure 2:Sea level at Santa Cruz from1982-2008. No significanttrend exists in the data. Thetwo large El Niño events of1982-83 and 1997-98 areclearly visible as periods ofhigher-than-normal sea level.Data available online fromthe University of Hawaii SeaLevel Centerhttp://uhslc.soest.hawaii.edu/

geous to augment the tide gauge on

Santa Cruz with additional tide gauges

throughout the archipelago.

4. PRECIPITATION ANDGARÚA

Mean annual precipitation in Puerto

Ayora, Santa Cruz Island, has varied

significantly over the last 45 years, with

El Niño years being characterized by

high rainfall and La Niña years charac-

terized by low rainfall (Trueman, Han-

nah and D'Ozouville, chapter two in the

current volume). But this relationship

can break down, as observed in 2008, a

non-El Niño year, when rainfall

amounts were greater than in several

El Niño years of the last half century.

On longer time scales, our rainfall re-

construction from the sediments of

Lake El Junco on San Cristobal Island

indicate that the Galápagos have been

trending toward a wetter mean climate

since the start of the Industrial Revolu-

tion about 130 years ago (Sachs et al.

2009). The driest period of the last

1,200 years in the Galápagos was ap-

parently the end of the 19th century,

which we attribute to the end of the

Northern Hemisphere climate anomaly

known as the “Little Ice Age” (Grove

1988). Since that time, there has been a

century-long trend toward wetter con-

ditions, though even modern rainfall

amounts are lower than at any other

time in the 1,200 years prior to about

1880 A.D. Reconciling our paleoprecip-

itation data, which indicate increasing

precipitation over the last several

decades, with the observations for the

last 45 years that indicate no significant

trend in precipitation, is possible consid-

ering that the El Junco sediment sam-

ples average over 30 years of deposition,

and there could be some differences inrainfall recorded at sea level on SantaCruz Island and at 750 m on San Cristo-bal Island. Nevertheless, if the century-long trend toward a wetter climate inthe Galápagos that is implied by the ElJunco data continues, we would expectthe Galápagos to receive increasingmean annual amounts of rainfall in thecoming decades.

Whether the trend toward increasedprecipitation since the start of the In-dustrial Revolution is connected to an-thropogenic alteration of the climate isunknown, but the IPCC indicates agreater than 90% chance of increasedprecipitation over the 21st century inthe region of the Galápagos. As dis-cussed for temperature, local changeswill not necessarily follow regionalchanges, and a critical downscalingquestion concerns the trend of localGalápagos rainfall in the future. Muchmore extensive instrumental measure-ments of Galápagos weather (in boththe highlands and the lowlands) needsto occur to address this question.

In addition to considering overall pre-cipitation trends, it is necessary to as-sess the impact of a warming globalclimate on garúa, the dense fog thatforms from low stratus clouds in thehighlands, typically during the cool, dryseason lasting from June to December.This water source is critical to highlandplants and ecosystems. Future trendsin garúa formation, duration, and ele-vation are uncertain because thephysics of garúa formation are a com-plex function of SST, wind, and humid-ity. We surmise, however, that aweakening of the Walker circulation, aspredicted by theory and many state-of-the-art global climate models (GCMs)(DiNezio et al. 2009; Vecchi and Soden2007; Vecchi et al. 2006), would likely


22

result in a reduction of garúa persist-ence in the Galápagos. In addition, iflocal SSTs increased, especially in thecool, dry season, the optical depthand/or seasonal duration of garúawould be expected to decrease. On theother hand, if the frequency and/or in-tensity of La Niña events increased orlocal upwelling increased, then an in-crease in the optical depth and/or sea-sonal duration of garúa might ensue.

Another complication is that, althoughit is tempting to use past El Niño eventsas a model for the influence of a warmerocean on precipitation and garúa forma-tion in the Galápagos, El Niño may notbe a good model. The existence of a spa-tial pattern of SST in the tropical Pa-cific that is similar to that during an ElNiño event does not necessarily implythat the underlying dynamics are thesame (DiNezio et al. 2009; Vecchi andWittenberg, in press).

Future studies should focus on under-standing the dynamics of garúa forma-tion. Specifically, it should beestablished whether there is a thresh-old SST above which garúa will notform, and what the influence of the

large-scale ocean-atmosphere circula-tion is on garúa formation. It is possiblethat a better understanding of garúa

formation could be achieved by analyz-ing existing precipitation, SST, humid-ity (both highland and lowland),pressure, and wind data to determinethe conditions under which garúa formsand persists.

5. OCEANACIDIFICATION

An increase in atmospheric carbon diox-ide (CO2) levels from 290 to 385 ppmsince the start of the Industrial Revolu-tion has caused the ocean to becomemore acidic (Sabine et al. 2004). Conse-quently, global ocean pH (= –log10[H+])has declined by 0.1 units since 1880 A.D.and is expected to decrease by an addi-tional 0.4 pH units by the end of this cen-tury (Caldeira and Wickett 2003). Theincreased acidity of seawater will makethe production of calcium carbonateshells by marine plants and animals in-creasingly difficult (Orr et al. 2005).Making matters worse, regions whereupwelling produces CO2-rich surface


23

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

water, such as the Galápagos, are moresensitive to increased CO2 concentra-tions (measured in partial pressure ofcarbon dioxide [pCO2]) (Doney et al.2009; Manzello et al. 2008). This sensi-tivity is clearly demonstrated by thehigh buffer factor in the region of theGalápagos relative to most of the tropi-cal and subtropical ocean, which indi-cates a decreased ability to buffer CO2

changes (Sabine et al. 2004).

The upshot is that the calcifying organ-isms and the marine ecosystem in theGalápagos are likely to be more sensi-tive to an acidifying ocean as atmos-pheric CO2 levels rise than the rest ofthe globe. When atmospheric CO2 levelsreach 450 ppm, which will likely occurby mid-century, coral growth is pre-dicted to be at about 50% of its pre-in-dustrial rate, due to a combination ofhigher SSTs and lower aragonite satu-ration levels (Fabry et al. 2008; Feely etal. 2008; Hoegh-Guldberg et al. 2007;Silverman et al. 2009). Coral reefs inthe Galápagos likely will become inca-pable of surviving by the time atmos-pheric CO2 levels reach 750 ppm(Silverman et al. 2009), the level ex-pected by the end of the 21st century(IPCC 2007b).

Future study should address the rela-tive vulnerability of Galápagos coral toocean acidification, given that thesecorals already experience large swingsin pH associated with ENSO.

6. UPWELLING

Changes in upwelling are the final im-pact of global warming on the Galápa-gos that we will consider. Reducedupwelling might be expected to resultfrom weaker trade winds, which, inturn, weaken equatorial surface cur-

rents, reduce Ekman divergence, andreduce the east-west thermocline tilt,among other processes (DiNezio et al,2009). Many of the most sophisticatedcoupled ocean-atmosphere GCMs pre-dict a reduction in trade-wind strength,the Walker Circulation, surface cur-rents, and vertical ocean velocity in theequatorial Pacific as a whole, and theeastern equatorial Pacific to a lesser ex-tent, as atmospheric CO2 levels rise(DiNezio et al. 2009; Vecchi and Soden2007).

Unfortunately, it is difficult to discernwhat the changes in local upwelling inthe Galápagos will be in the face ofthese large-scale changes in the circu-lations of the atmosphere and ocean.The upwelling that occurs in andaround the Galápagos Islands resultsfrom a complex interplay between thebathymetry, the South Equatorial Cur-rent that flows west at the surface, andthe Equatorial Undercurrent that flowseast in the subsurface (Eden and Tim-mermann 2004). The archipelago pres-ents a topographic barrier, disruptingthe flow of these major currents andtropical instability waves, such as theKelvin waves that are generated duringEl Niño and La Niña events (Eden andTimmermann 2004).

Because the Galápagos are small whencompared to the grid size of most gen-eral circulation models, and theprocesses that cause upwelling in theGalápagos are influenced by basin-wide(i.e., 104 km) features as well as verysmall scale bathymetric features (i.e.,100 km), it is not yet possible to predicthow changes in the coupled ocean-at-mosphere circulation will affect theGalápagos upwelling regime. It istherefore necessary to address the samedownscaling issues that exist for tem-perature and precipitation in order to


24

link large spatial-scale analyses ofchanges in ocean currents to the localscale of the Galápagos.

Other currents that affect the Galápa-gos are the Panama Current and theHumboldt Current. However, there aretoo few model studies to provide infor-mation as to how these currents arelikely to change over the course of thiscentury. Such studies should be in-cluded in future research.

7. CONCLUSIONS

Over the next several decades, theGalápagos should be prepared for anumber of changes related to globalwarming. Although varying degrees ofuncertainty exist for each topic ad-dressed, the future of the Galápagosmore likely than not includes continuedEl Niño and La Niña events, some ofwhich may be intense; increases in sealevel, precipitation, and surface oceantemperatures; and a decrease in surfaceocean pH. However, many uncertainties

and areas for future research remain,

particularly concerning the relationship

between local and regional SSTs, pre-

cipitation, upwelling, and ocean acidifi-

cation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This manuscript developed from the

discussions of the Ocean and Climate

Analysis Group of the Galápagos Vul-

nerability to Climate Change Assess-

ment Workshop, April 20-23, 2009,

Santa Cruz, Galápagos. The working

group participants were: Julia Cole,

Patricio Goyes, Derek Manzello, Rod-

ney Martinez, Cesar Palacios, Julian

Sachs, Jose Santos, Gabriel Vecchi, and

Lian Xie. Financial support for J.P.S.

was provided by the National Science

Foundation under Grant No. NSF-

ESH-0639640 and Grant No. NSFEAR-

0823503, as well as by the US National

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administra-

tion under Grant No. NOAA-

NA08OAR4310685. We greatly


25

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

REFERENCES

Caldeira, Wickett 2003. Oceanography: Anthropogenic carbon and ocean pH. Nature425(6956): 365-365.

Cane 2005. The evolution of El Niño, past and future. Earth and Planetary Science Let-ters 230(3-4): 227-240.

Clarke and Van Gorder 1994. On ENSO coastal currents and sea levels. J.Phys. Oceanog-raphy 24: 661–680.

Clarke and Lebedev 1999. Remotely driven decadal and longer changes in the CoastalPacific waters of the Americas. J. Phys. Oceanography 29: 828–835.

Collins 2000, Understanding uncertainties in the response of ENSO to greenhousewarming. Geophysical Research Letters 27(21): 3509-3512.

Collins, Groups 2005. El Niño- or La Niña-like climate change? Climate Dynamics, 24: 89-104 (DOI: 10.1007/s00382-004-0478).

DiNezio, Clement, Vecchi, Soden, Kirtman, Lee, 2009. Climate response of the Equato-rial Pacific to global warming. Journal of Climate 22(18): 4873-4892.

Doney, Tilbrook, Roy, Metzl, Le Quere, Hood, Feely, Bakker 2009. Surface-ocean CO2

variability and vulnerability. Deep Sea Research Part II: Topical Studies in Oceanog-raphy 56(8-10): 504-511.

Eden, Timmermann 2004. The influence of the Galápagos Islands on tropical tempera-tures, currents and the generation of tropical instability waves. Geophysical Re-search Letters 31.

Fabry, Seibel, Feely, Orr 2008, Impacts of ocean acidification on marine fauna andecosystem processes. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 65(3): 414-432.

Feely, Sabine, Hernandez-Ayon, Ianson, Hales 2008, Evidence for upwelling of corrosive"acidified" water onto the continental shelf. Science 320(5882): 1490-1492.

Gedalof, Mantua, Peterson 2002, A multi-century perspective of variability in the PacificDecadal Oscillation: new insights from tree rings and coral. Geophysical ResearchLetters 29.

Glynn 1988, El Niño-Southern Oscillation 1982-1983: Nearshore population, commu-nity, and ecosystem responses. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 19(1):309-346.

Grove, J.M. 1988, The Little Ice Age. Methuen, London; New York. Guilyardi, Wittenberg, Federov, Collins, Wang, Capotondi, Van Oldenborgh, Stockdale

2009, Understanding El Niño in ocean-atmosphere general circulation models,progress and challenges. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 90 (3):325-340.

Hoegh-Guldberg, Mumby, Hooten, Steneck, Greenfield, Gomez, Harvell, Sale, Edwards,Caldeira, Knowlton, Eakin, Iglesias-Prieto, Muthiga, Bradbury, Dubi, Hatziolos 2007,Coral reefs under rapid climate change and ocean acidification. Science 318(5857):1737-1742.

Holmgren, Scheffer, Ezcurra, Gutiérrez, Mohren 2001, El Niño effects on the dynamicsof terrestrial ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16(2): 89-94.

appreciate Mandy Trueman, Noémid'Ozouville, and Mark Gardener forproviding the Galápagos rainfall andSST data since 1965 that are shown inthis manuscript and Gabriel Vecchi forproviding the SST re-analysis data forthe Galápagos region since 1880. Wethank the Workshop organizers, Dr.

Noémi d'Ozouville and Dr. Giuseppe DiCarlo of Conservation International,and the WWF, for bringing us togetherfor this important discussion. We alsowould like to thank the Charles DarwinFoundation, and the Galápagos Na-tional Park for their support of thiswork.


26


27

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2001, Climatic Change 2001: The ScientificBasis. Cambridge: University Press.

Manzello, Kleypas, Budd, Eakin, Glynn, Langdon 2008, Poorly cemented coral reefs ofthe eastern tropical Pacific: Possible insights into reef development in a high-CO2

world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105(30): 10450-10455.Newman, Compo, Alexander 2003, ENSO-forced variability of the Pacific Decadal Oscil-

lation. Journal of Climate 16(23): 3853-3857.Orr, Fabry, Aumont, Bopp, Doney, Feely, Gnanadesikan, Gruber, Ishida, Joos, Key, Lind-

say, Maier-Reimer, Matear, Monfray, Mouchet, Najjar, Plattner, Rodgers, Sabine,Sarmiento, Schlitzer, Slater, Totterdell, Weirig, Yamanaka, Yool 2005, Anthropogenicocean acidification over the twenty-first century and its impact on calcifying organ-isms. Nature 437(7059): 681-686.

Philander Fedorov 2003, Is El Niño sporadic or cyclic? Annual Review of Earth and Plan-etary Sciences 31(1): 579-594.

Philander 1983, El Niño Southern Oscillation Phenomena. Nature 302: 295-301.Rahmstorf, Cazenave, Church, Hansen, Keeling, Parker, Somerville 2007, Recent climate

observations compared to projections. Science 316(5825): 709.Rajagopalan, Lall, Cane, 1997, Anomalous ENSO occurrences: An alternate view. Journal

of Climate 10(9): 2351-2357.Rayner, Parker, Horton, Folland, Alexander, Rowell, Kent and Kaplan, 2003, Global analy-

ses of sea surface temperature, sea ice, and night marine air temperature since thelate nineteenth century. J. Geophys. Res. 108: 4407 (DOI:10.1029/2002JD002670).

Sabine, Feely, Gruber, Key, Lee, Bullister, Wanninkhof, Wong, Wallace, Tilbrook, Millero,Peng, Kozyr, Ono, Rios 2004, The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2. Science305(5682): 367-371.

Sachs, Sachse, Smittenberg, Zhang, Battisti, Golubic 2009, Southward movement of thePacific intertropical convergence zone AD 1400-1850. Nature Geoscience 2(7): 519-525.

Silverman, Lazar, Cao, Caldeira, Erez 2009, Coral reefs may start dissolving when atmos-pheric CO2 doubles. Geophysical Research Letters 36.

Smith, Reynolds, Peterson and Lawrimore 2008, Improvements to NOAA's historicalmerged land-ocean surface temperature analysis (1880-2006). Journal of Climate.

Solomon, Plattner, Knutti, Friedlingstein 2009, Irreversible climate change due to car-bon dioxide emissions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106(6):1704-1709.

Sura, Newman 2006, Daily to decadal sea surface temperature variability driven bystate-dependent Stochastic Heat Fluxes. Journal of Physical Oceanography 36(10):1940.

Timmermann, Oberhuber, Bacher, Esch, Latif, Roeckner 1999, Increased El Niño fre-quency in a climate model forced by future greenhouse warming. Nature398(6729): 694-697.

Trenberth, Hoar, El Niño and Climate Change. Geophysical Research Letters 24.Vecchi, Soden 2007, Global warming and the weakening of the tropical circulation.

Journal of Climate 20(17): 4316-4340.Vecchi, Soden, Wittenberg, Held, Leetmaa, Harrison 2006, Weakening of tropical Pacific

atmospheric circulation due to anthropogenic forcing. Nature 441: 73-76.Vecchi and Wittenberg. 2010. El Niño and our future climate: where do we stand?

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change. Volume 1, Issue 2: 260-270.Vimont 2005, The contribution of the inter-annual ENSO cycle to the spatial pattern of

decadal ENSO-like variability. Journal of Climate 18(12): 2080-2092.Wunsch 1999, The interpretation of short climate records, with comments on the North

Atlantic and Southern oscillations. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society80(2): 245-255.


28

CHAPTER 2

Terrestrial Ecosystems in Galápagos: Potential Responses to Climate Change

Mandy Trueman1, Lee Hannah

2 and Noémi d’Ozouville

3

1. Charles Darwin Foundation and University of Western Australia.2. Conservation International, USA.3. Integrated Water Studies Program, Université de Paris, Paris, France.

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

1. INTRODUCTION

The terrestrial ecosystems of Galápagos have evolved within theunique climate of the archipelago and are therefore susceptible toany changes in the climatic regime. Driven by ocean currents andwinds, the climate is uncharacteristically cool for its equatorial po-sition, has two distinct seasons, and is periodically subject to ex-treme events associated with the El Niño-Southern Oscillation(ENSO). There is some inherent resilience among terrestrial Galá-pagos organisms and communities due to the natural rainfall vari-ability associated with ENSO events. However, ecosystemresponses would be very different if there was a change to thebaseline climatic conditions or to the frequency or intensity of verywet or very dry years, all of which are possible under global cli-mate change. Two especially powerful El Niño events in 1982–83and 1997–98, characterized by anomalous warming of sea surfacetemperature, air temperature, and extreme precipitation, did re-sult in substantial impacts in the terrestrial ecosystems. These ob-servations can help us understand the vulnerability of species andecosystems to potential future changes to the climate in Galápagos.

In preparation for the Climate Change Vulnerability AnalysisWorkshop of April 2009, we drew together data from local climaticrecords and observations of terrestrial species’ and communities’responses to previous climatic fluctuations including ENSO events.These were first steps to better understand how regional climatevariability and background climate conditions have shaped the ter-restrial communities of Galápagos, and that information is pre-sented in sections 2 and 3 below. Drawing on these observedresponses to previous ENSO events and input from workshop par-ticipants, we predicted ecosystem responses to possible changes inthe frequency and/or intensity of El Niño and La Niña events, am-bient global climate change, and changes to seasonality or inten-sity of precipitation. These predictions are presented in section 4below. Finally, in section 5, we provide recommendations to guidemitigation and adaptation strategies to reduce the threats to ter-restrial Galápagos communities.

2. ExISTING GALÁPAGOSTERRESTRIALCLIMATE

The Galápagos climate has been thesubject of research and investigation fordecades, as part of climate-related or bi-ological investigations (Alpert 1963;Colinvaux 1972; Perry 1972; Newell1973; Hamann 1979; Grant and Boag1980; Pourrut 1985; Nieuwolt 1991;Huttel 1992; Snell and Rea 1999; d'O-zouville 2007). Trueman and d’Ozou-ville (2010) define the rainfall thatoccurs in two distinct seasons: The hotseason, from January until May, ischaracterized by localized convectiveprecipitation events, and total rainfallfor the season is highly variable in rela-tion to sea surface temperature. Thecool season, from June to December, iscommonly referred to as garúa, and ischaracterized by ground-level cloudcover, occult precipitation, and mistyconditions in the highlands on thewindward side of the islands.

Annual precipitation is generally loweron the coastal lowlands and higher onthe inland volcanic mountains, particu-

larly on south-facing slopes (Snell and

Rea 1999). Anomalous high-rainfall

years are usually associated with the

higher sea surface temperatures and re-

laxation of trade winds associated with

the El Niño phase of the ENSO cycle,

occurring every two to seven years

(Snell and Rea 1999). The La Niña

phase of ENSO is associated with lower

sea surface temperatures and lower

rainfall. These ENSO effects are largely

apparent in the hot season, although

strong El Niño events have resulted in

an extended period of convective rain-

fall, including some of the normal cool-

season months. Years of high or low

rainfall have occurred in isolation of

ENSO events. For example, the hot sea-

son of 2008 experienced high rainfall,

yet there was no El Niño event.

The spatial variation of rainfall in rela-

tion to altitude has resulted in a pattern

of vegetation zonation (figure 1) from

dry lowlands to humid highlands (Wig-

gins and Porter 1971). The dry lowlands

(also referred to as the arid zone) oc-

cupy the majority of the archipelago,

comprising nearly 83% of total land

area (figure 2). The biodiversity in each

Terrestrial Ecosystems in Galápagos: Potential Responses to Climate Change │ ChAPTER 2

HumidZone

TransitionZone

NORTHSOUTH900 m

600 m

300 m

0 mLittoralZone

PrevailingWind

DryZone

Figure 1. Galápagos vegetation zonation in relation to altitude.

Source: Charles Darwin Foundation.

31

of the vegetation zones is adapted to theexisting climate regime, and results inan uneven spread of endemic, native,and introduced plant species betweenthe zones. The arid zone, characterizedby exceptionally dry conditions punctu-ated by wet El Niño events, hosts themajority of the endemic plants in thearchipelago (Porter 1979) and is nothospitable to the majority of introducedplants. The humid zone has higher bio-logical productivity due to the regularrainfall it receives during the cool sea-son every year. However, this zone is al-ready significantly degraded on the fourinhabited islands due to the combinedimpacts of land-use change and plantinvasions (Watson et al 2009). Changesto the climate of the Galápagos, includ-ing changes to ENSO intensity or fre-quency, would have differing effects oneach of the vegetation zones and thespecies within them. Therefore this re-port differentiates between the twomajor climatic zones: the dry lowlandzone and the humid highland zone.

3. TERRESTRIALbIOLOGICALRESPONSES TOCLIMATEVARIAbILITY

Scientists working in Galápagos, suchas Hamann (1985) and Trillmich(1991), have recognized the utility ofdocumenting Galápagos ecosystem re-sponses to extreme climatic conditionsas a predictor of potential climatechange impacts. Unfortunately, veryfew experimental studies or monitoringprograms have been conducted to docu-ment these effects. Useful observationalinformation is provided by reports cen-tered on the effects of the two severe ElNiño events that occurred in 1982–83and 1997–98 and a number of otherpublications. The following review de-scribes observed impacts on Galápagosnative vegetation, native fauna, and in-troduced species in both the arid low-lands and the humid highlands.


32

Santiago

Genovesa

Town

0°0’

1°0’S

90°0’W91°0’W

Village

Boundary

Roads

Arid

Transition

Humid

Crater

Habitat Zone

Pinta

Marchena

Española

Santa Cruz

Baltra

San Cristóbal

Fernandina

FloreanaIsabela

0 25 50

Kilometers

N100

Santiago

Genovesa

To

V

B

R

A

Tr

H

C

Habitat Zone

Pinta

Marchena

Española

Santa Cruz

Baltra

San Cristób

nandina

FloreanaIsabela

25 50 N100

Figure 2. Map of Galápagos vegetation zones, principally derived from INGALA et al. (1989)

The effects of extreme climatic eventson the Galápagos terrestrial environ-ment are profound. In general, terres-trial organisms flourish during wet ElNiño conditions and suffer through LaNiña droughts (Snell and Rea 1999). Onland, rainfall is the limiting factor tolife. During El Niño conditions, south-east trade winds slacken, upwellingsubsides, and raised sea surface tem-peratures generate higher rainfall onland. Jaksic (2001) summarized the ter-restrial effect of wet El Niños nicely:there is a bottom-up system of ecosys-tem control, where more rainfall in-creases primary productivity, therebyincreasing secondary productivity (e.g.insects) and tertiary productivity (e.g.hawks). In Galápagos, large increasesin biotic growth have been observedduring wet years, especially in short-lived species of plants and insects. Un-fortunately, introduced terrestrialspecies also benefit from El Niño condi-tions in Galápagos, which has a nega-tive impact on the native biodiversity(Snell and Rea 1999).

3.1. Arid-zone vegetation

The effects of El Niño events in the aridzone are pronounced, with a massive in-crease in herbaceous plant and vineabundance, an increase in overall plantdiversity, and some increased mortalityamong several dominant, native specieswith longer life spans (Hamann 1985;Tye and Aldaz 1999). The overallspecies composition is not altered sig-nificantly, but El Niño events can altercommunity structure by changing therelative importance of the componentspecies (Hamann 1985). Following ElNiño events, a greater diversity ofspecies has been recorded in long-termmonitoring plots (Cayot 1985; Aldazand Tye 1999) and records of species es-

tablishment show species in placeswhere they previously have not beenfound (Luong and Toro 1985; Trillmich1991). This potentially indicates thepresence of a soil seed reserve of theemergent species. Also, in contrast todrier years, El Niño events create adense herbaceous understory with vinesand creepers covering higher vegetation(Tye and Aldaz 1999). In particular, thecactuses Opuntia echios and Jas-

minocerus thouarsii, the tree Bursera

graveolens, and the shrub Croton

scoulerii all had increased mortalitydue to falling over (due to being waterlogged) or being smothered in vines(Hamann 1985; Luong and Toro 1985;Tye and Aldaz 1999).

There also is a temporary alteration ingrowth and phenology among plants,including larger leaves, larger flowers,taller bushes, greater rate of growth,and longer retention of leaves in decid-uous species (Tye and Aldaz 1999). Al-though no studies have quantified theincrease in primary productivity or veg-etation biomass during El Niño, anec-dotal and photographic evidenceindicates such increases would be sev-eral-fold as compared to drier years. Amore localized effect of El Niño includesthe erosion of all vegetation along newlyformed watercourses (Tye and Aldaz1999). Also, in areas previously de-graded by goats, El Niño events as-sisted the recovery of some species(Hamann 1985).

Increases in the frequency of severe ElNiño events could have negative conse-quences for longer-lived arid zonespecies that suffer under abnormallyhigh precipitation. For example, Opun-

tia echios (prickly-pear cactus) andBursera graveolens (palo santo tree) aretwo native, arid zone species character-ized by high seedling mortality but ex-


33

ceptionally long life spans for individu-als that survive into adulthood(Hamann 2001). Hamann (2004) sug-gests that the recruitment and survivalof O. echios may be hindered if future ElNiño events are more intense, with re-covery periods for the cactus on thescale of 150 years, in accordance withthe plant’s life span.

Conversely, some species demonstratea mass mobilization of the seed reserve(e.g. Scalesia helleri), and could therebybe positively affected by an increase inwet events, but negatively affected bymore prolonged dry events. Trillmich(1991) proposed that many Galápagosplants only germinate, grow, and set anew seed reserve during El Niñoevents. In the arid zone, many speciesare adapted to prolonged dry periods byhaving a long-lived seed bank or mech-anisms for water conservation. A rapidshift to a wetter climate could endangerthese species by increasing competitionfrom the vast majority of species thatthrive in wetter conditions.

3.2. humid-zone vegetation

There are significant effects of wet ElNiño events in the humid highlands,but they are not as pronounced as ef-fects in the arid zone (Hamann 1985;Luong and Toro 1985). Again, there is amassive increase in vegetation growth.In a long-term survey site within thehumid zone initiated in 1970, Hamann(1985) reported an increase in the abun-dance of vines and herbs following the1982–83 El Niño event. He also notedthat diversity decreased, suggestingthat some species were shaded out byfaster growing, more dominant species.During the same period, Cayot (1985)observed how runoff, flow, and tempo-rary water holes appeared to be very

important determinants of the distribu-tion of finer-scale vegetation communi-ties in the transition zone. Tye andAldaz (1999) also noted tremendousgrowth in ferns, herbs, grasses, andcreepers, both native and introduced.During the 1997–98 El Niño event,there was an increase in the number ofspecies recorded in permanent monitor-ing plots on Alcedo volcano: Prior to theevent there were 60 species, comparedwith 100 species by the end of the event(Aldaz and Tye 1999).

One highland species that may be par-ticularly affected by ENSO is Scalesiapedunculata. It exhibits a naturalstand-level dieback and regenerationthat appears to be linked with El Niñoand La Niña events (Hamann 2001).Kastdalen (1982) first observed a de-cline in S. pedunculata trees in the late1930’s, followed by a subsequent regen-eration in 1945, during rainfall follow-ing drought and disturbance by cattleand donkeys. Dieback in the speciesalso was observed during the 1982–83El Niño event (Hamann 1985; Itow1988), with subsequent regeneration in1985, again in response to rainfall fol-lowing drought (Itow 1988; Hamann2001). Hamann (2001) suggests thatthe short life expectancy of this andother Scalesia species makes them vul-nerable to persistent, long-term distur-bances. The stand-level dieback patternrenders Scalesia vulnerable to invasionby species with a more continuousgrowth and regeneration pattern (Tyeand Aldaz 1999), which is particularlyconcerning as introduced plants spreadthrough the archipelago.


34

3.3. Non-vascular plants

During the 1982–83 El Niño event, thelichen and bryophyte population wasdevastated in three ways (Weber andBeck 1985): destruction of habitats andsubstrates (e.g. tree mortality, scouringof rocks), effects on the plants them-selves (e.g. lichen thallis damaged, in-dividuals becoming waterlogged), andeffects of differential competitive suc-cess of certain groups. In the highlands,a few dominant bryophytes dominatedwhile rarer, smaller mosses and lichenswere absent (Weber and Beck 1985).Ongoing work by Frank Bungartz hasrevealed many new species of lichens inGalápagos. The vulnerability of thisgroup of plants to climate change is yetto be investigated.

3.4. Native terrestrial fauna

Tortoises

El Niño effects on Galápagos giant tor-toises (Geochelone nigra) were observedduring both the 1982–83 and 1997–98events. During the former event, Cayot(1985) recorded little positive or nega-tive effect, but observed the mass migra-tion of a Santa Cruz Island population tolower elevations. During the 1997–98event, observers documented increasedmortality due to tortoises falling downravines or drowning in floods (Snell andRea 1999). Successful reproduction wasalso suppressed during the 1997–98event for two reasons: (1) increasedvegetation and wet soils reduced thetemperature of the soil, renderingnests unviable, (2) hatchlings were at-tacked and killed by introduced fireants (Snell and Rea 1999). Tortoisemovements associated with El Niñoevents also are likely to assist themovement of plant propagules between

lowland-coastal areas and highlandareas (Trillmich 1991), and this couldassist in the spread of alien plants asindividuals find more favorable condi-tions in different environments. Cur-rent research is investigating therelationship between tortoise move-ments and environmental variables in-cluding ecology and climate. Results ofthis work will help explain how tor-toise ecology might be affected by cli-mate change (Stephen Blake, personalcommunication). Without this under-standing it is difficult to implementadaptation measures.

Land birds

Many bird species in Galápagos are en-demic and have small populations. As aresult, they are at risk of extinction(Deem et al. 2008), especially in the faceof introduced pathogens and diseasevectors (Bataille et al. 2009). In general,bird breeding and bird populations re-spond positively to increases in biologi-cal productivity due to rain. Increasesin mockingbird and finch breeding havebeen reported during El Niño events(Curry 1985; Grant and Grant 1999).Pathogens and parasites are affectingmany bird species, and unfortunatelythese pathogens and parasites also tendto increase in wetter conditions. Curry(1985) reported that although breedingincreased during the 1982–83 El Niño,there was no net increase in reproduc-tion because they were negatively af-fected by pox at the same time. Inparticular, avian pox virus and the par-asite Philornis downsii cause mortali-ties in many native and endemic birdspecies (Deem et al 2008). Introducedrats and mice also prey on birds. Wetconditions favor all of these introducedorganisms. Recent unpublished re-search by Dale Clayton, Jody O’Connor,and Sabine Tebbich has shown almost


35

zero recruitment among species offinches during the wet year of 2010, dueto P. downsii, pox, and predation by ro-dents.

Sea birds

Seabirds on Galápagos and other is-lands in the region exhibit massive mi-grations and die-offs during El Niñoevents (Jaksic 2001) due to the fall inmarine productivity and decrease infood availability. During the 1982–83 ElNiño, all 15 sea bird species on Galápa-gos suffered species declines (Valle etal. 1987). Duffy (1989) reported adultmortality and nesting failure amongpenguins, flightless cormorants, wavedalbatross, greater frigate birds, brown

pelicans, blue-footed boobies, maskedboobies, swallow-tailed gulls, and lavagulls; and speculated that many birdsdispersed and returned later. Waved al-batross (Phoebastria irrorata) are likelyto be negatively affected by a wetter cli-mate because denser vegetation in-hibits their ability to land and take off(Anderson et al. 2002).

The critically endangered Galápagospetrel (Pterodroma phaeopygia) is aseabird that nests under vegetation inthe highlands of several islands and istherefore affected by the terrestrial en-vironment as well as marine conditions.Nesting habitat is severely restricted byhuman activities and introducedspecies. Two of the major threateningprocesses are habitat alteration by in-vasive plants and predation by blackrats, both of which are advantaged bywet conditions. Also, El Niño eventshave had a detrimental impact on nest-ing and productivity in the past(BirdLife International 2009). Manycolonies are in stream beds, resulting inreduced breeding success due to flood-ing and debris deposition in wet years,which is compounded by the lack of foodavailability from the marine environ-ment in El Niño conditions (CarolinaProaño, personal communication).

Reptiles and rodents

There is very little documented infor-mation on ENSO impacts on reptiles orrodents but evidence exists that certainreptile and rodent species are either re-liant on annual rainfall or are advan-taged by higher rainfall. Land iguanas(Conolophus subcristatus) are adaptedto the seasonal variation and rely onannual rainfall for nesting and survivalof young (Snell and Tracy 1985). Fe-male lava lizards (Microlophus delano-

nis) that reproduced in times of low


36

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

rainfall laid fewer and smaller eggs,

and had lower post-laying body weight

(Jordan and Snell 2002). In a 3-year

study of the endemic rodent Nesory-

zomys swarthy, Harris and Macdonald

(2007) showed a positive correlation be-

tween rainfall, vegetation density, and

body weight. The research also revealed

an increase in breeding with higher

rainfall.

Invertebrates

There are no published reports of direct

effects of ENSO events on native inver-

tebrates. However, anecdotal evidence

suggests that enhanced vegetative pro-

ductivity also benefits insects. Many

more hawk moths and grasshoppers are

observed in wetter years than in drier

years. Roque-Albedo and Causton

(1999) noted a secondary effect of El

Niño events through introduced inver-

tebrates. As introduced invertebrate

populations increase, often coincident

with El Niño events, the native popula-

tions are negatively affected.

3.5. Introduced and invasive species

Due to increased rainfall and productiv-

ity, El Niño events assist the establish-

ment of new species in Galápagos by

creating optimal conditions for repro-

duction, particularly in dry environ-

ments. Using examples of plants and

birds, Trillmich (1991) explains, “El

Niño rains increase the suitability of

the habitat for a short while. This in-

creases the chances of plants to find a

permanently suitable habitat, and al-

lows populations to escape from danger-

ously low levels to a size where the

probability of extinction is low, even

after the disturbance is low.”

Since the two intense El Niño events of1982–83 and 1997–98, invasive plantshave continued to spread furtherthroughout the archipelago, especiallyon the inhabited islands (Watson et al.2009). Additionally, many species of in-troduced plants that are still restrictedto the inhabited areas have been iden-tified as future potential invaders (Gué-zou et al. 2010). It is expected that therewill be more naturalizations and inva-sions from the existing introduced florain Galápagos due to increasing resi-dence time and growing human popula-tion and development (Trueman et al.In press.). Hence the risk of future in-vasion is already high, and this wouldbe even higher with wetter conditions.Once established, introduced plants canbe fierce competitors.

Vegetation

During the 1982–83 El Niño, Luong andToro (1985) observed that several intro-duced plants were favored by the higherrainfall, including Psidium guajava,

Syzigium jambos, Pennisetum pur-

pureum, and Caesalpinia bonduc. Alter-natively, Cayot (1985) observed thatSida rhombifolia expanded during thatEl Niño event, but that other intro-duced plants were not successful at in-vading native vegetation in thetransition/Scalesia zone. Dispersion ofintroduced plants was also observedduring the 1997–98 El Niño (Aldaz andTye 1999). Species that spread notice-ably included Rubus niveus, Lantana

camara, Ricinus communis, and Cin-

chona pubescens (Tye and Aldaz 1999).

Vertebrates

Smooth-billed anis (Crotophaga ani)were introduced in the early 1960s, butremained rare until the El Niño of1982–83 produced a population explo-


37

sion over Santa Cruz and facilitateddispersal to other islands (Rosenberg etal. 1990; Trillmich 1991). They also in-creased greatly during the 1997–98 ElNiño (Snell and Rea 1999). Introducedpigs and goats both increased withmore available surface water during ElNiño, and goats benefited from in-creased vegetation to eat (Campbell1999). Efforts to eradicate these ani-mals also were impeded by denser veg-etation (Campbell 1999). Introducedfrogs became established in Galápagosduring the 1997–98 El Niño and theseare the first known amphibians to re-side in Galápagos (Snell and Rea 1999).Further wet conditions would facilitatethe frogs’ range expansion and potentialimpacts on biodiversity, such as effectson native invertebrate populations.

Invertebrates

Twenty-three percent of all Galápagosinsects are introduced species (Caustonet al. 2006). The islands most affected byintroduced invertebrates are the central,inhabited islands, although introducedinvertebrate species have spread to moreremote islands during strong El Niñoconditions (Roque-Albedo and Causton1999). These conditions also have in-duced a spread in the two species of in-troduced fire ant. The spread of the fireant has been associated with a drop in di-versity of native species due to predationor stinging bird or reptile species (Roque-Albedo and Causton 1999; Lubin 1985).Future events may facilitate the disper-sal of invertebrates to the more pristineislands with a higher diversity of habi-tats, such as Fernandina and Pinta(Roque-Albedo and Causton 1999). Somespecies, such as the wasp Polistes versi-color, are more positively affected by dryconditions, with population expansionsrecorded during strong La Niña events(Roque-Albedo and Causton 1999).

Parasites and pathogens

Wet conditions favor most parasites andpathogens, including mosquitoes thatserve as vectors for disease. Avian poxand the parasitic fly Philornis downsii

both have increased during El Niñoevents in Galápagos, negatively affect-ing bird reproduction (Dudaniec et al.2007; Curry 1985). A shift to wetter con-ditions in Galápagos could lead to popu-lation explosions of species alreadypresent, facilitate their dispersal aroundthe islands, and also facilitate the intro-duction of new species. Hotter conditionswill allow certain species to increasetheir range, thus potentially threateningspecies that currently are not at risk. Forexample, West Nile virus is a mosquito-borne virus whose mosquito vector is al-ready present in Galápagos. The virusis expected to reach Galápagos in thecoming years, with rapid and dire out-comes predicted for endemic verte-brates (Bataille et al. 2009).

3.6. Summary

Workshop participants noted that pub-lished data on the effects of natural cli-mate variation on Galápagos terrestrialbiota is incomplete, and much of theavailable information is anecdotal.However, important themes emerge:Most native and introduced terrestrialorganisms thrive during wet El Niñoconditions and suffer through drier LaNiña conditions. Many plant species ap-pear to rely on periodic wet events fortheir life cycle, relying heavily on soilseed reserves that are germinated andreplenished during these events. Sev-eral species seem to benefit temporarilyfrom wetter El Niño conditions andtherefore are able to expand their terri-tory or out-compete species that are notsimilarly advantaged. This effect is


38

more pronounced in arid-zone vegeta-tion. Additionally, several importantspecies appear to be negatively affectedby wetter El Niño conditions, includingOpuntia cactus, palo santo trees, andperhaps giant tortoises.

Although the native biota are adaptedeither to rely on or to cope with the tem-porary climatic variations linked withthe ENSO cycle, a more sustained alter-ation in the local climate would havevery different effects. Additionally,long-term trends in the general Galápa-gos climate or climate-change-inducedperturbations to the frequency or sever-ity of ENSO cycles may imperil nativebiota by facilitating a higher rate ofalien species introduction or by expand-ing the suitable habitat of invasivespecies already present. The terrestrial-ecosystem working group formed dur-ing the Climate Change VulnerabilityAnalysis Workshop of April 2009 iden-tified the potential for an enhancedthreat of invasive species as an essen-tial consideration for effective planningand management of the impacts of cli-mate change on the Galápagos ecosys-tems.

4. POTENTIALGALÁPAGOSTERRESTRIALRESPONSES TOGLObAL CLIMATEChANGE

Workshop discussions concluded thatthe effects of global climate change inthe Galápagos will include a continua-tion of ENSO events, some of which willbe intense, and warming of the sea sur-face temperature with an associated in-crease in precipitation (Sachs and Ladd,Chapter 1, this publication).

Under current climate conditions, aridlowlands regularly go without muchrain for several years but receive peri-odic wet years, and the humid high-lands regularly receive rain every coolseason. Participants agreed that main-tenance of the arid zone is highly de-pendent on the continuation of thispattern of irregular hot-season rainfall,and maintenance of the humid zone ishighly dependent on the continuation ofcool-season rainfall. General localwarming and resultant increased hot-season rainfall would likely mean thatrain falls every year in the arid zone, es-


39

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

sentially removing the aridity of that

zone and thereby reducing the compet-

itive advantage of the characteristic

arid-adapted species that exist there

and making it more favorable for inva-

sive species. The combined effects of

persistent wet conditions and the pres-

ence of invasive species would be cata-

strophic for arid-zone species, many of

which are endemic to Galápagos.

Due to the naturally highly variable

rainfall of Galápagos, there is inherent

resilience in the terrestrial biodiversity


40

Table 1. Significant potential responses to climate change

Climate Change Humid zone Arid zone Vulnerable speciesScenario

↑ Plant productivity↑ Pathogens↑ Invasibility

Increased garúa dura-tion and decreasedconvective activity and heat in the hotseason

↓ ProductivityReptiles disadvantaged

Floreana mockingbird and otherarid-zone passerines, mangrovefinch, Miconia robinsoniana(light-limited), tortoises, iguanasand lizards, seed-bank-depen-dant plants in the arid zone

↓ ProductivityAridification, ↓ Size of El Junco Lake ↑ Evaporation

Decreased garúa du-ration and increasedconvective activity andheat in the hot season

↑ Productivity↑ Evaporation

Species in El Junco Lake, Miconiarobinsoniana

↓System resilience Shift toward rainforestcommunitystructure. ↑ Invasive species andpathogens

El Niño return-rate increase

↓ System resilienceShift toward rainforestcommunity structure, Invasives and pathogensadvantaged↓ Tortoise nesting ↑ Invertebrate populations

Cactus, palo santo tree, reptiles

↑ Pathogens↑ Continental invasivesImpacts on vertebrate reproduction Negative impacts onScalesia forest Reduced ocean-to-landnutrient transport

El Niño intensity increase

↑ PathogensInvasives advantaged↑ Erosion Reduced ocean-to-land nu-trient transport

Lichens and bryophytes, Opuntia spp., highland Scalesiaspp., mangrove finch

↓ System resilience↓ Pathogen transmission Vertebrate and inverte-brate population de-clines↑ Immuno-suppression

La Niña return-rate increase

↑ SeabirdsMore male baby tortoises Reduced ability to hatch ↑ Competition for food↓ Recruitment of plantsReptiles disadvantaged

Calandrina, Lecocarpus, Floreanamockingbird and other arid-zone passerines, seed-bank-de-pendant species in the aridzone, endemic snails, mangrovefinch, reptiles

↓ System resilience↓ Pathogen transmissionVertebrate and inverte-brate population de-clines ↑ Immuno-suppression

La Niña intensity increase

Herbaceous plants disad-vantagedDecreases in decomposi-tion, soil formation, and nutrient cycling Create openings for inva-sivesReptiles disadvantaged

Floreana mockingbird and otherarid-zone passerines, reptiles

to changes in rainfall. However, anthro-pogenic effects alter this resilience byinterfering with ecological processes. Inthe Galápagos terrestrial environment,it seems apparent that invasive speciesare the human-induced agent thatgreatly increases the vulnerability ofterrestrial biodiversity to future climatechange.

The terrestrial-ecosystem workinggroup developed a matrix to considerpotential effects of long-term climaticshifts on the Galápagos ecosystem. Theframework focused on changes to theduration of the cooler garúa season andchanges to the intensity or return inter-vals of severe ENSO events. A sum-mary of the working group’s findings ofsignificant potential ecosystem re-sponses to each climate change scenariois presented in table 1. Potential eco-logical impacts are categorized intohumid-zone and arid-zone responses aswell as species that are particularly vul-nerable to a certain climate scenario.The findings presented in table 1 are in-tended to portray representative direc-tional responses to climate change to beused as a planning and managementtool, rather than an exhaustive, quanti-tative document of all possible re-sponses or impacts.

5. TERRESTRIAL-ECOSYSTEMWORKING GROUPRECOMMENDATIONS

The terrestrial-ecosystem workinggroup developed recommendations formanagement actions that will help mit-igate ongoing threats to vulnerablespecies and habitats, and minimize theimpacts of future climate change.Broadly, the recommendations focuson: (1) limiting the impact of invasivespecies, (2) preserving intact habitat orrestoring degraded native habitat, and(3) implementing land-use strategiesthat will help preserve and promote na-tive biodiversity. An outline of theworking group’s recommendations,which could serve as guidelines in thedevelopment of robust, site-specificmanagement policy, is presentedbelow.

To achieve many of the recommenda-tions, more information is needed re-garding climate envelopes for vulnerableGalápagos habitats and species. This re-quires a better understanding of exist-ing and past climate at a local scalethat includes ecosystem complexity andchanges along elevational gradients.


41

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

Additionally, assessment of vulnerabil-

ity and prioritization of management

action require an enhanced knowledge

of the current spatial distributions of

threatened species, invasive species,

and invertebrates—particularly dis-

ease vectors that could transmit

pathogens to vulnerable native popula-

tions. The need for this additional re-

search is recognized and is currently in

development by the Charles Darwin

Foundation, Conservation Interna-

tional, and other collaborating agencies.

The working group recommendations

were:

a. Prevent the introduction, estab-lishment, and dispersion of newinvasive species. • Strengthen existing quarantine

system with regulation and en-

forcement, and improve conditions

of cargo boats and mainland ports.

• Strengthen the early-warning sys-

tem for new invasive species and

the rapid-response system for

early eradication of newly intro-

duced invasive species.

• Involve the local community

through education and awareness

campaigns.

• Continue to monitor and limit the

pathways into Galápagos (e.g.

limit ports of entry to Galápagos

and ports of departure from main-

land).

b. Reduce the impacts of estab-lished invasive species thatwould thrive under wetter, hot-ter conditions.• Support and contribute to the long-

term commitment to maintain the

“Fondo para el Control de Especies

Invasoras de Galápagos” (Control

of Invasive Species Fund) and en-

sure its operability.

• Carry out systematic mapping and

monitoring of spatial distribution

and population dynamics of the

species of highest threat potential.

• Strengthen institutional and inter-

institutional capacity to enforce ex-

isting laws and regulations and to

implement a rapid-response sys-

tem that includes the community

(e.g. municipalities, education in-

stitutions, and the “Comité In-

terinstitucional para el Control y

Manejo de Especies Introducidas,”

CIMEI (Inter-institutional Com-

mittee for the Control and Man-

agement of Introduced Species).

• Prioritize the eradication or con-

trol of high-threat species in areas

identified as vulnerable to or

threatened by climate change (e.g.

communities of high conservation

value).

c. Reduce the threat of extinctionsdue to climate change.• Identify and protect priority

species and habitats identified as

highly vulnerable to climate

change or especially vulnerable

due to other external pressures.

• Develop mechanisms to mitigate

the impacts of climate change on

priority species and habitats.

• Reduce external pressure on

highly vulnerable species (e.g. con-

trol rats in petrel nesting colonies).

d. Restore ecosystem function andecological connectivity to enablerange and population shifts.• Restore key biological communi-

ties, especially in humid high-

lands, through holistic methods

that maximize ecosystem function-

ing and involve the strategic con-

trol of invasive species and

reforestation.


42

• Protect native corridors and bufferzones along the altitudinal gradi-ent on inhabited islands.

• Implement regulations and con-trols to minimize habitat fragmen-tation and allow native species tomove across the landscape.

e. Improve agricultural productiv-ity and land-use planning to cre-ate landscapes more resilient tochange.• Provide support for farmers to

manage their land and reducefarm abandonment in order to re-duce the spread of invasivespecies.

• Develop mechanisms to supportthe maintenance of native biodi-versity within farms (e.g. agro-forestry).

• Strengthen enforcement of laws orregulations to prevent removal orharvest of native species.

6. CONCLUSIONS

Globally, it is expected that climatechange will greatly modify biodiversityand ecosystems (Holmgren et al. 2001).Workshop participants agreed that po-tential responses of the terrestrial biotain Galápagos to long-term global cli-mate change could be anticipated usingknowledge about biotic responses topast climatic variation and a range offuture scenarios. In particular, a wet-ter, warmer climate is likely to lowerthe aridity of the extensive dry low-lands in Galápagos, thereby alteringecosystem structures and affecting en-demic species. Systematic climatic andecological monitoring will further en-hance our understanding of biologicalresponses to climate change and betterenable us to assess the direction andspeed of changes to Galápagos climatecharacteristics. Developing a frame-work of known biological responses to


43

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

different types of climatic perturbationswill allow us to anticipate ecological re-sponses and identify species or commu-nities that are especially vulnerable tothe observed shifts in Galápagos cli-mate. Finally, management actionsthat help minimize the impact of intro-duced species or economic land usescould potentially increase the resilienceof endemic Galápagos species or com-munities under a changing climate.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We gratefully acknowledge the valuableinput of all participants in the terres-trial-ecosystem working group at theclimate change workshop held by Con-servation International and WWF inApril 2009: Steve Blake, Mark Bush,Charlotte Causton, David Cruz,Filemón Cueva, Sharon Deem, Free deKoning, Javier López, Solanda Rea, Ale-jandra Restrepo, and Stephen Walsh.


44

REFERENCES

Aldaz I, Tye A. 1999. Effects of the 1997-98 El Niño event on the vegetation of AlcedoVolcano, Isabela Island. Noticias de Galápagos 60:25-28.

Alpert L. 1963. The climate of the Galápagos Islands. Occasional Papers California Acad-emy of Sciences 44:21-44.

Anderson DJ, Huyvaert KP, Apanius V, Townsend H, Gillikin CL, Hill LD, Juola F, PorterET, Wood DR, Lougheed C, Vargas FH. 2002. Population size and trends of theWaved albatross Phoebastria irrorata. Marine Ornithology 30:63-69.

Bataille A, Cunningham AA, Cedeño V, Patiño L, Constantinou A, Kramer LD, GoodmanSJ. 2009. Natural colonization and adaptation of a mosquito species in Galápagosand its implications for disease threats to endemic wildlife. Proceedings of the Na-tional Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106:10230-10235.

BirdLife International. 2009. Pterodroma phaeopygia. In: IUCN 2010. IUCN Red List ofThreatened Species. Version 2010.2. <www.iucnredlist.org>. Downloaded on 04August 2010.

Campbell K. 1999. Santiago's pigs and Isabela's goats: El Niño's implications for man-agement and the environment. Noticias de Galápagos 60:21.

Causton CE, Peck SB, Sinclair BJ, Roque-Albedo L, Hodgson CJ, Landry B. 2006. Alien in-sects: threats and implications for the conservation of the Galápagos Islands. An-nals of the Entomological Society of America 99:121-143.

Cayot, L. 1985. Effects of El Niño on giant tortoises and their environment. In: RobinsonG, del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: The 1982-1983 Event. Quito,Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 363-398.

Colinvaux PA. 1972. Climate and the Galápagos Islands. Nature 240:17-20. Curry RL. 1985. Breeding and survival of Galápagos mockingbirds during El Niño. In:

Robinson G, del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: The 1982-1983Event. Quito, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 449-471.

D'Ozouville N. 2007. Étude du fonctionnement hydrologique dans les Iles Galápagos:caractérisation d'un milieu volcanique insulaire et préalable à la gestion de laressource. Université de Paris, Paris, France.

Deem S, Cruz M, Jiménez-Uzcátegui G, Fessl B, Miller RE, Parker PG. 2008. Pathogensand parasites: An increasing threat to the conservation of Galápagos avifauna. InCDF, GNP, and INGALA, editors. Galápagos Report 2007-2008. Puerto Ayora, Galá-pagos, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation, Galápagos National Park, Instituto Na-cional Galápagos. p. 125-130.

Dudaniec RY, Fessl B, Kleindorfer S. 2007 Interannual and interspecific variation in in-tensity of the parasitic fly, Philornis downsi, in Darwin's finches. Biological Conserva-tion 139:325-332.

Duffy DC. 1989. Seabirds and the 1982-1984 El Niño-Southern Oscillation. In: Glynn PW,editor. Global ecological consequences of the 1982-83 El Niño-southern oscillation.Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Grant PR, Boag PT. 1980. Rainfall on the Galápagos and the demography of Darwin'sfinches. The Auk 97:227-244.

Grant PR, Grant BR. 1999. Effects of the 1998 El Niño on Darwin's finches on Daphne.Noticias de Galápagos 60:29-30.

Guézou A, Trueman M, Buddenhagen CE, Chamorro S, Guerrero AM, Pozo P, Atkinson R.2010. An extensive alien plant inventory from the inhabited areas of Galápagos.PLoS ONE 5:e10276.

Hamann O. 1979. On Climatic conditions, vegetation types, and leaf size in the Galápa-gos Islands. Biotropica 11:101-122.

Hamann O. 1985. The El Niño influence on the Galápagos vegetation. In: Robinson G,del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: The 1982-1983 Event. Quito,Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 299-330.

Hamann O. 2001. Demographic studies of three indigenous stand-forming plant taxa(Scalesia, Opuntia, and Bursera) in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Biodiversity andConservation 110:223-250.

Hamann O. 2004. Vegetation changes over three decades on Santa Fe Island, Galápa-gos, Ecuador. Nordic Journal of Botany 23:143-152.

Harris DB, Macdonald DW. 2007. Population ecology of the endemic rodent Nesory-zomys Swarthi in the tropical desert of the Galápagos Islands. Journal of Mammal-ogy 88:208-219.

Holmgren M, Scheffer M, Ezcurra E, Gutiérrez JR, Mohren GMJ. 2001. El Niño effects onthe dynamics of terrestrial ecosystems. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 16:89-94.

Huttel C. 1992. Vegetación en coladas de lava. Quito, Ecuador: ORSTOM y FundaciónCharles Darwin.

INGALA, PRONAREG, ORSTOM. 1989. Inventario cartográfico de los recursos naturales,geomorfología, vegetación, hídricos, ecológicos y biofísicos de las Islas Galápagos,Ecuador 1:100,000. Quito, Ecuador: INGALA.

Itow S. 1988. Population structure, stand-level dieback and recovery of Scalesia pedun-culata forest in the Galápagos Islands. Ecological Research 3:333-339.

Jaksic FM. 2001. Ecological effects of El Niño in terrestrial ecosystems of western SouthAmerica. Ecography 24:241-250.

Jordan MI, Snell HI. 2002. Life history trade-offs and phenotypic plasticity in the repro-duction of Galápagos lava lizards (Microlophus delanonis). Oecologia 130:44-52.

Kastdalen A. 1982. Changes in the biology of Santa Cruz Island between 1935 and1965. Noticias de Galápagos 35:7-12.

Lubin YD. 1985. Studies of the Little Fire Ant, Wasmannia auropunctata, in a Niño year.In: Robinson G, del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: The 1982-1983Event. Quito, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 473-493.

Luong TT, Toro B. 1985. Cambios en la vegetación de las Islas Galápagos durante "ElNiño" 1982-1983. In: Robinson G, del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Is-lands: The 1982-1983 Event. Quito, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 331-342.

Newell R. 1973. Climate and the Galápagos Islands. Nature 245:91-92. Nieuwolt S. 1991. Climatic uniformity and diversity in the Galápagos Islands and the ef-

fects on agriculture. Erdkunde 45: 134–142.Perry R. 1972. Key Environments - Galápagos. Pergamon Press. Porter DM. 1979. Endemism and evolution in Galápagos Islands vascular plants. In:

Bramwell D, editor. Plants and Islands. London: Academic Press. p. 225–256.Pourrut P. 1985. Atlas de Galápagos - El Niño. Roque-Albedo L, Causton CE. 1999. El Niño and introduced insects in the Galápagos Is-

lands: different dispersal strategies, similar effects. Noticias de Galápagos 60:30.Rosenberg DK, Wilson MH, Cruz F. 1990. The distribution and abundance of the

smooth-billed ani Crotophaga ani (L.) in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. BiologicalConservation 51:113-123.


45

Sachs J, Ladd N. Sachs J, Ladd N. 2010. Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos inthe 21st Century: Expected Changes and Research Needs. In Climate Change Vulner-ability Assessment of the Galápagos Islands. 2011. Eds. I. Larrea and G. Di Carlo. WWFand Conservation International, USA.

Snell H, Rea S. 1999. The 1997-1998 El Niño in Galápagos: Can 34 years of data estimate120 years of pattern? Noticias de Galápagos 60:11-20.

Snell HL, Tracy CR. 1985. Behavioral and morphological adaptations by Galápagos landiguanas (Conolophus subcristatus) to water and energy requirements of eggs andneonates. American Zoologist 25.

Trillmich F. 1991. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: A natural experiment. In: MooneyHA, Medina E, Schindler DW, Schulze ED, Walker BH, editors. Ecosystem Experi-ments (SCOPE report 45). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. p. 3-21.

Trueman M, D’Ozouville N. 2010. Characterizing the Galápagos terrestrial climate in theface of global climate change. Galápagos Research 67: 26-37.

Trueman M, Atkinson R, Guézou A, Wurm P. In Press. Residence time and human-medi-ated propagule pressure at work in the alien flora of Galápagos. Biological Inva-sions. DOI: 10.1007/s10530-010-9822-8.

Tye A, Aldaz I.1999. Effects of the 1997-98 El Niño event on the vegetation of Galápa-gos. Noticias de Galápagos 60:22-24.

Valle CA, Cruz F, Cruz JB, Merlen G, Coulter MC. 1987. The impact of the 1982-1983 ElNiño-Southern Oscillation on seabirds in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Journal ofGeophysical Research - C: Oceans 92:14437-14444.

Watson J, Trueman M, Tufet M, Henderson S, Atkinson R. 2009. Mapping terrestrial an-thropogenic degradation on the inhabited islands of the Galápagos archipelago.Oryx 44:79-82.

Weber WA, Beck T. 1985. Effects on cryptogamic vegetation (lichens, mosses, and liver-worts). In: Robinson G, del Pino E, editors. El Niño in the Galápagos Islands: The1982-1983 Event. Quito, Ecuador: Charles Darwin Foundation. p. 343-361.

Wiggins IL, Porter DM. 1971. Flora of the Galápagos Islands. Stanford (CA): Stanford Uni-versity Press.


46

CHAPTER 3

A Review of Galápagos Marine Habitats and Ecological Processes under Climate Change Scenarios

Stuart Banks1

Vulnerability Assessment working group participants: Graham Edgar

2, Peter Glynn

3, Angela Kuhn

1, Jerson Moreno

1,

Diego Ruiz1, Anna Schuhbauer

1, John Paul Tiernan

1,

Nathalia Tirado1and Mariana Vera

1

1. Charles Darwin Foundation for the Galápagos Islands, Puerto Ayora, Galápagos, Ecuador.2 . Tasmania Aquaculture and Fisheries Institute, Tasmania, Australia.3 . Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, University of Miami, FL, USA.

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

1. INTRODUCTION

Climate change is a global concern following post-indus-trialization since the mid nineteenth century. Excessiveaccumulated greenhouse gas emissions over a periodwhen natural carbon sinks were removed through largescale deforestation and altered land use have instigatedlarge scale shifts in the world’s heat balance (Levitus etal. 2005, Orr et al. 2005, Raupach et al. 2007). Predic-tions into the next century suggest a range of conse-quences for biodiversity and resource availability (IPCCAR4 2007; Parmesan et al. 2003). Indeed, recent com-missions such as the International Panel for ClimateChange (IPCC) and UN Framework Convention on Cli-mate Change (FCCC) have reviewed a preponderance ofevidence from various science disciplines drawing theworld’s attention to documented signs of warming, asso-ciated degradation of ice shelves, sea level rise, changesin ocean circulation and ocean acidification (Soloman etal. 2008). While debate continues as to whether the con-temporary rate of change exceeds that reconstructedover geological time scales from paleoclimatic records,evidence suggests that (1) gradual forcing and non-lin-ear (chaotic) ENSO perturbations can trigger rapid cli-mate shifts as certain physical thresholds are exceeded.This can cause feed-forward Bjerknes responses andrapid reorganization of the ocean-atmosphere system(Cane 2005; Zachos et al. 1993) and (2) that extinctionsin ecosystems are more likely through increases in mag-nitude and frequency of climate events than throughgradual shifts in climate (Edgar et al 2009; Reaser et al.2000; Boer et al. 2004). Hence when assessing risk, weshould consider that certain physical cues in the ocean-atmosphere system can trigger ecosystem tipping pointsthat can significantly impact biodiversity and associ-ated human wellbeing.

While present day greenhouse emis-

sions continue to rise beyond low im-

pact benchmarks (Elzen et al. 2005)

the associated large scale environ-

mental shifts (e.g. retreating glaciers,

drops in recirculation of oceanic deep

water into the euphotic zone, forma-

tion of anoxic submarine “dead zones,”

etc.) are expected to place new con-

straints upon both species distribu-

tions and resource demands by the

human populace –particularly regard-

ing the obvious interdependencies for

ecosystem services such as fisheries,

agriculture and non-extractive modal-

ities such as nature based tourism

(Stern 2008). The social, economic and

political constraints associated with

applying effective multinational green-

house gas emission controls and mitiga-

tion measures have to date confounded

a timely coordinated international re-

sponse. The problem appears to have ef-

fectively outpaced the capacity of

developed nations to disentangle the

myriad interests and dependencies

linked to changes in land use and de-

pendence upon fossil fuels.

Due to the lagged response of accumu-

lated heat transfer between the ocean

and atmosphere, were anthropogenic

aerosol emissions reduced we would

still experience continued warming be-

fore stabilization over the next century

(Meehl et al. 2005). Hence while govern-

ments address the very serious concern

of reducing emissions and improving

long term carbon sequestration, and in-

dividuals adopt lifestyles that reduce

their carbon footprint, the onus has

turned to adaptation. How can we

quantify and then best confront the in-

evitable changes occurring across the

biosphere into the foreseeable future

and avoid large scale biodiversity to fis-

cal resource extinctions.

In terms of biodiversity managementthe relatively rapid rate at whichchange is occurring (compared to time-frames for selection processes) and theinterruption of natural migratory path-ways through global urbanization/ re-source extraction, adds to a new suite ofhuman pressures that include overfish-ing, maritime traffic and pollution. Pat-terns of human use interact withecosystem resources in an often indirectfashion reducing natural resilience toextinction before climate events (Edgaret al. 2009). For example, barriers topelagic stocks such as high extractionacross industrial fishing grounds sur-rounding Marine Protected Area (MPA)refugia has potential to limit gene flowbetween meta-populations over 10 -1000 Km meso-scales reducing geneticdrift and population viability beforeadaptation pressures. Under heatingstress at local scales (< 1 - 100 Km), re-duced cold water refuge habitat, in-creased competition for a dwindlingresource (such as anchovies feeding inreduced cold water upwelling cellsaround plankton blooms) and resultingmortalities can create genetic bottle-necks in populations. Increases intransoceanic marine traffic also canopen new pathways for the invasion ofnovel species. Pathogens are more effec-tively transmitted as individuals re-treat into smaller refuge habitat,overlap geographic living space and in-crease individual proximity. Concen-trating climate sensitive species intosmaller areas also increases the chancethat a single perturbation event (suchas anchor damage, disease outbreak, adirected fishery or an oil spill, etc.) re-sults in mortalities from which popula-tions cannot recover. The combinationof such stress reduces potential for nat-ural adaptation within and betweengenerations favoring instead fast breed-ers, plastic specialists, or a subset of

Galápagos Marine habitats and Ecological Processes under Climate Change Scenarios │ ChAPTER 3

49

species that responds well to rapid nicheshifts giving them a space or resourceadvantage over other species. Con-versely it tends to exclude more special-ist feeders with a limited foraging range–characteristics associated with manyGalápagos endemics (e.g. marine igua-nas, Galápagos penguins). It also impliesthat we should start to seriously rethinkthe appropriateness of existing manage-ment regimes in regions where environ-mental shifts reduce the representativeprotection or capacity for sustainablemanagement of endangered species andresource stocks (Kareiva 2005).

There are still considerable challengesahead to tease apart natural apparentlystochastic climate variability andhuman driven changes. There are stillsizeable gaps in our knowledge as to themechanisms behind global ocean-at-mosphere forcing and how naturalbackground variability and anthro-pogenic drivers interact. At the Pacificbasin level, a significant “regime shift”in ocean heat distribution reported overa few years in the 1970s has yet to beentirely understood. It may have repre-sented either a tipping point in the op-erating mode of the ENSO climatesystem or decadal-scale variability(Graham 1994). Patterns in decadal

cooling in the 1980s over the Pacificbasin may also have masked residualbackground warming (MacDonald et al.2005; Mantua and Hare 2002). Recentstudies point to shifts in the ENSOmode – the predominance of the recentlylabelled “Modoki” El Niño for examplewhere warm pool effects tend to extendinto the tropical central Pacific but notinto the Galápagos and eastern bound-ary current system (Yeh et al. 2009).

Considerably less is understood regard-ing the effect of such large basin scaleshifts upon the complexities and pecu-liarities of circulation in smaller re-gions, despite differential heating beingevident over the last 40 years across theworld’s oceans (Belkin 2009). Localitieswith varied oceanographic features al-ready experiencing considerable re-gional climate variability such asGalápagos in the path of strong ENSOeffects become important yardsticks tomeasure biological and societal re-sponse.

Attempting to estimate the resultantstress and threat posed to the manycomponents and processes within theGalápagos ecosystem through periodicstrong ENSO and anthropogenic (dis-crete or chronic) disturbances has been


50

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

a recurring theme in local conservationscience since the strong El Niños of1976-77, 1982-83 and 1997-98. Thoselast two events coincided with the firstsystematic time series measures of Pa-cific basin oceanography (the TOA/TRI-TON buoy array (McPhadden et al.2009)). The end of the 1997-98 eventalso saw the advent of synoptic satellitederived sea surface monitoring with un-precedented coverage in time and space. The pioneering NOAA-AVHRR/MCSST, NASA-SeaWiFS and laterNASA-MODIS sensors captured ad-mirably the spectacular variability andpatterning of near-surface productivityand temperature.

Despite the anecdotal nature of manybiological records at the time, re-searchers began to document in-situ ob-servations. Amongst those, notablesystematic studies include the rapid de-terioration of bleached habitat formingcoral frameworks by opportunistic bio-eroder urchins (Glynn et al. 1979;Glynn et al. 1984). CDF Investigators inlater years began to characterize com-plete subtidal communities (Danulatand Edgar Eds. 2002) and their accom-panying oceanographic regimes (Banks2002, Palacios et al. 2004, Schaeffer etal. 2008, Sweet et al. 2007, Sweet et al.2009), documenting the collapse of over-exploited benthic fisheries (Hearn et al.2005, Toral-Granda 2005) while priori-tizing threatened Galápagos species foradditional protection.

Given both their importance in influ-encing marine community structure (ashabitat forming species) and suspectedrecent extinctions linked to ENSOevents, corals and marine algae werereviewed for inclusion in a new IUCNred listing ─drawing attention to futureextinction risk linked to climate changescenarios (Carpenter et al. 2008). Today

43 marine species are consideredthreatened under red listing criteriawith at least 2 probable extinctions(marine algae Bifurcia galapagensisand damselfish Azurina eupalama), sixpossible extinctions of marine algae,and the sea star Heliaster solaris. Re-search continues to qualify how climatedisturbance events coupled with humandisturbance (such as extraction of re-source species) might cause broad shiftsin ecosystem composition and biodiver-sity state that inhibit natural recoveryprocesses (Edgar et al. 2009).

These themes were discussed betweenlocal and invited international expertswithin a “Climate Change VulnerabilityAnalysis and Adaptation” workshopheld on Santa Cruz Island 20th – 24th

April 2009. To further climate debateand as part of a larger initiative for de-veloping climate change adaptationmeasures for the Islands, we present areview of known climate related marineinteractions for Galápagos.

2. METhODS

Given the ambiguity in current OceanAtmosphere Global Climate Model(OAGCMs) predictions, the approachtaken was to describe the level of poten-tial risk given our understanding of pastclimate impacts in the Galápagos Ma-rine Reserve (GMR). This exercisewithin expert working groups generateda suite of interpretations for use by man-agers towards precautionary measureswhile predictive models improve. Theanalysis was framed by (1) known effectsof the considerable seasonal and ElNiño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) vari-ability upon GMR marine habitats andprocesses, and (2) the extrapolated effectof a reasonably conservative global-cli-mate-change scenario upon the GMR.


51

The first scenario drew together recenttechnical overviews, including Banks etal. (2009), Charles Darwin Foundation(CDF), Instituto Nacional Oceanográficode la Armada (INOCAR), Centro Inter-nacional para la Investigación del Fenómeno de El Niño (CIIFEN) oceano-graphic and ecological data sets, contri-butions from participating expertsduring the Vulnerability Assessmentworkshop, and published literature doc-umenting the last two large ENSOevents. The review was targeted towardshort- and mid-term adaptation solutionsfrom 2010 to 2015. Under this scenario,ENSO continues to generate periodicstrong El Niño (EN) and La Niña (LN)disturbance events as observed in the 50years of recent GMR history.

The second scenario considers a suite ofGMR effects associated with back-ground global warming as defined bythe IPCC AR4 SRES A1B emissions sce-nario (a future world of very rapid eco-nomic growth, low population growth,

and rapid introduction of new and moreefficient, low-emission technology). Theinherent assumption was that global cli-mate shifts will exacerbate or amelio-rate natural GMR variability (includingpossible impacts upon ENSO intensity,periodicity, and frequency).

Where appropriate, boundary ranges foreach physical climate variable were es-timated for each of the two scenarios.These discussions often were accompa-nied by an estimate of “uncertainty inprediction” where information exists andwere discussed in detail within a sepa-rate physical climate discussion group.

The effects of combinations of climatechange effects and human stressorsupon the GMR were analyzed under twotime frames (2010-2015 and 2015-2050).

Where possible, inferences were sub-stantiated through past observationsand data. Where data was insufficient,a separate exercise identified future re-search needs.


52

Figure 1. Habitats, processes, and species interactions considered during the climate vulnerability discussions.

Category Climate effects Human stressorsReef-forming coral communities

Cold water upwelling/ macroalgae dominated

Intertidal rocky reef

Coastal biogeography

Soft bottom sediments

Mangroves

Sandy beaches

Focal-species=level effects

Fisheries

Invasive-species risk

OverfishingIntroduced species

Sea urchin dominanceHabitat loss

Illegal fishing

Bycatch

Pollution (chronic and spills)

Physical abrasion

Tourism visitation

Regulated fisheries extraction

Increased temperatures (El Niño intensified and background warming)

Decreased temperatures (La Niña intensified)Indirect trophic impacts

Change in meridional surface transport

Reduced upwelling (drop in primary production)

Meridional deviation in EUC

Ocean acidification

Sea level rise

Storm surge and erosion processes

Physiological tolerance

Change in ENSO and PDO frequency (interval forrecovery)

3. RESULTS ANDDISCUSSION

During the meeting, physical climate

experts agreed that ENSO climatic

variability will continue almost cer-

tainly into the near future, although

there was far less consensus as to the

future ENSO dynamic. The outputs

from those discussions frame the vari-

ous climate change scenarios. We exam-

ined the range of implications for

physical-state change upon natural sys-

tems, and identified two high-impact

scenarios with great implication for

Galápagos conservation: (1) El Niño

and possibly La Niña events intensify

as background temperatures increase,

and (2) deep turnover of productive cold

water to the surface is reduced (an in-

tensification of ENSO thermocline de-

pression in the Eastern Pacific).

The first part of the following section

outlines a series of possible scenarios

discussing what we might expect to

change in the biophysical environment

under a shifting climate. It includes

considerations based upon past tenden-

cies through observations in the region.

The second section examines the impli-

cations of each scenario individually for

the principal subtidal habitat types

where data exists: coral communities,

cold water macroalgae and rocky reef

based systems, under two time frames.

The first timeframe (2010-2015) reflects

the current situation in Galápagos

under ENSO variability. The second

(2015-2050) considers that global cli-

mate change alters the local climate dy-

namic. Soft, bottom-sediment habitat

and mangroves were determined to be

data deficient and, although not in-

cluded here, their importance is recog-

nized for future baseline research.

Finally, we include a brief overview of

potential interaction effects with an-

thropogenic stressors.

3.1. Climate changescenarios (used to framediscussion of expectedeffects)

A. Increased background tempera-tures: Galápagos will experience a

gradual shift toward a persistently

warmer state, with elevated sea tem-

peratures, reduced garúa mist for-

mation, and probable higher annual

rainfall. El Niño sea surface temper-

atures [SST] peaks will intensify

under gradual SST background

warming.)

Observations:

i. The last 40-year warming trend

shows a 0.4–0.8°C increase over

larger spatial scales in the El Niño

3.4 region to the west of Galápa-

gos, yet near-neutral conditions

within the archipelago possibly

linked to local Equatorial Under-

current (EUC) upwelling and rein-

forced Humboldt flow from the

southeast.

ii. Sea surface temperature (SST)

records in Academy Bay over the

last 40 years show an overall neu-

tral trend, although increasing

maxima and decreasing minima

over time indicate more pro-

nounced seasonality and local

ENSO peaks during that averaged

period (Banks 2009; Wolff 2010).

iii.Past warming or cooling trends are

better described by moving aver-

ages due to strong decadal vari-

ability in the Galápagos region.

iv. Mean 1–3°C global warming is

very likely over the next century

(IPCC 2007).


53

B. A drop in turnover of productive,cold, upwelled water: A potentialdrop of 25% in turnover of deep, nu-trient-enriched water to the surface(IPCC 2007) affects lower trophiclevels and results in bottom-up re-structuring of subtidal communities.

Observations:

i. It is more than likely that theEquatorial Undercurrent (EUC)will deepen in the Eastern TropicalPacific over the next severaldecades (Vecchi and Soden 2007,CIIFEN-INOCAR, unpublisheddata 2009).

ii. The threshold at which thermoclinedepression affects vertical nutrientflux (and consequently Galápagosnatural systems) has yet to be de-termined. Ecological monitoring ofsubtidal communities in Feb–Mar2010, for example, show that de-spite moderate EN surface condi-tions, and a strong “Modoki” ElNiño (warm pool) in the central Pa-cific, the turnover of cold, deepwater was still present as shallowas 10 m in northerly Wolf Island,with widespread productivity andlarge schools of juvenile fish.

C. Shifts in ENSO and PacificDecadal Oscillation (PDO) am-plitude and frequency: Shifts be-tween positive and negativetemperature and productive anom-alies may become more abrupt and ofincreased magnitude over space andtime. Thermal and nutrient depriva-tion stress intensifies over shorterperiods with fewer apertures for nat-ural recovery.

Observations:

i. Despite advances, model OAGCMsvary in their ability to simulatemany aspects of ENSO and an en-

semble model approach is sug-gested to examine concurrence inpredicted frequency shifts.

ii. A first HyCoM 4 Km2-resolutionGalápagos circulation model forcedby the AR4 A1B warming scenario(Xie et al. 2009) showed increasedwarming from 25–30 years intothe model run. Future ENSOevents had similar periods, whilethe PDO phase moderating ENSOintensity shifted into longer 16-year intervals. This model showeda greater than 90% correlationwith observed data.

D. Intensified “La-Niña like” up-welling (stronger periodic LaNiña events): Some models suggestthat contrary to local warming ashift in the land-sea heat gradientwill encourage alongshore tradewinds, intensify wind-driven equa-torial upwelling near eastern cur-rent boundary systems, andeffectively dampen the effect of in-creased SST anomalies in the region(Cane 1997).

Observations:

i. The Ocean Thermostat model(Cane 1997) suggests that an in-creased zonal heat differentialacross the Pacific could reinforcealongshore trade winds and east-ern-current-boundary-system up-welling along the Peru-Chilemargin and offset warming effectsin connected regions such as Galá-pagos.

ii. Galápagos SST records show aslight trend toward cooler cold sea-sonal temperatures over the last40 years and warmer hot seasonmaxima, implying that degreeheating and cooling days betweentransitions (and hence rapid tem-perature shifts exerting stress)


54


55

have increased despite maintain-ing a near-neutral 40 year mean.

iii.Positioning of the thermocline de-termining the nutrient loading ofupwelled water is critical to provi-sion of productive surface waters.

E. Changes in mass transport ofsurface waters around the is-lands: Changes in meridional sur-face transport, reduced upwellingand hence primary production and ameridional deviation in the position-ing of the EUC would influence bothproductive regimes and connectivityacross the GMR.

Observations:

i. Any external forced climatechange in the ENSO mode that re-sults in weakening of the Walkercirculation has the potential toalter the larger circulation andwater-mass signature of surfaceflow around the archipelago.

F. Sea level rise: Storm surge and

erosion processes increase differen-

tially across exposed coastline with

incursions most apparent during

spring tides.

Observations:

i. Sea surface height (SSH) is not

uniform across the archipelago

and during strong ENSO events

shows significant variability simi-

lar to levels expected over longer

global climate change scales.

ii. Tidal range at about 2 meters in

Galápagos is relatively low at the

equator compared to other re-

gions, with Galápagos being nat-

urally in a depressed SSH region

20–40 cm below the Eastern Trop-

ical Pacific regional average

(Banks et al. 2009).

G. Ocean acidification: A combina-

tion of relatively young (less than 30

years) upwelled water, absorption of

excess CO2 in subtropical gyres, and

capped outgassing as anthropogenic

CO2 increases promotes a relatively

rapid increase of partial pressure of

CO2 (pCO2) in equatorial surface wa-

ters and a reduction of pH compared

to other regions.

Observations:

i. In the Galápagos, upwelled water

has a naturally lower pH of pH

8.10–8.15 (INOCAR 2009) when

compared to other non-upwelling

regions.

ii. These pH levels produce higher

bioerosion rates in calcareous

species.

iii.According to Sabine et al. (2004),

buffer factors (Revelle factors) in

the Galápagos region are reason-

ably low, suggesting a certain ca-

pacity to buffer pCO2 increases.LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

Risk projection 2015-2050

Global climate change influencesnatural variability.

A. Increasing sea temperatures

As temperatures across the archipelago increase, spa-tial SST gradients between cold upwelled regions willbecome sharper and may homogenize completelyduring strong EN years, when cold upwelling is re-duced or stops. As a result, stratification in the upperwater column is likely to become stronger with re-duced cold water mixing to the surface. This suggestsfewer cold shocks in the future for Galápagos coralswith less cold water reprieve during bleachingepisodes. Disease may increase if vectors andpathogens positively respond to an increase in tem-perature (Harvell et al. 2002).

Warm-water-tolerant corals will displace cold-water-tolerant species. Gradually increasing backgroundtemperatures may favor survival of some shallow-water corals such as Porites Sp. over species such asPocillopora damicornis, P.eydouxi, P.inflata, P.elegans,P.meandrina, Gardinoseris planulata and Pavona Sp.,which tend to suffer heating stress.

Burrowing mollusks (e.g. Lithophagia) and spongesmay proliferate. Reduced, fragmented populationsbecome more susceptible to extirpation eventscaused by point pollution, anchor damage, and trans-mission of pathogens by marine fauna and diver con-tact. Declining coral health may result fromproliferation of urchin bioeroders and changes in thebioeroders’ depth zonation. (For example, Diademamexicana urchins may displace Eucidaris galapagensis,or may migrate deeper across different coral strata ifthe thermocline deepens). Extreme rainfall eventsmay increase sedimentation stress (Fabricus 2005).

B. A drop in turnover of upwelled water

The top- and low-end heat tolerances of coral speciesdefine part of the environmental envelope determin-ing coral survival. A persistent decrease in cold up-welling would favor more widespread coral growth inpreviously inhospitable western and central regions,yet also would reduce the extent of cooler refuge anddeep-water habitat from which repopulation has oc-curred in previous years in warmer parts of the archi-pelago to the north. Lower nutrient loading, lessplankton, and hence clearer water both may exacer-bate bleaching and may reduce other food sources forreef bioeroders (Highsmith 1981). Reef-associated fil-


ENSO continues as in the past withfuture strong warm and cold events.

A. Increasing sea temperatures

In general, heavy bleaching mortalities are expectedas in previous strong EN events. Since the 1997–98event resulted in 21% mortality, compared to the 97%estimated from the 1982–83 event, we might expectthat populations of the dominant massive coralsPavona Sp. and Porites lobata be reduced back to asimilar base survival threshold favoring species withheat resilient species-zooxanthellate clade associa-tions.

Temperature changes also are suspected to have af-fected associated abundance of burrowing mollusks(e.g. Lithophagia spp.), sponges, and other as-yet-undocumented reef in-fauna and cryptofauna in-volved in nutrient recycling.

Extreme EN events may indirectly cause local extinc-tions of dependant species through bleaching of theirsheltering colonies. Once weakened, coral habitat isfurther degraded by bioeroders.


As mixed autotrophs, corals are less affected by dropsin phytoplankton productivity, yet still require nitro-gen supplement from zooplankton feeding. However,without periodic incursions of cold water, associatedspecies that respond to temperature can be affected.Population growth of macroinvertebrate bioeroderssuch as burrowing mollusks and urchins in combina-tion with fisheries’ removal of their natural predators(e.g. lobsters and reef fish) likely played a role in af-fecting coral health and corals’ natural recovery be-tween strong EN years. Persisting coral reefs are innorthern zones receiving a reduced influence of up-welled EUC water. Populations of rare voracious coralpredators such as Acanthaster planci in the northernislands currently may be restricted by such cold-waterincursions.

Periods of reduced upwelling probably have favoredcoral development around fringes of upwelling re-gions. Coral recruits probably would not have time toestablish during 1–2 year warm events in otherwisecold upwelling zones given their slow growth rates,with the possible exception of sheltered, shallow, sun-heated bays.


56

3.1.1. habitat-level considerations: I. Reef-forming coral communities

ter feeders may be limited by the associated drop inproductive upwelling. If the thermocline is depressedwith less vertical transport and mixing, there is lesschance of larval flux from depth after strong warmevents, possibly affecting local recruitment.

If a tropical-water environment prevails with reducedincursions of cold water, novel circumtropical specieswith Indo Pacific or Panamic affinities can establishthemselves and extend into what was previouslycold-water habitat. Nutrient deprivation and compe-tition effects notwithstanding, there may be increas-ing shifts from transient EN visitors to residentGalápagos species in the long term.

C. Shifts in ENSO and PDO amplitude andfrequency

If the frequency of strong, stressful ENSO events in-creases, we would expect reduced reef recovery overthe shorter intervening periods and we would expectthe opposite if intervals increase. Such recovery alsois mitigated by the presence of keystone reef preda-tory fish and spiny lobster, and hence is susceptibleto shifts in and over-extraction by local fisheries.

Although connectivity between tropical coastal coralcommunities and Galápagos may increase with in-creased flow from Panamic and Indo-Pacificprovinces, it seems likely that many species would notsurvive the combination of background acidification,implicit heating stress, and regional-scale degrada-tion of colonies which interrupts recruitment be-tween potential source and sink regions.

The degree of recovery almost certainly will be moder-ated by other compounding effects from reef bio-eroders, bioeroder population controls (or lack thereof),the state of appropriate settling substrate, and possibleestablishment of novel benthic competitors.

D. Intensified “La Niña-like” upwelling

An intensification of bathymetry-forced upwelling ofcooler water within the archipelago or an intensifica-tion of westerly extension of the equatorial coldtongue and Peru coastal surface transport from up-welling regions along the South American coast ac-tually offset background warming trends observed inother parts of the Pacific.

Since there is a tendency for a shallow, superheatedsurface layer under the equatorial sun, regular verticalmigrations of the thermocline through tidal andKelvin-wave propagation across shallow subtidal reefmay increase the frequency of significant tempera-ture shock and subsequent bleaching of Porites andPocilloporid corals, favoring instead Pavona Sp. devel-opment in the northern islands.


Both the interval between strong ENSO events andthe rate of change from ENSO SST maxima to minimagreatly affect coral framework recovery as well as thestate of bioerosion of the reef following strong events.

After extensive bleaching following the recent strongENs, Glynn (2009) reports a seven-year period (2000–2007) of considerable regeneration in coral tissue andrecruitment across one of the few surviving reef struc-tures in Darwin Island after the 1982 EN. Most sexualpropagation of new recruits appears restricted to thevicinity of surviving source populations (Glynn et al.2009). The recent ENSO frequency observed since the1970s suggests that new recruits have a minimum“grace period” to establish before a periodic strongbleaching event.

Since 2004, a degree of recovery also has been ob-served in some sites with less-intact frameworksacross Floreana, such as Corona del Diablo and BahíaGardner in Española, that prior to the 1982–83 ENevent had high coral cover (CDF-Marine obs.).


Temperature variability greatly influences local marinecommunities. A cold shock of 11°C at 10 m depth overjust 6 days in Feb–Mar 2007 (associated with the pas-sage of internal waves across the archipelago) causedwidespread bleaching in Galápagos Porites lobata andPocillopora Sp. corals from Wolf to Española Island(Banks et al. 2009). Whereas northerly corals recoveredwithin the following month, the normal transition tothe cold season at the same time exaggerated cold-water stress to coral colonies in the southeast of the ar-chipelago resulting in high levels of pocilloporidbleaching into the shallows. Increased persistent pro-ductivity also may have had shading effects limitingcoral development.

Some areas in the western islands (e.g. Punta Es-pinoza in Fernandina and Bahía Urvina in western Is-abela) also show historical evidence of upliftedmassive corals that persisted in protected shallowbays around cold upwelling zones (Dunbar et al.1994). This suggests that although now conspicu-ously absent, at some point prior to the volcanic upliftin the 1950s, conditions were favorable to coral re-cruitment despite now being in a cold upwelling zoneinhospitable to coral growth.


57

E. Changes in mass transport of surfacewaters

Source-sink larval contributions may shift betweenother marine protected areas (MPAs) in the region,such as on the Ecuadorian coast or on Cocos orMalpelo Island, as both prevailing currents and pos-sibly levels of relative protection through manage-ment change. Hence, while the importance ofprotecting existing Marine Managed Areas (MMAs)continues, new zones within larger MPA networksmay shift to play an important part in bolstering re-gional marine resilience.

F. Sea level rise

Stronger or more frequent storm events would in-crease damage to species more adapted to low-en-ergy shallows near the coast, favoring resistantspecies such as barnacles. Those lobate and encrust-ing species with a wider depth zonation would bemore likely to avoid damaging effects. As sea levelrises, there may be subtle shifts in vertical zonation ofcoral species commensurate with their respectivelight, wave-abrasion, and temperature tolerances.

G. Ocean acidification

Current 2010 partial CO2 levels are at 389 ppm. Unlessvery drastic emission standards are adopted within1–2 decades, levels likely will increase to 450 ppm, atwhich point coral growth is predicted to fall to about50% of preindustrial levels.

Since naturally high-CO2 reefs persist near the Varagdistributional threshold in Galápagos, they representa “canary in the coal mine” for Pacific corals and areexpected to be among the first and most affected byocean acidification (Manzello et al. 2010). Weaker ce-mentation will make corals more susceptible to bio-erosion and physical abrasion, also restrictingrecruitment (Colgan 1990). Other calcifying benthossuch as coralline algae otherwise supporting reef co-hesion also will be affected.


In the current PDO phase, the influence of the Hum-boldt Current system is more pronounced (Martinezpersonal communication.). A lower probability of ex-ternal recruitment from Cocos or other northeasterlysites may mean that recruitment during the last 10–20 years is mostly localized in Galápagos, and is there-fore more susceptible to local processes.

Although potential exists for exogenous recruitment,most recovery since 1998 appears limited to areasaround persisting fragmented reefs (Glynn et al.2009). Possible recruitment may originate fromcolonies protected from warming in deeper water.

F. Sea level rise

Depending upon the state of ENSO-related bleach-ing, corals are sensitive to physical abrasion and sed-imentation of sand over living reef duringstorm-surge events (Robinson 1985).


Recent acidification studies show that Galápagoscoral reef communities are naturally exposed to thehighest pCO2 and lowest aragonite saturation (Varag)documented for any coral reef environment to date.As such, Galápagos recently has been cited as anocean acidification “hotspot” (Manzello et al. 2010).

Acidification stress may correlate with the high(~21%) incidence of coral malaise in the remainingfragmented populations in the north (Vera and Banks2009).


58



A. Incrgeasing background temperatures

Most marine endemism is associated with the up-welling western region, which includes critically en-dangered solitary corals and algae species. Localextinction events are likely if cold-water refuge habi-tat becomes more spatially restricted. If the thermo-cline deepens on average in the near future, then“EN-like” limitations upon upwelling of nutrient-en-riched deep water productivity likely will occur. Thatthreshold, if crossed more frequently during seasonaland ENSO shifts, will emphasize extended nutrient-deprivation stress across the archipelago. Many otherspecies-interaction effects are expected but notquantified, such as the risk from toxic dinoflagellates.


Reduced upwelling would have differential effectsacross the archipelago, reducing the habitat diversityafforded by cold, nutrient-rich water and limiting pro-ductivity across the islands. Algal nursery habitatwould be affected, as well as global productivity, pro-ducing consequent multiple shifts in communitystate, which also includes fisheries- and tourism-ob-jective species. Important foraging areas would shiftto reflect the dwindling or alternative food and nest-ing resources instigating changes in species rangesand behaviors (e.g. penguins and marine turtles). Cir-cumtropical or Indo-Pacific species would extendranges into reduced upwelling areas as a result ofcompetition effects generated by incursions ofwarmer water.

Since most marine endemism and Peruvian-Chileanspecies in the islands are associated with cold-waterareas, biodiversity would decline, with probablespecies extinctions.


Shifts in the time and intensity of ENSO and PDO cy-cles imply changes in exposure to both favorable andinhospitable conditions. The response and recoveryperiod of the algae species within these time framescan limit habitat development toward a more robust,mature associated community. Hence, openings de-velop for rapid colonists, some of which (such as in-vasive Caulerpa Sp.) are hugely prolific and rapidlydisplace other native species.



A. Increasing background temperatures

Past observations saw widespread algae mortalityduring strong ENs, which led to restructuring of sub-tidal and intertidal communities including unique,equatorial deep-kelp (e.g., Eisenia galapagensis) habi-tat and suites of co-adapted invertebrate and fishspecies. Recent assessments have included at least sixmarine algae species (Dictyota galapagensis,Spatoglossum schmittuu, Desmarestia tropica, Phyco-drina elegans, Gracilaria skottsbergii, and Galaxaurabarbata) among the IUCN Red List because they fulfillthreatened criteria. These species are considered pos-sibly extinct, and one species of intertidal Galápagosstringweed (Bifurcia galapagensis) is probably extinct.Algae-specialist feeders such as marine iguanas arerapidly affected by the loss of algae.


Cold-water productive areas are well correlated withimproved stock recovery of coastal finfish (e.g. ba-calao, deep-water mero, camotillo, and blanquillospawning aggregations) and show regular evidenceof juveniles. These areas represent important greenturtle foraging areas, nesting zones for threatenedmarine birds such as the Galápagos penguin andflightless cormorant, and temperature refuge forcold-water-adapted endemic invertebrates and fish.Periodic drops in upwelled deep water and subse-quently effects on macroalgae habitat during theENSO cycle have profoundly affected the Galápagoscoastal ecosystem in observed recent history.


Occasional temperature shock of at least 11°C is notuncommon due to vertical thermocline migrationacross subtidal reefs causing differential levels of heatstress. This is particularly evident in the western partof the archipelago under regular influence of cool 14–18°C upwelling while surface waters still can reach28–30°C in exceptional summer months. Recovery ofmacroalgae since the last strong EN in 1997–98 wasmost obvious around the sustained upwelling areasin Isabela and Fernandina and along the westernshores of central islands, although various intertidalspecies have not been recorded since (see section “A”above), suggesting a significant loss of habitat-form-ing algae under current ENSO periodicity.


59

3.1.2. habitat-level considerations:II. Macroalgae-dominated cold water upwelling

D. Intensified “La-Niña-like” upwelling

If protracted, cold, La Niña conditions develop morefrequently, populations may be bolstered betweenyears by increasing ranges of intertidal and subtidalalgae. Faster-growing temperate algae also may im-pinge upon ranges of tropical species and overgrowcoral in transient upwelling areas. As long as cold, nu-trient-rich upwelling is maintained, observations sug-gest that the coastal fringe may benefit underperiodic surface warming interspersed with provisionof deep water into the sunlit, mixed surface layer.


Meridional shifts in the EUC affecting its expressionin the surface around the Islands may alter the posi-tion of cold-water refuge areas for some species ofconservation importance (e.g. penguins) into possiblyunprotected zones. If shifts in prevailing currents arepervasive, mobile species may concentrate in refugepockets. Larger-scale shifts in predominant transportfrom Indo-Pacific, Panamic, or Humboldt provinceswould reinforce respective connectivity with algalbanks across these regions to Galápagos.

F. Sea level rise

Stronger or more-frequent storm events would in-crease damage to algae more adapted to low-energy,shallow water near the coast. In general, incrementalsea level rise at the ranges suggested should not neg-atively affect macroalgae habitat above that observedperiodically during strong spring-tide and surgeepisodes.


Phytoplankton coccolithophores and coralline algaeare among those groups known to be affected byacidification (Riebesell et al 2000). Calcareous algaeplays a role in reef cohesion and integrity across thearchipelago, concreting reef frameworks during tran-sitions between coral, algae, and barnacle habitat for-mers over ENSO and seasonal cycles. Observationsaround acidic ocean vents suggest that rich benthicassemblages can be rapidly replaced by tough seagrass and invasive algaes.


During periods in which nutrient upwelling is rein-forced, general positive impacts are observed withinalgae communities, expanding niche ranges for cold-water adapted species and consequently increasingsystem productivity. La Niña events generallystrengthen recovery of cold-water-adapted en-demics, including fish and invertebrate species as-semblages associated with subtidal algae stands. Reeffish and grazers also tend to increase in biomass, withevidence of stock recovery for some commercialdepredatory finfish such as bacalao.


A shift in upwelling and positioning of the oceanicfront seems to change pelagic species distributionsusually drawn to ephemeral productive upwellingzones in open waters. Not enough is understood lo-cally to qualify how the shifts in currents affectpelagic species, although it is clear that seasonalchanges in affluence from the temperate Humboldtand warm Panama systems influence near-coastalsubtidal compositions and whitefish capturethroughout the year.

F. Sea level rise

Temperature stress compounded with increasedstorm surge during strong EN events weakens algaecementation to substrate within the turbulent upper-subtidal and intertidal zone.


Upwelling areas tend to have naturally higher ambi-ent pCO2 levels due to the recent contribution ofdeep, lower-pH water into the surface layer. Althoughthere is no local data to date, it can be hypothesizedthat western upwelling communities may exist at lim-iting pCO2 thresholds for certain more-sensitivegroups, such as calcareous algaes, in a similar way tocorals. It is unclear whether in some cases native andendemic species have developed a level of natural re-sistance to acidification effects associated with freshlyupwelled deep water.


60




If background warming increases the seasonal signal,we might expect resident tropical species to establishthemselves during the warm season, gradually be-coming more-dominant components of the ecosys-tem and displacing cold-water-adapted species. Also,transient, novel tropical species may encroach uponprevious cold-water zones as the biome shifts. Certainchanges, such as tropical fish grazing, may introducea new trophic state between functional groups.


If the cold-water biome in Galápagos is reduced to keyrefuge spots and possibly disappears, the result wouldbe a loss of endemic and native species through com-petition, resource limitation, or physiological stress.Some species may develop new feeding behaviors andpersist. Recent observations of Galápagos fur seals col-onizing in Piura, Peru, suggest that some species mayhave the capacity to shift poleward to cooler waters.


If temperature shocks are severe, habitat modificationin coral and algae nursery habitats will become morepronounced, affecting wider taxa and species. Thesechanges open windows of opportunity for novel sea-weeds and other invasives such as Caulerpa Sp.,which is considered one of the world’s worst biologi-cal invaders and already has been observed in DarwinIsland, Punta Estrada, and Tortuga Bay in Santa Cruz(M. Vera pers. comm.).

Recovery will be sensitive to the length of intervalsbetween strong climatic impacts and will be depend-ent upon the life history and biology of, and the suc-cession dynamic between, the various biotic andabiotic components.

Shifts in species composition due to macro-scaleshifts in temperature and productivity patterninggenerate a different ecological equilibrium, with dif-ferent biodiversity and functional state. Abruptchanges in strong ENSO minima and maxima arelikely to stress the less-tolerant and less-adaptablespecies groups. During these changes, the often-rapid increase in habitat engineers such as urchins is




Rocky basaltic reef covers more than 80% of the sub-tidal coastal reserve and underpins the macroalgaeand coralline communities described. Most rockysubtidal reef is characterized between the tempera-ture tolerances across these two systems, rangingfrom ubiquitous encrusting coralline algae (such asLithothamia Sp. and filamentous Ulva stands) to a richassemblage of benthic taxa upon vertical walls andhigh-current sites.

Elevated surface temperatures homogenize watermasses during strong EN events, reducing the bio-physical gradient and patterning usually sustained bycold-water upwelling, which otherwise generatescold-water, temperate, and tropical habitat.

Intertidal rocky reef and mangrove systems also in-teract with invasive species in the coastal fringe. Inaddition to threats such as the cottony cushion scaleinsect (Icerya purchasi), unique flora and fauna asso-ciated with mangroves (such as the mangrove finch,Camarhynchus heliobates) are at risk from introducedrats, cats, dogs, fire ants, pigs, and the parasitic fruitfly Philornis, which can benefit from heavy EN rainfalland increased temperatures near the coast.


Upwelled productive zones correlate strongly withareas of high fisheries extraction. Such areas tend tobe ephemeral, variable in magnitude (with the no-table exception of constitutive production in westernIsabela and Fernandina), and spatially consistent. Theinfluence of cold-water zones clearly supports a sub-set of Galápagos biodiversity derived from Peruvianand Chilean provinces (e.g. cold-water endemics), andhence contributes considerably to the islands’ distinctbiogeography.


Seasonal variability is reasonably high in Galápagoswith a 2–4°C anomaly every year that increases up to+/- 6°C during strong ENSO warm and cold events.This variability already causes range shifts in subtidalcommunities in space and over depth. The extremeENSO events, however, demonstrated multiple cas-


61

3.1.3. habitat-level considerations:III. Intertidal and subtidal rocky reef

likely facilitated by processes such as changes in tem-perature regimes and increases in fishing pressure ontheir natural predators. An absence of predator con-trol can lead to excessive herbivory.


Nutrient availability promotes bottom-up develop-ment of higher trophic groups. Grazers benefit, and,barring unforeseen non-linear effects, reef predatorswould respond positively. Interestingly, observationsduring the hot EN peak of 2010 showed that despitepositive SST anomalies, EUC upwelling continued, in-termittently driven by internal waves into the coastalmixed zone. The combination of enriching pulses ofcold, deep water into the surface and anomalous, el-evated surface temperatures seemed to favor pro-ductivity in a fashion similar to mid-latitude springblooms. Unusually abundant spawning aggregationsof reef fish, a very high abundance of juvenile fishthroughout the archipelago, the presence of largereef predators, and pelagic species congregating in-shore were observed.


Changes in source-sink populations and connectivitybetween populations are difficult to predict withoutmore fine-scale, current modeling and larval (particle)tracking models. However, we would expect broad-scalechanges in biogeography and biodiversity with anychange in residency of water masses around continentalmargins or islands prior to passage to Galápagos.

F. Sea level rise

A gradual incursion of saline water into coastal dunesand wetlands would change the coastal nesting habi-tat for many species, with greater impact upon en-demics with restricted home ranges (e.g. penguinsand cormorants).

Mangroves fulfill important protection and produc-tive roles, buffering the coast from Pacific swells andforming protected bays that make them ideal nurseryareas for many coastal and open-water species. Wewould expect mangroves to gradually shift upshoreand inland as the coastline recedes. The degree of re-location of mangrove stands would depend upon thecoastal profile and what currently is bordering exist-ing mangrove areas. Assuming that novel biologicalinvasions are not a problem, over time, mangrovecover will extend in some areas and retreat in othersdepending upon coastal topography, inclination, andpatterns of seed dispersal.

cade effects from the bottom up, emphasizing thelimiting role that primary production within theselarger climate signals has upon local ecological func-tion.


Strong La Niña years such as 2007 with its associatedenhanced upwelling benefited recovery and expan-sion of cold-water-adapted populations and breedingsuccess of some species, such as bacalao and marineiguana. Green algae normally predominate in coldperiods, perhaps recruiting from the subtidal reef.Rapid recruiters such as Megabalanus barnacles tendto show a strong positive response to the reducedtemperatures and productive regime (Witman andSmith 2003).


Prevailing currents and water masses seem to influ-ence recruitment patterns. Following the 1997–98 EN,monitoring data revealed a juvenile red spiny lobsterstock that may have originated during reinforced con-nectivity from the western Pacific. Other transienttropical species establish themselves to differing de-grees across the archipelago. For example, novel trop-ical species (such as butterfly fish, (Chaetodon Sp.),and Indo-Pacific Naso Sp. unicorn fish) temporarily re-cruited to northern coral reefs during past strong ENevents.

F. Sea level rise

Coastline habitat experiences storm surge duringstrong EN events, with near-subtidal reefs particularlyaffected. Mangrove systems do not appear affectedlocally since changes are short lived. During EN ex-tremes, sea level rises are of a similar magnitude tothat predicted for other regions over much longer pe-riods and differ in height across the archipelago, pre-sumably as a function of bathymetry and localcirculation.


To date, ocean acidification effects upon subtidalrocky reef communities are poorly understood. Al-though recent opportunistic measures in 2010 at sev-eral sites suggested pH values of 8.1–8.2, widermonitoring is required.


62


If pCO2 continues to rise in the future, we can expectwidespread impacts upon invertebrate exoskeletonformation and larval development, and probable de-formities in mollusk shells (Doney et al. 2009). Deeperspecies likely will be more susceptible, as pH changesare larger and growth rates often are slower in deeperwater. A general weakening of calcifiers (e.g. mollusks,echinoderms, and coralline algaes) will underminereef structures.


63

4. CLIMATE INTERACTIONS WITh ANThROPOGENICSTRESSORS

Non-climatic stressors Estimated climate-shift interactions and exacerbating effects

Overfishing Edgar et al. (2009) suggest important correlations between the overfishing of medium-to-large-sized reef predators (such as bacalao serranids, snappers, and lobsters) withurchin overgrazing, which inhibits normal benthic recovery after thermal stress events.The implication is that without natural predator controls, rapid response grazers havea competitive advantage causing population booms and subsequent collapse to earlybenthic succession states once overgrazed. Although the urchin dynamic for the north-ern islands (Diadema dominance) seems different from the southern archipelago (Trip-nuestes/Lytechinus dominance), the message seems to be that there are significantinteractions with overfishing and grazing pressure. Coupled with acidification andweakening reef accretion and recovery, the outlook seems grim for existing corals andmacroalgae, which have in recent years been largely replaced by extensive urchin bar-rens. Pocillopora coral species are among the hermatypic corals most affected to date.The shift in habitat-forming species implies changes in associated fauna and flora thatcascade through the whole ecosystem, including a decline in total biomass and lossof the self-contained nutrient cycling normally found within a coral habitat. Sea urchindominance is symptomatic of such a regime shift where habitat-forming species arerapidly eroded. Fundamental changes in species composition and abundance towardlow-diversity “urchin barrens” are characterized by encrusting algae substrate ratherthan diverse coral and foliose algae assemblages. There also may be regulatory inter-actions between bacalao and intertidal herbivores, as well as between subtidal reeffish, lobsters and urchins.

With the advent of pelagic fisheries, there is an accompanying increase in net fishingfor bait fish that serve as prey for climate-impacted species such as marine birds. Mul-let is the principal target species historically fished near certain sandy beaches, andcurrently are not overexploited. Excessive netting for bait would affect many other ju-venile fish species, including keystone reef predators that depend upon protected pro-ductive habitats, and in turn repopulate the surrounding reef. Overfishing for seacucumbers and lobsters is unlikely to worsen, since fisheries bottomed out severalyears ago, and lobster shows some signs of recovery in parts of the GMR. Fishing hasincreased for pelagic species such as wahoo and tuna, and also coastal fish such as ba-calao, mero, and salema. The coastal species are most at risk from warming due to theirassociation with cold-water productive inshore habitat. Chitons, octopus, and gas-tropods (Nerita) may be overfished near port zones as demand increases locally forseafood. Appropriate and regularly revised quota controls are key to improved re-silience of fisheries stocks under a shifting climate.


Introduced species Marine invasive-species risk will increase with a shift in environmental conditions ac-companied by a seemingly inevitable increase in transoceanic marine traffic. Theseshould be considered separately from transient species from connected provincesthat establish during extended warm or cold periods. A reduction in suspension feed-ers such as barnacles that proliferate in cold productive water would open space forinvasion of novel species. Greater connectivity with marine traffic hubs such asPanama and the Indo West Pacific increases the possibility of more arrivals. The novelalgae species Giffordia mitchelliae with a tropical/Panama distribution first recordedin 1982 overtaking intertidal habitat as temperature increased was also later observedduring the 1997 El Niño altering the grazing dynamic (marine iguanas, crabs and in-tertidal fish) (Vinueza et al. 2006). A warmer climate may exclude some invasivespecies that affect mangroves, such as the cushiony cotton scale insect (pulgón). Algaesuch as Caulerpa Sp. appears to be well established in Tortuga Bay. Some rare Acan-thaster coralivore seastars appear to establish periodically across reefs at Darwin, al-though may be native to the island with distributions possibly limited to incursionsof cold upwelled water. Population explosions of swimming crabs were observed inprevious ENSO events, yet were rapidly consumed by Galápagos fauna. More researchis required in this area.

Habitat loss Loss of habitat from coral bleaching and algae stress results in multiple cascading ef-fects reducing functional group diversity of the marine space: nursery habitat is re-duced, affecting a range of codependent species accompanied with a drop in localproductivity.

Anchor damage, which can destroy 100 years of coral growth in minutes, is exacer-bated by high maritime traffic and site visitation. In multiuse port areas, there is a riskof habitat modification for urban development. Removal of mangroves would affectneighboring habitats and marine communities, as well as remove the mangroves’ localnursery, protective and productive ecosystem function.

Illegal fishing Illegal shark finning, still one of the most lucrative illegal activities in the GMR evenat moderate levels can affect top-down control of ecosystem function, given sharks’regulatory trophic role, low fecundity, and relatively long period to reach sexual ma-turity. Climate-shift effects may alter their distributions outside of well patrolled areas.Fishing outside of established quotas will in general exacerbate the aforementionedoverfishing effects.

Bycatch The collection of chitons across intertidal beaches close to port areas disturbs otherspecies. Seafood other than the fisheries objective species is often served in localdishes such as ceviche and may vary as resources change with climate.

Pollution (chronic & spills) With more spills and accidents every year, pollution is an ongoing concern in portareas, with contamination localized around anchorages. Rare corals such as Gardi-noseris and Pavona duedeni are found in the bay area of Puerto Ayora, for examplewhere they are susceptible to pollution.

Tourism anchorages in protected bays with restricted circulation may alter the oxygenenvironment where coliforms accumulate, while small spills lead to bacterial and heavymetal accumulation in sediments. Chlorine use in tidepools although illegal is prac-ticed around port zones mainly targeting octopus but affecting other marine life. Pol-lution encourages a monopoly by more-resistant species, building up within softsediments over long periods, altering interstitial meiofauna and subsequently macro-fauna. Mangrove areas tend to collect plastic and organic rubbish and accumulatelight hydrocarbons from the frequent small spills from visiting boats.


64

REFERENCES

Banks S.A and M. Trueman. 2009. Galápagos and climate change: technical report.Charles Darwin Foundation. 72pp.

Banks S.A, M. Vera & A.Chiriboga. 2009. Characterizing the last remaining reefs: estab-lishing reference points to assess long term change in Galápagos zooxanthellatecoral communities. Galápagos Research #66.

Banks S.A. 2002. Ambiente físico. In: Reserva Marina de Galápagos. Línea Base de la Bio-diversidad (Danulat E & GJ Edgar, eds.) pp 22-37. Fundación Charles Darwin-Servi-cio Parque Nacional Galápagos, Santa Cruz, Galápagos, Ecuador.

Belkin, I. 2009. Rapid Warming of Large Marine Ecosystems. Progress in Oceanography81:207-213.

Boer, G., B. Yu, S. Kim, and G. Flato. 2004. Is there observational support for an El Niño-like pattern of future global warming. Geophys. Res. Lett 31.

Cane, M. 2005. The evolution of El Niño, past and future. Earth and Planetary ScienceLetters 230:227-240.

Cane, M., A. Clement, A. Kaplan, Y. Kushnir, D. Pozdnyakov, R. Seager, S. Zebiak, and R.Murtugudde. 1997. Twentieth-century sea surface temperature trends. Science275:957.

Carpenter, K., M. Abrar, G. Aeby, R. Aronson, S. Banks, A. Bruckner, A. Chiriboga, J. Cortes,J. Delbeek, and L. DeVantier. 2008. One-third of reef-building corals face elevatedextinction risk from climate change and local impacts. Science 321:560.


Physical abrasion Diver and anchor damage can cause physical abrasion. Diver damage is more likelyin high-current areas where divers look for handholds. Mangroves protect coastalzones from surge erosion and are relatively resistant compared to other biogenichabitats. Coral reefs that once afforded protection from along-shore erosion arelargely absent since the 1982–83 EN event.

Tourist visitation Inappropriate (high) levels of dive tourism and anchorage over coral reefs can exac-erbate the impact of a suite of climate stressors (e.g. heat and acidification). Visitorsalso may inadvertently transmit coral disease and parasites between colonies simplyby touching reef frameworks. Sunblock washing off tourists over time at a site alsomay affect reefs. Rocky reef systems are likely more resilient than coral reefs to directtourism impacts, yet impacts will depend upon effective management of site quotas.As tourism develops, there is the risk that tour operators will search for underutilized,and often more secluded and pristine, areas such as Cabo Douglas, which are impor-tant reference and climate impact recovery areas with very little human influence andgreat biodiversity value.

Some concerns exist for trampling effects upon iguana nests in well visited sites. Anyoverloading of tourism sites may change the behaviors and residency of intertidal key-stone species.

If erosion patterns change, marine access to terrestrial sites will need to adapt.

Urban development driven by tourism puts demand upon sand as a construction ma-terial.

Regulated fisheries Benthic near-shore fisheries are mostly associated with the cold, productive upextraction welling areas. If upwellling decreases, fisheries focus may shift by necessity to open-

water alternatives requiring careful foresight and planning to encourage healthy longterm stock harvest as resources and markets change.


65

Colgan, M. 1990. El Niño and the history of Eastern Pacific reef building. Global ecologi-cal consequences of the 1982-1983 El Niño-Southern Oscillation. Elsevier, Amster-dam:183-232.

Danulat, E., and G. Edgar. 2002. Reserva Marina de Galápagos. Línea Base de la Biodiver-sidad. Fundación Charles Darwin/Servicio Parque Nacional Galápagos. Santa Cruz,Galápagos, Ecuador.

Doney, S., V. Fabry, R. Feely, and J. Kleypas. 2009. Ocean acidification: the other CO2

problem. Annual Review of Marine Science 1:169-192.Dunbar, R., G. Wellington, M. Colgan, and P. Glynn. 1994. Eastern Pacific sea surface

temperature since 1600 AD: The 18O record of climate variability in Galápagoscorals. Paleoceanography 9.

Edgar, G., S. Banks, M. Brandt, R. Bustamante, A. Chiriboga, S. Earle, L. Garske, P. Glynn, J.Grove, and S. Henderson. 2009. El Niño, grazers and fisheries interact to greatly elevate extinction risk for Galápagos marine species. Global Change Biology DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2486.2009.02117.

Edgar, G., S. Banks, R. Bensted-Smith, M. Calvopiña, A. Chiriboga, L. Garske, S. Hender-son, K. Miller, S. Salazar, and W. Foundation. 2008. Conservation of threatenedspecies in the Galápagos Marine Reserve through identification and protection ofmarine Key Biodiversity Areas. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and FreshwaterEcosystems 18:955-968.

Elzen, M., and M. Meinshausen. 2005. Meeting the EU 2 C climate target: global and regional emission implications. Report 728001031:18.

Fabricius, K. 2005. Effects of terrestrial runoff on the ecology of corals and coral reefs:review and synthesis. Marine pollution bulletin 50:125-146.

Glynn P, R. B., Romanski AM, Baums IM. 2009. Rapid recovery of a coral reef on DarwinIsland. Galápagos Research 66:6-16.

Glynn, P., G. Wellington, and C. Birkeland. 1979. Coral reef growth in the Galápagos: lim-itation by sea urchins. Science 203:47.

Glynn, P., G. Wellington, and J. Wells. 1984. Corals and coral reefs of the Galápagos Islands. University of California Press.

Graham, N. 1994. Decadal-scale climate variability in the tropical and North Pacific during the 1970s and 1980s: Observations and model results. Climate Dynamics10:135-162.

Harvell, C., C. Mitchell, J. Ward, S. Altizer, A. Dobson, R. Ostfeld, and M. Samuel. 2002.Climate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota. Science296:2158.

Hearn, A., P. Martinez, M. Toral-Granda, J. Murillo, and J. Polovina. 2005. Population dy-namics of the exploited sea cucumber Isostichopus fuscus in the western GalápagosIslands, Ecuador. Fisheries Oceanography 14:377-385.

Highsmith, R. 1981. Coral bioerosion: damage relative to skeletal density. The AmericanNaturalist 117:193-198.

IPCC. 2007. Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K.B. Averyt, M. Tignorand H.L. Miller (eds.) Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007 . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.

Kareiva, P., and M. Marvier. 2003. Conserving Biodiversity Coldspots Recent calls to direct conservation funding to the world's biodiversity hotspots may be bad invest-ment advice. American Scientist 91:344-351.

Levitus, S., J. Antonov, and T. Boyer. 2005. Warming of the world ocean, 1955–2003.Geophys. Res. Lett 32:L02604.

MacDonald, G., and R. Case. 2005. Variations in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation over thepast millennium. Geophysical Research Letters 32:L08703.

Mantua, N., and S. Hare. 2002. The Pacific Decadal Oscillation. Journal of Oceanography58:35-44.

Manzello, D. 2010. Ocean acidification hot spots: Spatiotemporal dynamics of the seawater CO2 system of Eastern Pacific coral reefs. Limnol. Oceanogr 55:239-248.


66

Martínez R., J. Nieto, E. Pinto and E. Zambrano. 2009. Análisis de factores y tendenciasoceanográficas con impactos potenciales en la biodiversidad y bienestar humanoen las Islas Galápagos.In: Workshop of Assessment of the Vulnerability of Biodiver-sity and Related Human Well-Being in the Galápagos Islands to Climate Change.April 20-23, 2009, Santa Cruz, Galápagos.

McPhaden, M., K. Ando, B. Bourles, H. Freitag, R. Lumpkin, Y. Masumoto, V. Murty, P.Nobre, M. Ravichandran, and J. Vialard. 2009. The Global Tropical Moored BuoyArray. Community White Paper for OceanObs 9.

Meehl, G., C. Covey, B. McAvaney, M. Latif, and R. Stouffer. 2005. Overview of the cou-pled model intercomparison project. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Soci-ety 86:89-93.

Orr, J., V. Fabry, O. Aumont, L. Bopp, S. Doney, R. Feely, A. Gnanadesikan, N. Gruber, A.Ishida, and F. Joos. 2005. Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-firstcentury and its impact on calcifying organisms. Nature 437:681-686.

Palacios, D. 2004. Seasonal patterns of sea-surface temperature and ocean color aroundthe Galápagos: regional and local influences. Deep Sea Research Part II: TopicalStudies in Oceanography 51:43-57.

Parmesan, C., and G. Yohe. 2003. A globally coherent fingerprint of climate change im-pacts across natural systems. Nature 421:37-42.

Raupach, M., G. Marland, P. Ciais, C. Le Quéré, J. Canadell, G. Klepper, and C. Field. 2007.Global and regional drivers of accelerating CO2 emissions. Proceedings of the Na-tional Academy of Sciences 104:10288.

Reaser, J., R. Pomerance, and P. Thomas. 2000. Coral bleaching and global climatechange: scientific findings and policy recommendations. Conservation Biology14:1500-1511.

Riebesell, U., I. Zondervan, B. Rost, P. Tortell, R. Zeebe, and F. Morel. 2000. Reduced calci-fication of marine plankton in response to increased atmospheric CO2. Nature407:364-367.

Sabine, C., R. Feely, N. Gruber, R. Key, K. Lee, J. Bullister, R. Wanninkhof, C. Wong, D. Wal-lace, and B. Tilbrook. 2004. The oceanic sink for anthropogenic CO2. Science305:367.

Schaeffer, B., J. Morrison, D. Kamykowski, G. Feldman, L. Xie, Y. Liu, W. Sweet, A. McCul-loch, and S. Banks. 2008. Phytoplankton biomass distribution and identification ofproductive habitats within the Galápagos Marine Reserve by MODIS, a surface ac-quisition system, and in-situ measurements. Remote Sensing of Environment112:3044-3054.

Solomon, S., D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen, M. Marquis, K. Averyt, M. Tignor, and H. Miller.2008. Climate change 2007: the physical science basis. Cambridge University PressCambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi.

Stern, N. 2008. The economics of climate change. American Economic Review 98:1-37.Sweet, W., J. Morrison, D. Kamykowski, B. Schaeffer, S. Banks, and A. McCulloch. 2007.

Water mass seasonal variability in the Galápagos Archipelago. Deep-Sea ResearchPart I 54:2023-2035.

Sweet, W., J. Morrison, Y. Liu, D. Kamykowski, B. Schaeffer, L. Xie, and S. Banks. 2009.Tropical instability wave interactions within the Galápagos Archipelago. Deep-SeaResearch Part I.

Toral-Granda, M. 2005. Requiem for the Galápagos sea cucumber fishery? SPC Beche-de-Mer Information Bulletin 21:5-8.

Vecchi, G., and B. Soden. 2007. Global warming and the weakening of the tropical circu-lation. Journal of Climate 20:4316-4340.

Vera M. & S. Banks. 2009. Health status of the coralline communities of the northern Is-lands; Darwin, Wolf and Marchena of the Galápagos Archipelago. Galápagos Re-search #66.

Vinueza, L., G. Branch, M. Branch, and R. Bustamante. 2006. Top-down herbivory andbottom-up El Niño effects on Galápagos rocky-shore communities. EcologicalMonographs 76:111-131.

Witman, J., and F. Smith. 2003. Rapid community change at a tropical upwelling site inthe Galápagos Marine Reserve. Biodiversity and Conservation 12:25-45.


67

Wolff M. 2010. Galápagos does not show recent warming but increased seasonality.Galápagos Research. In press.

Xie L, Yanyun Liu, J. Morrison. 2009. A 100-year simulation of the ocean circulationaround the Galápagos from 1951 to 2050 using a nested grid hybrid coordinateocean circulation model, NCSU and UNC. In: Workshop of Assessment of the Vulner-ability of Biodiversity and Related Human Well-Being in the Galápagos Islands toClimate Change. April 20-23, 2009, Santa Cruz, Galápagos.

Yeh, S., J. Kug, B. Dewitte, M. Kwon, B. Kirtman, and F. Jin. 2009. El Niño in a changing cli-mate. Nature 461:511-514.

Zachos, J., K. Lohmann, J. Walker, and S. Wise. 1993. Abrupt climate change and tran-sient climates during the Paleogene: A marine perspective. The Journal of Geology101:191-213.


68

CHAPTER 4

Galápagos Marine Vertebrates: Responses to Environmental Variability

and Potential Impacts of Climate Change

Daniel M. Palacios1, 2

, Sandie K. Salazar3, 4

and F. Hernán Vargas4,5

1. Joint Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research, University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1000 PopeRoad, MSB 312, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA

2. NOAA/NMFS/Southwest Fisheries Science Center, Environmental Research Division, 1352 Light-house Avenue, Pacific Grove, CA 93950-2097, USA

3. Galápagos Academic Institute for the Arts and Sciences (GAIAS), Universidad San Francisco deQuito, Playa Man s/n – San Cristobal Island, Galápagos.

4. Charles Darwin Foundation, Av. Charles Darwin, Puerto Ayora, Isla Santa Cruz, Galápagos, Ecuador5. The Peregrine Fund, World Center for Birds of Prey, 5668 West Flying Hawk Lane, Boise, ID 83709,

USA

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. Vertebrate Diversity

The Galápagos marine vertebrates constitute a diversegroup of species that includes marine iguanas, sea tur-tles, seabirds, sea lions, dolphins, and whales. (Teleostfishes and sharks are not considered in this report).Several of these species rely on coastal ecosystems, andeven spend substantial portions of their time ashore,whereas others have an entirely aquatic existence andnormally are found far from land. As major consumersof secondary and tertiary productivity, most marinevertebrates are widely regarded as the ocean’s top pred-ators, with the exception of marine iguanas and greenturtles which feed almost exclusively on vegetation.Perhaps the most distinctive feature that the marinevertebrates of the Galápagos have in common is thatthey are among the most charismatic fauna of the ar-chipelago.

Globally, climate change is expected to have deleteriousimpacts on marine vertebrates, primarily through foodshortages and physiological impairment (secondary andtertiary impacts are also expected but less understood).However, quantifying, or even describing at a basiclevel, how climate change will affect the Galápagos ma-rine vertebrates is a tall order. This stems from 1) ourlimited and fragmented knowledge of the ecology of thespecies, 2) a lack of adequate local-scale, spatio-tempo-rally resolved climate change scenarios, and 3) the factthat climate change is expected to be a unidirectional,progressive process with no past analog on which tobase predictions. The purpose of the present report isto provide an overview of known or observed responsesto environmental variability, which could inform futureresponses to changes in environmental conditionsdriven by climatic change.

1.2. biogeographic Affinities

The archipelago is divided into threebiogeographic zones—the western, cen-tral-southern, and northern regions—which are determined by their locationand degree of exposure to prevailingcurrents and water masses. Not sur-prisingly, the marine vertebrates of theGalápagos display distinct distributionpatterns within these regions. Giventhat the predicted impacts of climatechange include the alteration of oceaniccurrents (notably the Equatorial Un-dercurrent that fuels an elevated ma-rine productivity in the Galápagos),consideration of present biogeographicaffinities will be useful in predicting theimpact of these changes on the Galápa-gos fauna. The green sea turtle (Chelo-

nia mydas agassizi) is predominantlyfound in the western region (wheremost nesting occurs between Decemberand May), as well as in the central-southern region. Marine iguanas (Am-

blirhynchus cristatus) occur throughoutthe archipelago, but their highest den-sities are found in the western region.The Galápagos sea lion (Zalophus

wollebaeki) also occurs throughout thearchipelago, but the largest colonies arefound in the central-southern region.In contrast, the major breeding coloniesof the Galápagos fur seal (Arcto-

cephalus galapagoensis) are found inthe western and northern regions.

More than a dozen species of seabirdsmake their home on different islands ofthe Galápagos, which they use forbreeding and as a base for launchingtheir ocean-going foraging trips. Whilethe magnificent frigatebird (Fregata

magnificens), the blue-footed booby(Sula nebouxii), and the brown pelican(Pelecanus occidentalis urinator) areubiquitous throughout the archipelago,most seabirds have more region-specificdistributions. The western region is

host to 100% of the flightless cormorant(Nannopterum harrisi) and 90% of theGalápagos penguin (Spheniscus men-

diculus) populations. In the central-southern region, Española Island hoststhe largest concentration of Nazca boo-bies (Sula granti) and waved alba-trosses (Phoebastria irrorata), whileSanta Cruz Island is home to the lavagull (Larus fuliginosus). The Galápagospetrel (Pterodroma phaeophygia) nestsprimarily on San Cristóbal, Santa Cruz,Santiago, and Floreana Islands, whilethe swallow-tailed gull (Creagrus furca-

tus) nests on Plazas and Española Is-lands. The northern region is home tothe red-footed booby (Sula sula), thegreat frigatebird (Fregata minor), theswallow-tailed gull, and two species ofstorm petrel (Oceanodroma tethys andOceanites gracilis). The sooty tern (Ony-

choprion fuscatus) also nests on thenorthern islands of Darwin and Wolf.

A diverse cetacean community inhabitsGalápagos waters, including several res-ident species and long-distance migrantssuch as the humpback whale (Megaptera

novaeangliae) and the blue whale (Bal-

aenoptera musculus). Among the resi-dents, the short-beaked common dolphin(Delphinus delphis), the striped dolphin(Stenella coeruleoalba), the Risso’s dol-phin (Grampus griseus), the short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala

macrorhynchus), the sperm whale (Phy-

seter macrocephalus), the killer whale(Orcinus orca), and the Bryde’s whale(Balaenoptera edeni) are predominantlyfound in the upwelling-modified watersof the western and the central-southernregions. In contrast, the pantropicalspotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata) andthe spinner dolphin (Stenella lon-

girostris) are the predominant species inthe warm and stratified waters of thenorthern region. The bottlenose dolphin(Tursiops truncatus) is common in near-shore waters of all three regions.

Galápagos Marine Vertebrates │ ChAPTER 4

71

2. RESPONSES TOENVIRONMENTALVARIAbILITY

In spite of being located on the equator,the Eastern Tropical Pacific undergoesmarked seasonal changes driven by theannual north-south migration of the In-tertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ)and its associated trade winds. In ad-dition, every four to seven years this re-gion is affected by more dramaticchanges caused by the El Niño-South-ern Oscillation (ENSO) and its twophases: El Niño, with associated anom-alously warm conditions, and La Niña,with cooler-than-normal conditions. Aslong-lived organisms, marine verte-brates are adapted to cope with thesevariations, although some species aremore successful than others. Somespecies’ responses to ENSO variabilityare illustrated below, as their responsesto ENSO events are the best informa-tion available for understanding howspecies might respond to climate-in-duced changes. We know much lessabout how other environmental factorsrelated to climate change will affectGalápagos marine vertebrates, but weprovide brief discussions about theirpresumed impact where relevant.

2.1. El NiñoGreen sea turtles and marine iguanas

Turtles and marine iguanas are prima-rily affected by the reduction in theamount of algae of the genuses Ulva,Spermothamnium, and Centroceras,which are their main food, and theirfood’s replacement by inedible speciesor less palatable genuses such as Giffor-dia and Enteromorpha. Consumptionof undigestible brown algae is one of theleading causes of mortality. During thelast strong El Niño of 1997-98 the pop-

ulation of marine iguanas suffered 90%mortality. El Niño also affects repro-duction and recruitment. Lower num-bers of females arrive at the nestingbeaches during these events, as nutri-tional stress may limit in their abilityto perform long migrations. In addi-tion, extreme high air and ground tem-peratures during incubation may causefeminization or death of embryos dur-ing development. Nest flooding andbeach erosion caused by elevated sealevel during El Niño also can have animpact in subsequent-year cohorts.

Sea lions

Severe reductions of up to 50% of thetotal population have occurred duringstrong El Niño events. During theseevents, up to 90% of the pups and 67%of the alpha males have died. Wide-spread movements, probably in searchof food, have been recorded between is-lands and even to the South Americanmainland. Feeding habits are also sig-nificantly altered. Lantern fishes (Myc-

tophidae) and serranids replace theSouth American pilchard (Sardinops

sagax) as the main prey items, implyinga switch to nocturnal and coastal forag-ing. The population can take up 10years to recover after strong events. In2005 the population was estimated at18,000 to 20,000 individuals and ap-peared to be increasing. An expansionin the distribution range is expected infuture warming events.

Fur seals

Less data on the effects of El Niño areavailable for fur seals, but the data areexpected to be similar to those recordedfor the sea lions, perhaps with less dra-matic mortality. Like the sea lions, furseals appear to range widely during ElNiño events, as evidenced by move-


72

ments to mainland South and CentralAmerica and even into the Gulf of Cali-fornia. The population also appears tobe increasing from the strong events inthe 1980s and 1990s, with numbers es-timated at 8,000 to 10,000 individualsin 2005. Similar to sea lions, an expan-sion in the distribution range is ex-pected in future warming events.

Penguins, cormorants, and other

seabirds

Mortalities of up to 77% in penguinsand 50% in cormorants were recordedduring the strong El Niño events of1982-83 and 1997-98. Breeding successis known to be lower in both speciesduring weak El Niño events. Boobies,frigatebirds, and albatrosses show lowreproductive rates and increased migra-

tions outside the Galápagos Marine Re-serve, while most young pelicans starveduring El Niño events. One seabirdspecies appears to benefit from El Niño:the wide availability of carrion resultsin an enhanced reproductive output inthe lava gull. However, an increasedabundance of migratory gulls arrivingin the Galápagos during El Niño eventsmay lead to competition with the en-demic lava gull. Seabirds of the Galá-pagos also are negatively affected bythe increased abundance of introduced,land-based predators (e.g. rats and cats)and disease vectors during El Niñoevents.

Cetaceans

As highly migratory species, cetaceansare able to redistribute quickly in re-sponse to events such as El Niño. Thereduction or collapse of the EquatorialUndercurrent coupled with decreasedwinds during El Niño results in theshrinking of the upwelling habitat inthe western region. This in turn maylead to increased competition for foodamong the dolphin species that are de-pendent on this habitat. Warm-waterspecies not normally found close to theislands might be more common duringthese episodes. Species such as sperm,Bryde’s, and blue whales, which dependon the productive Galápagos ecosys-tems, may experience decreased forag-ing success during an El Niño year anddecreased reproductive success in sub-sequent years.

2.2. La Niña

For most marine vertebrates, the LaNiña phenomenon represents a favor-able period of resource abundance, par-ticularly in the western upwelling area.The cold waters bring nutrients and in-creased prey resources. For marine


73

Y.-J

. REY

-MIL

LET

/ WW

F-C

AN

ON

iguanas and sea turtles, the bloom ofgreen algae provides sufficient food foradults and young individuals. Themain limiting factor for these poikilo-thermic (cold-blooded) organisms dur-ing La Niña events is thermoregulation.For sea lions, fur seals, penguins, andcormorants, this is a perfect time tobreed and increase in numbers.

2.3. Transient events

There is scant information regardingtransient events such as upwellingKelvin waves at the end of an El Niño,but it is presumed that sudden drasticreductions in water temperature on theorder of 5–10°C over a few days, as oc-curs during the passage of upwellingKelvin waves at the end of an El Niñoevent, may induce thermal shock andundermine the health of poikilothermicmarine vertebrates.

2.4. Acidification

At present, we do not know the directimpacts of acidification. However, acid-ification seems to affect plankton abun-dance and distribution. Acidificationalso could affect the abundance of mol-lusks, crustaceans, and bony fishes,which constitute important prey for ma-rine vertebrates.

2.5. Thermocline

The general prediction under climatechange scenarios is that the thermo-cline will deepen and become morestratified. A deepened thermoclinewould reduce access to food resourcesfor vertebrate predators, which areshallow divers. For instance, adult ma-rine iguanas have been recorded feed-ing on algae up to depths of 12 m, while90% of dives by Galápagos penguinsand cormorants are conducted in water

less than 6 m and 15 m deep, respec-

tively. Galápagos fur seals get their

prey at 10 to 35 m, while sea lions dive

to an average depth of 115 m.

Presently, the Galápagos thermocline is

situated at between 10 and 20 m depth.

If the thermocline were to deepen, the

shallow divers are expected to be phys-

iologically affected, and may possibly

starve. Changes in foraging behavior

also are expected, such as predators

shifting to different prey.

2.6. Surges and extreme tides

Storm surges and extreme tides are in-

frequent under present conditions, as

they are tied to earthquakes and vol-

canic eruptions. Surges and extreme

tides also occur during El Niño because

sea level is higher during these events.

The effects of surges and extreme tides

on the coastal areas will depend on the

magnitude of the surge, the area af-

fected, and the time of year. These three

factors will have to coincide to generate

a major impact at specific areas impor-

tant for marine vertebrates (e.g. nesting

areas of sea turtles, penguins, cor-

morants, and marine iguanas); and pup-

ping locations for sea lions and fur seals.

There are records of nest losses in pen-

guins and cormorants by flooding during

extreme tides and surges.

2.7. Sea temperature

The marked seasonal variation in sea

temperature probably acts as an impor-

tant factor in the synchronization and

initiation of breeding seasons to match

the availability of food resources. The

prediction under climate change scenar-

ios is for increased sea temperature,

which may affect the breeding season-

ality, in addition to reducing prey abun-

dance and availability.


74

2.8. Air temperature

The effects of air temperature are un-

known for most marine vertebrates.

However, the lower temperatures of

shady areas such as lava tubes and

large boulders appear to be important

for nesting penguins and resting fur

seals. The normal variation of air tem-

peratures seems at present fairly well

tolerated by Galápagos marine verte-

brates. However, extreme high air tem-

peratures could result in increased

stress and energy demands on species

that need to thermoregulate while on

land, such as marine iguanas, sea lions,

fur seals, and seabirds. Dehydration

could be another problem during high

temperatures in tropical environments.

Disease vectors, such as insects, also

may increase in abundance due to rising

temperatures on land and in the water,

raising the risk of disease transmission.

Disease outbreaks that resulted in a

high morbidity (but low mortality) of sea

lions were recorded in 2001 and 2006,

mostly affecting the pups. The eye-dis-

ease (conjunctivitis and parasitosis) out-

break of 2001 has subsided, but these

diseases persist today at a lower preva-

lence. High air temperatures also can

generate a favorable environment forthe breeding of introduced mosquitoes,such as the vector of avian malaria(Culex quinquefasciatus), and affect theendangered Galápagos penguin.

2.9. Upwelling

The upwelling areas in the western partof the archipelago provide reliable feed-ing conditions for marine vertebratessuch as cormorants, penguins, sea lions,fur seals, and cetaceans. However, asthis upwelling diminishes in intensityin a future warmer climate, these habi-tats will deteriorate and the marinevertebrate species that inhabit themwill become vulnerable.

2.10. Sea level rise

At present, there is no clear evidence ofan increase in sea level in the Galápa-gos. If this happens in the future, coastalflooding could impact breeding coloniesfor beach nesting species, erosion of nest-ing, pupping, and resting areas causedby coastal erosional processes. Sea levelrise also could lead to a relocation of thebreeding colonies or an increase in com-petition for breeding habitat in sea lions,fur seals, and seabirds.


75

EUN

ICE

PARK

/ W

WF

2.11. Precipitation

The amount of precipitation varies byseason: Most rain falls in the hot rainyseason (late December to April) and lessin the cool dry season (May to early De-cember). This pattern changes duringEl Niño and La Niña events, when therainy and dry seasons are extended, re-spectively. Climate models predict amore extreme climate, with warmer ElNiño events and attenuated (less cool)La Niña events. Sustained levels of hu-midity and fresh water could trigger ahigher prevalence of disease vectors,parasites, and associated diseases or in-creased predation by introduced mam-mals such as cats and rats, which arepredicted to become more abundant asprey resources increase.

2.12. Winds and oceancurrents

Changes in wind directions andstrengths likely will result in changesin ocean currents, precipitation, andthermal regime, which probably will af-fect the duration of the seasons as wellas the synchronization of the breedingseason for most marine vertebrates.

2.13. Native and introducedpredators

In general, during warm years preda-tion from sharks on Galápagos marinevertebrates appears to increase, espe-cially from unusual visitors of these wa-ters such as bull and mako sharks(Vargas, pers. obs.), probably in re-sponse to a reduced food supply. Popu-lations of land birds such as finches andGalápagos hawks generally benefit froman overabundance of food during ElNiño events. An increased hawk popu-lation could result in higher predationrates on young marine iguanas, pen-

guins, and cormorants. In fact, young

marine iguanas constitute an important

prey item of hawks on coastal Fernand-

ina Island (HV pers. obs.). Populations

of introduced predators such as cats and

rats also increase during El Niño years,

when they tend to target the eggs and

young of iguanas, penguins, and cor-

morants. Therefore, increased preda-

tion rates from both native and

introduced species are expected to occur

in a future warmer climate.

2.14. Parasites and diseases

Several new disease strains and parasite

species have been recorded in the past

ten years in Galápagos penguins, cor-

morants, and sea lions. Their preva-

lence appears to be closely associated

with changes in the local climate. This

situation is expected to worsen in a

warmer, wetter climate-change scenario.

3. CURRENT AND FUTURECLIMATE IMPACTS ANDADAPTATION MEASURES

Current and future climate changes in-

dicate an overall negative impact on

Galápagos marine vertebrates, with La

Niña and the persistence of upwelling

being the only events that probably

have a positive effect on selected verte-

brate populations (table 1). However, it

is doubtful that extreme cold events,

were they to occur, would have a bene-

ficial effect on poikilothermic organisms

such as sea turtles and marine iguanas.

Climate models suggest that the cur-

rent climatic conditions will prevail

over the next 15 years, but the intensity

of El Niño events will increase in the

next 50 years (see outputs of Chapter

1), with a significant long-term negative

effect on Galápagos marine vertebrates.


76

Based on current scientific and techno-logical knowledge, it seems feasible toimplement adaptation measures tocounteract some of the impacts of ElNiño events, extreme surge, air and seatemperature, sea level rise, and precip-itation. Novel technologies and new sci-entific knowledge are required tocounteract the current and future im-pacts of other climate factors (table 1).Adaptation measures are more feasiblefor vertebrates that spend a consider-able amount of time on land.

4. RESEARCh AGENDA FORThE DESIGN OFADAPTATION MEASURES

A research agenda should begin imme-diately to enable adaptation measuresbefore the next El Niño event, which islikely to occur within the next fouryears. The following research should beconducted:

a. Determine thermal tolerances, en-ergy budgets, and the duration of pe-riods needed for population recoveryafter mass-mortality events.

b. Assess incubation temperatures ofsea turtles to determine thresholdtemperatures to ensure the develop-ment of male individuals.

c. Determine the movements and dis-persal of Galápagos marine verte-brates outside the Galápagos regionduring El Niño and other extremeclimatic events to plan for conserva-tion needs beyond the archipelago.

d. Describe patterns of intensity andwind direction in relation to ENSOevents, which affect birds that de-pend on wind for their movements(e.g. albatrosses) or that can be ex-posed to nest failures by wind knock-ing down nests (e.g. mangrove

finches). This study also will helppredict the intensity and distributionof extreme surges.

e. Develop methodologies for the designof cavities and artificial substratesfor nesting penguins and cor-morants, and test their acceptanceby the species.

f. Monitor and evaluate tested adapta-tion measures.

g. Design modeling studies and im-prove existing models on populationtrends of the species more vulnerableto climate change.

h. Assess the likelihood of competitionbetween sardine fishermen and ma-rine vertebrates that are naturalpredators of sardines. Design man-agement actions to ban temporarilythe capture of sardines as bait dur-ing El Niño, when food for marinevertebrates is limited, and proposealternative bait.


77

MA

RTI

N H

AR

VEY

/ W

WF-

CA

NO

N


78

Table 1. Present and future climate impacts on selected Galápagos marine vertebrates and the feasibility of implementation of adaptation measures.

Climate event Period Sea Marine Sea lions Seabirds Cetaceans Adaptationturtles iguanas and fur seals measures

El Niño Present - - - - - Feasible15 years - - - - 0 Feasible50 years -- -- -- -- 0 Feasible

La Niña Present + + + + + Feasible15 years + + ++ ++ ++ Feasible50 years 0 0 0 0 0 Feasible

Acidification Present 0 0 0 0 0 Not feasible15 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?50 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?

Thermocline Present 0 0 0 0 0 Not feasible15 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?50 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?

Extreme storm Present - - - - 0 Feasiblesurge 15 years - - - - 0 Feasible

50 years -- -- -- -- 0 Feasible

Sea surface Present - - - - 0 Not feasibletemperature 15 years -- - - - 0 ?and ocean currents 50 years -- -- -- -- 0 ?

Air temperature Present - - - - 0 Feasible15 years - - - - 0 Feasible50 years -- -- -- -- 0 Feasible

Upwelling Present + + + + + Not feasible15 years - - - - - ?50 years -- -- -- -- -- ?

Sea level rise Present 0 0 0 0 0 Feasible15 years 0 0 0 0 0 Feasible50 years - - - - 0 Feasible

Rainfall Present - - - - 0 Feasible15 years 0 0 0 0 0 Feasible50 years 0 0 0 0 0 Feasible

Wind Present 0 0 0 0 0 Not feasible15 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?50 years 0 0 0 0 0 ?

Present Impacts- = Reduction in local abundance, population size, or breeding success; unbalanced sex ratio.+ = Increase in local abundance, population size, or breeding success; balanced sex ratio.0 = Insufficient information to evaluate current impacts, or impacts not evident.

Future Impacts-- = Significant reductions in biological parameters.+ + = Significant positive effects on biological parameters.0 = Insufficient information to evaluate future impacts.

Adaptation MeasuresFeasible = With current knowledge and technology, it is possible to implement adaptation measures.Not feasible = With current knowledge and technology, it appears unfeasible to implement adaptation measures.? = With future scientific and technological knowledge, it may be feasible to implement adaptation measures.

REFERENCES

Alava JJ, Salazar S. 2006. Status and conservation of otariids in Ecuador and the Galápa-gos Islands. In: Trites AW, Atkinson SK, DeMaster DP, Fritz LW, Gelatt TS, Rea LD,Wynne KM, editors. Sea Lions of the World. Fairbanks (AK): Alaska Sea Grant CollegeProgram, University of Alaska Fairbanks.

Capella JJ, Flórez-González L, Falk-Fernández P, Palacios DM. 2001. Regular appearanceof otariid pinnipeds along the Colombian Pacific coast. Aquatic Mammals 28(1):67-72.

Dellinger T, Trillmich F. 1999. Fish prey of the sympatric Galápagos fur seals and sealions: seasonal variation and niche separation. Canadian Journal of Zoology77:1204–1216.

Fariña JM, Salazar S, Wallem P, Witman J, Ellis JS. 2003. Nutrient exchanges betweenmarine and terrestrial ecosystems: the case of the Galápagos Sea Lion (Zalophus-wollebaeki). Journal of Animal Ecology 72:873–887.

Félix F, Jiménez P, Falconí J, Echeverry O. 2007. Nuevos casos y primeros nacimientosregistrados de lobos finos de Galápagos (Arctocephalus galapagoensis Heller, 1904)en la costa continental de Ecuador. Revista de Biología Marina y Oceanografía42:77–82.

Harvell CD, Mitchell CE, Ward JR, Altizer S, Dobson AP, Ostfeld RS, Samuel MD. 2002. Cli-mate warming and disease risks for terrestrial and marine biota. Science 296:2158–2162.

Horning M, Trillmich F. 1997. Ontogeny of diving behaviour in the Galápagos Fur Seal.Behaviour 134: 1211–1257.

Laurie WA. 1990. Effects of the 1982-83 El Niño-Southern Oscillation event on marineiguana (Amblyrhynchus cristatus Bell, 1825) populations on Galápagos. Global eco-logical consequences of the 1982-83 El Niño-Southern Oscillation:361-380.

Laurie WA, and Brown D. 1990. Population biology of marine iguanas (Amblyrhynchuscristatus). III. Factors affecting survival. Journal of Animal Biology 59:545-568.

Levin II, Outlaw DC, Vargas FH, Parker PG. 2009. Plasmodium blood parasite found inendangered Galápagos penguins (Spheniscus mendiculus). Biological Conservation142:3191-3195.


79

i. Monitor the impact of tourist-boat

lights on insects. Research the use of

technological options that do not at-

tract insects and prevent the trans-

portation and introduction of insects

among islands.

j. Produce vulnerability maps of nest-

ing areas of marine iguanas, sea tur-

tles, penguins, and cormorants to

anticipate possible flooding during

extreme surges.

k. Use flooding models under various

scenarios of sea level rise to produce

vulnerability maps that evaluate the

potential loss of breeding-area quality.

l. Assess future scenarios of ocean-cur-

rent shifts at the Galápagos regional

scale, as these shifts could alter theecosystems and habitat quality ofmarine vertebrates.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Conservation Internationaland WWF for organizing and invitingus to the workshop “Climate ChangeVulnerability Assessment of Biodiver-sity and Human Well-Being in theGalápagos Islands.” We are also grate-ful to the other participants in the ma-rine vertebrate working group in-cluding Carlos Drews, Mariana Vera,Judith Denkinger, Annika Krutwa, andMaría Claudia Díaz-Granados.

Merlen G, Salazar S. 2007. Estado y efectos antropogénicos en los mamíferos marinosde Galápagos. In: Action Plan for Protection of Marine and Coastal Environments ofthe Southeast Pacific. Workshop proceedings of the impacts of anthropogenic ac-tivities in Marine Mammals in the Southeast Pacific. p. 70–76.

Palacios DM. 2003. Oceanographic conditions around the Galápagos Archipelago andtheir influence on cetacean community structure [dissertation]. Corvallis (OR): Ore-gon State University.

Palacios DM, Salazar S. 2002. Cetáceos. In: Danulat E, Edgar GJ, editors. Reserva Marinade Galápagos, Línea Base de la Biodiversidad. Santa Cruz, Galápagos, Ecuador: Fun-dación Charles Darwin/Servicio Parque Nacional Galápagos. p. 291-304

Palacios DM, Félix F, Flórez-González L, Cappela JJ, Chiluiza D, Haase BJM. 1997. Sight-ings of Galápagos sea lion (Zalophus californianus wollebaeki) on the coasts ofColombia and Ecuador. Mammalia 61:114–116.

Salazar S. 2002. Lobos marinos y peleteros. In: Danulat E, Edgar G, editors. Reserva Ma-rina de Galápagos. Línea Base de la Biodiversidad. Santa Cruz, Galápagos, Ecuador:Charles Darwin Foundation and Servicio Parque Nacional Galápagos, Puerto Ayora.p. 260–283

Salazar S, Bustamante R. 2003. The El Niño 1997–98 effects on the Galápagos Sea Lion.Noticias de Galápagos 62:40–45.

Salazar S, Banks S, Milstead B. 2008. Health and population status of the Galápagos sealion and fur seal (Zalophus wollebaeki and Arctocephalus galapagoensis). CharlesDarwin Foundation. Final Report (September 2005 - December 2007) presented toSielmann Foundation and GNP.

Steinfurth A, Vargas FH, Wilson RP, Spindler M, Macdonald DW. 2007. Space use by for-aging Galápagos penguins during chick-rearing. Endangered Species Research. DOI10.3354/esr00046.

Trillmich F. 1990. The behavioural ecology of maternal effort in fur seals and sea lions.Behaviour 114:3–20.

Trillmich F, Dellinger T. 1991. The effects of El Niño on Galápagos pinnipeds. In: TrillmichF, Ono KA, editors. The Ecological Effects of El Niño on Otariids and Phocids: Re-sponses of Marine Mammals to Environmental Stress. Berlin: Springer. p. 66–74.

Trillmich F, Rea L, Castellini M, Wolf JBW. 2008. Age-related changes in hematocrit in theGalápagos sea lion (Zalophus wollebaeki) and the Weddell seal (Leptonychotes wed-dellii). Marine Mammal Science 24:303–314.

Valle CA, Coulter MC. 1987. Present status of the Flightless Cormorant, Galápagos pen-guin and Greater Flamingo populations in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador after the1982-83 El Niño. Condor 89:276-289.

Vargas FH, Harrison S, Rea S, and Macdonald DW. 2006. Biological effects of El Niño onthe Galápagos penguin. Biological Conservation 127:107-114.

Vargas FH. 2006. The ecology of small population of birds in a changing climate. [disser-tation]. Oxford: University of Oxford.

Vargas FH, Lacy RC, Johnson PJ, Steinfurth A, Crawford RJM., Boersma PD. MacdonaldDW. 2007. Modeling the effect of El Niño on the persistence of small populations:The Galápagos penguin as a case study. Biological Conservation 137:138-14.

Villegas-Amtmann S, Costa DP, Tremblay Y, Salazar S, Aurioles-Gamboa D. 2008. Multipleforaging strategies in a marine apex predator, the Galápagos sea lion (Zalophuswollebaeki). Marine Ecology Progress 363:299–309.

Wilson RP, Vargas FH, Steinfurth A, Riordan P, Roupert-Coudert Y, Macdonald DW. 2008.What grounds some birds for life? Movement and diving in the sexually dimorphicGalápagos Cormorant. Ecological Monographs 78(4):633-652.

Wolf JBW, Trillmich F. 2007. Beyond habitat requirements: individual fine-scale site fi-delity in a colony of the Galápagos sea lion (Zalophuswollebaeki) creates conditionsfor social structuring. Oecologia 152:553–567.

Worm B, Barbier EB, Beaumont N, Duffy JE, Folke C, Halpern BS, Jackson JBC, Lotze HK,Micheli F, Palumbi SR, Sala E, Selkoe KA, Stachowicz JJ, Watson R. 2006. Impacts ofbiodiversity loss on ocean ecosystem services. Science 314:787-790.


80

CHAPTER 5

Dealing with Climate Change in the Galápagos:Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors

Diego Quiroga1, Carlos Mena

1, Leah Karrer

2, Haruna Suzuki

1,

Alexandra Guevara1and Juan Carlos Murillo

1

1. Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Galápagos Institute for the Arts and Sciences (GAIAS),Ecuador.

2. Conservation International, USA.

WW

F-U

S / S

TEV

E M

ORE

LLO

1. ExECUTIVE SUMMARY

Currently, an estimated 25,000 people live in the Galápagos Is-lands. They depend directly or indirectly on the ecosystem, whichprovides resources and supports the cultural services that in-creasingly form the basis of the local economy. By affecting keyecosystem processes and emblematic species, climate changecould influence the wellbeing of all people who live in the islands.

In this study, we analyzed the potential impacts of climate changeon tourism and fisheries:

a. While tourism in Galápagos has shifted from specialized naturetourists to generic nature tourists, nature remains the primaryreason that tourists travel to the islands. Because tourists aredrawn by a number of emblematic species, significant adverse ef-fects on the tourism industry are expected if many emblematicspecies go extinct because of climate change. Tourism is criticalto the Galápagos economy, employing a large and increasing pro-portion of residents. Loss of nature tourists would mean loss ofthe majority of international tourists, who spend more money, onaverage, than national tourists. A further negative effect of de-clining tourism is that tourism provides funds for conservationefforts, and loss of that funding may contribute to further de-clines in ecosystem health. However, people in the tourism sectorappear to have a relatively strong capacity to adapt to climatechange because of their transferable skills, including strong lan-guage and communication skills; high education levels; strong in-stitutional and social networks to support them during hardship;generally solid financial resources; access to credit; and relativelyhigh economic capital.

b. Fisheries are a small percentage of the Galápagos economy, ac-counting for less than 4% of gross product (Watkins and Cruz2007) and 3.55% of employment, according to the Galápagos Cen-sus 2006. Therefore, any adverse effects on fisheries will havelimited implications for the larger economy. However, peoplewithin the industry—especially those who fish for sea cucumber,spiny lobster, and coastal demersal fish—will be adversely af-fected. The fisheries sector has a moderately strong ability toadapt, with the advantages that fishermen have strong social andinstitutional support, access to some credit, and 90% of fishermenhave alternative livelihoods. Vulnerabilities include relativelylow levels of education, language skills, communication capacity,and existing financial resources.

We recommend the following steps tosupport tourism and fisheries in theface of climate change:

A. Enhance resiliency of species andhabitats.

For tourism:

a. Protect the species that attract in-ternational tourists to the Galápa-gos (tortoises, sea turtles, marineiguanas, penguins, blue-footedboobies, sea lions, and land igua-nas) and the ecosystems that sup-port them.

b. Develop tourism business strate-gies to address the uncertaintysurrounding climate change.

For fisheries:

a. Establish sustainable manage-ment measures for demersal fish.Improve conservation efforts forseamounts, mangroves, and otherkey areas.

b. Protect sea cucumber, spiny lob-ster, and demersal species fromoverfishing, as these species arethe most vulnerable to climatechange.

c. Establish sustainable manage-ment regulations for pelagicspecies that may not be heavily

fished at present, but could becomemore important due to climatechange.

B. Enhance people’s adaptive capacity.

a. Promote diversification of liveli-hood activities, particularly withinthe tourism sector where diversifi-cation is currently low.

b. Strengthen education, particularlyamong fishermen.

2. INTRODUCTION

Around the world, people seek to under-stand the socioeconomic implications ofclimate change, including likely effectson the economy, strategies to minimizenegative consequences, and ways toadapt to inevitable impacts. The Galápa-gos Islands provide an excellent casestudy for understanding climate changeeffects on biodiversity and human well-being because of the importance of na-ture to fisheries and tourism, therelative isolation of the islands, and thewell studied local impacts of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) climaticphenomenon. ENSO events could be aproxy to understand the possible effectsof climate extremes that might result

Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors │ ChAPTER 5

83

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

from climate change, and ENSO eventscould themselves increase and becomemore intense with climate change.

Other chapters in this publication dis-cuss the effects of climate change onecosystems. In this chapter, we analyzethe potential socioeconomic effects ofthese ecosystem changes. Given the closelinkage between nature and society,these effects could be significant. Under-standing the sensitivity of the tourismand fisheries sectors to climate changeand the adaptive capacity of each to ad-dress these changes is essential for thedevelopment of present and future man-agement strategies. More broadly, thisassessment will be critical in gaining po-litical and public attention to the actionsneeded to address climate change.

The focus of this chapter is to examinehow tourism and fisheries —two of themost nature-based activities in theGalápagos Islands— will be affected byclimate change and to what extent wecan expect these industries to be able toadapt to these impacts. The chapterconcludes with recommendations forhelping these sectors, as well as thelarger Galápagos society, adapt to cli-mate change.

3. METhODS

Analyzing the potential effects of cli-mate change on economies is a rela-tively new field. In developing themethodology for this study, we focusedon two critical issues: (1) the likely ef-fects of climate-related ecosystemchanges on tourism and fisheries, and(2) the ability of these sectors to adaptto these effects. This approach comple-ments global analyses examining sensi-tivity based on (1) employment andeconomic dependence and (2) adaptive

capacity based on health, education,governance, and size of the economy(Allison et al. 2009).

Likely effects of climate-relatedecosystem changes on tourism andfisheries: For the first component of thestudy, we analyzed the level of economicand social importance of fisheries andnature-based tourism. In particular, weexamined the role of species and habi-tats in each sector to determine how thepredicted climate change effects on thesespecies and habitats, as discussed inother chapters, might affect fisheriesand tourism. To do so, we investigatedwhich species and habitats are most im-portant to (a) fisheries, based on fish-eries data and the biology of key species,and (b) tourism, based on tourists’ rea-


84

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

sons for visiting the Galápagos. We thenexamined the levels of employment andeconomic dependence associated withthese two sectors, as measured by em-ployment statistics and the percentageof the Galápagos economy attributed toeach sector. These data served as an in-dicator of the sectors’ sensitivity tochange. As part of this analysis, we alsoconsidered (a) differences between thecontributions of national versus interna-tional tourists to the economy, and (b)the contribution of fisheries and tourismto other economic sectors.

Ability of tourism and fisheries sec-tors to adapt to climate-related ef-fects: For the second component of thestudy, we examined variables indicativeof people’s ability to adapt to new eco-nomic situations. These variables in-clude: level of education, languageskills, social and institutional supportnetworks, access to alternative liveli-hoods, investment in the current sector,and Internet communication skills.

We used multiple methods to examinethese variables, which ensured triangu-lation of information, and obtainedquantitative data for statistical analy-ses and qualitative data for an in-depthunderstanding of the issues.

Literature review: To minimize dupli-cation of previous research and to max-imize our understanding of the issues,we conducted a literature review thatincluded materials from governmentagencies, private businesses, non-gov-ernmental organizations, and peer-re-viewed journals (see References andAdditional Literature).

Tourist surveys1: We interviewed 400Galápagos-bound tourists in the Quitoairport over a 5-day period using astructured interview guide. This samplewas statistically representative of

tourists visiting Galápagos during themonth of August.

2The purpose of the

interviews was to determine what at-tracted tourists to the islands. To obtaina general sense of the type of tourismpresently occurring in the Galápagos,we asked visitors what types of activi-ties (e.g. observation of wildlife, adven-ture sports, and nightlife) were centralto their visit, and also asked them toauto-identify the types of tourists theyare (e.g. tourist with general interest inand knowledge of Galápagos wildlife,tourist with specialized knowledge ofGalápagos species and habitats, andvisitor interested in adventure sports).Tourists also ranked the importance ofspecific species to their decision to visit,which allowed us to identify the speciesmost critical for tourism, and thus theimplications for Galápagos tourism asclimate change affect these species.

Key-informant interviews: We useda “snowball” sampling scheme to select35 key informants, defined as peopleknown and respected for their knowl-edge on the issue and often representa-tive of the community. Snowballsampling uses references from key in-formants to identify individuals withparticular characteristics to be inter-viewed. This method identifies a set ofinformants that form a social network.The purpose of these interviews was todetermine the adaptive capacities of thetourism and fisheries sectors based ontheir social, economic, and cultural cap-ital. We interviewed each key informantfor approximately one hour using semi-structured questionnaires.


85

1. Survey questionnaire and other information availableupon request to author.

2. The sample size is based on a total population of11,389 tourists who entered Galápagos during August2008. The results were obtained with a 95% confidencelevel.

In addition, guides, conservationists,and tourism experts attending the Cli-mate Change Vulnerability AssessmentExpert Workshop in April 2009 were in-terviewed about the types of touristspresently seen in the Galápagos andpossible effects of climate change ontourist visitation.

household survey: We conducted ahousehold survey on the three mainpopulated islands: Santa Cruz, SanCristobal, and Isabela. The purpose ofthe survey was to determine key socioe-conomic and demographic characteris-tics—at a very low level of socialorganization (i.e., household)—that de-termine adaptive capacity and vulnera-bility. The survey included 365households, which is statistically repre-sentative of the population,

3and col-

lected information on 1,397 people. Weselected street blocks randomly andthen determined, based on block size,the number of houses to be sampled.Less than 1% of the respondents re-jected the survey. This percentage waslower than expected, considering thehigh occurrence of surveys in the is-

lands as well as the 2006 GalápagosCensus,

4which might have caused re-

spondent fatigue.

4. CLIMATE ChANGEEFFECTS ONTOURISM

Other chapters in this publication ex-amine the possible effects of climatechange on different ecosystems andtheir functional biodiversity. We nowconsider how these changes may subse-quently affect tourism. First, we exam-ine the likely impacts on touristvisitation given the importance of na-ture to tourism. Then we consider theeffects of climate change on the Galápa-gos economy and the people engaged inthe tourism industry.

4.1. Sensitivity: Importanceof Nature to Tourism

The opportunity to see emblematicspecies is one of the central reasons thattourists visit the Galápagos Islands,making it critical to understand poten-tial impacts of climate change onecosystem health. In tourist surveys,81.3% of respondents ranked wildlife as“very important/may not have comeotherwise” to their decision to visit theGalápagos, and an additional 6.75%ranked wildlife as “important, althoughnot critical” to their decision (table 1).Furthermore, 17 of the 18 species in-cluded in the questionnaire wereranked as “very important/may nothave come otherwise” by at least 33% ofrespondents (table 2).


86

3. The sample was established based on a confidence in-terval of 95%, which measures the probability of cover-age for the parameters to be estimated with an errorestablished. The error was a maximum of 5%, whichmeasures the level of uncertainty in relation to the pa-rameter. A rate of “no response” of 10% was also de-fined. If we assume that the proportion of householdsto be surveyed is p and the sample achieves an estima-tion p, then: P(│p - p│<0.05)=0.95We used the following formula for the calculation ofthe sample size for a proportion:

Where: p =0.5, the value with generated maximumvariability; N is the population size, the number ofhouseholds in the province; d is the sampling error(0.05); and Z value is 95% (z=1.96). The final sample in-cludes 190 household surveys in Santa Cruz, 110 in SanCristobal and 69 in Isabela, for a total of 360. This is arepresentative sample of Galápagos households, withan over-sampling of Isabela and San Cristobal Islands,and with adjustments to Santa Cruz.

4. 2006 Galápagos Census is a de jure census that collecteddata only on permanent residents of Galápagos, regard-less of their place of residence at the time the censuswas taken. Data was therefore not collected on visitors,temporary workers, and undocumented workers.

)-(1)1(d

)-(1

2

2

2

2

2

ππ

ππ

α

α

ZN

ZNn

+−=


87

Table 1. Importance of activities to Galápagos tourists.

Not important at all/ Important but Very important/may not No answer no influence not critical have come otherwise

Viewing wildlife 2.34 6.75 81.3 9.61

Photography 3.90 23.12 60.52 12.47

Snorkeling 11.43 36.36 35.84 16.36

Beaches 18.96 38.96 28.31 13.77

Diving 42.60 21.56 16.88 18.96

Kayaking 53.51 20.52 4.42 21.56

Surfing 66.23 9.87 2.34 21.56

Nightlife 62.08 15.32 2.34 20.26

Fishing 67.53 8.31 2.08 22.08

Other 0.52 1.04 4.42 94.03

Table 2. Importance of species to Galápagos tourists.

Not important at all/ Important but Very important/may not No answer no influence not critical have come otherwise

Tortoise 4.2 16.4 65.7 13.8

Sea turtles 2.3 19.0 64.9 13.8

Marine iguana 4.4 24.4 57.1 14.0

Blue-footed booby 5.5 23.4 57.1 14.0

Penguin 4.2 26.5 55.6 13.8

Sea lion 5.7 29.9 52.7 11.7

Land iguanas 6.5 27.8 52.5 13.2

Red-footed booby 6.5 30.9 47.8 14.8

Lava lizard 10.1 30.9 43.4 15.6

Masked booby 8.1 34.8 39.5 17.7

Albatross 9.6 34.8 39.0 16.6

Galápagos hawk 10.4 34.8 38.4 16.4

Flamingo 12.7 36.4 36.4 14.5

Frigate bird 13.5 35.1 35.8 15.6

Sharks 13.2 35.6 33.8 17.4

Reef fish 10.4 38.7 33.8 17.1

Flightless cormorant 13.2 36.9 32.5 17.4

Finches 12.2 42.1 28.3 17.4

Other 0.3 0.5 1.6 97.7


88

Table 3. Importance of species to tourism; effects of El Niño events on these species; anticipated effects of climate change and overall

expected change in species population from climate change.

Species Previous El Niño effects (indicative of climate changeeffects)

Tortoise 65.7 During the 1997–98 El Niño, tor-toises drowned in floods, andsome died from falling downravines. Reproduction declineddue to increased vegetation andwet soils, which lowered soil tem-peratures and made nests unvi-able, and also due to introducedmammals (e.g. rats) and insects(e.g. fire ants) that attacked andkilled hatchlings (Snell and Rea1999).

Sea turtles 64.9 The 1982–83 El Niño led to a con-siderable drop in green turtle nest-ing at various beaches from400–800 individuals per beach tofewer than 50 individuals perbeach (CDF 2009).

Marine iguana 57.1 The 1982–83 El Niño resulted inpopulation crashes of up to 90% insome populations (Steinfartz et al.2007 in CDF 2009). Hatchling mor-tality was reportedly as high as90%, with an overall 45–70% mor-tality; populations subsequentlyrecovered with an increase in fer-tility. Llerena et al. 2004 reportednegative impacts after the 1997–98 El Niño, with recovery over fouryears (CDF 2009).

Importance totourism indicatedby % tourists whonoted species as“very important/may not havecome otherwise”

Anticipated effect of climate change (see other biodiversity chapters)

Expectedchanges

High air temperatureinduces migrations tolower elevations. Tem-perature and rainfallvariation affects thesoil rendering nestsunviable. Increase ininvasive species (e.g.fire ants) reduceshatchling survivalthrough predation.

Uncertain

Warmer temperatures(above 30°C) will affectnesting eggs, favoringthe birth of more fe-males and consequentlyadversely affecting pop-ulations. In addition, de-clines in macroalgae willlimit diets, and beacherosion from sea-levelrise will adversely affectnesting sites.

Decline

Marine iguana num-bers are expected tosuffer significantly,principally due to de-creases in macroalgae,marine iguana’s majorfood source, and de-creases in the strengthof ocean upwelling.

Decline

Source: Juan Carlos Murillo, pers. comm.


89

Species Previous El Niño effects (indicative of climate changeeffects)

Penguin 55.6 This species experienced populationcrashes of 77% and 65% after the1982–83 and 1997–98 El Niñoevents (Vargas et al. 2006 in CDF2009). By the 1987 El Niño, the pop-ulation was only approximately halfas large as it had been in the early1970s (Boersma 1998 in CDF 2009).Increased temperatures and rainfallfavor pathogens such as Plasmod-ium, which have been detected al-ready in penguins. It has beenestimated that the Galápagos pen-guin has a 30% probability of ex-tinction within the next century(Vargas et al. 2006 in CDF 2009).

Blue-footed ooby 57.1 During the 1982–83 and 1986–87 El Niños, breeding colonies wereabandoned and attempts at repro-duction were unsuccessful (Valle etal. 1987; Anderson 1989 in CDF2009).

Sea lion 52.7 While different colonies respondeddifferently to El Niño events, allcolonies experienced significantdrops in population numbers. Dur-ing the 1982–83 El Niño, high pupmortality was observed (Trillmichand Limberger 1985). Pup produc-tion in 1983 was less than 30% ofnormal on the majority of islands, although wide variation betweencolonies was also noted (Trillmichand Limberger 1985). During the1997–98 El Niño, a 50% decline inthe sea lion population was ob-served, owing to 35% mortality and 15% relocation to other sites(Salazar and Bustamante 2003 inCDF 2009).

Land iguanas 52.5 Land iguanas are adapted to sea-sonal rain variation and rely on an-nual rainfall for nesting and survivalof young (Snell and Tracy 1985).Therefore, they may be adversely affected by reductions in rainfall.Also, increases in the spatial distri-bution of tropical fire ants during El Niño events have posed a threatto land iguanas’ nesting sites.

The weakening of theEcuadorian Undercur-rent will adversely af-fect penguins andother cold-water-adapted species. Thisweakening will cause areduction of nutrientsand food for many ma-rine species.

Decline;extinctionlikely

High average air tempera-tures induce blue-footedboobies’ migrations, increase adult mortality,and reduce reproductivesuccess.

The weakening of the Ecuadorian Under-current will adversely affect cold-water-adapted species. The lowering of thethermocline couldmean that sea lions willnot be able to accesstheir sources of food.

Uncertain

Increase in rainfall hasa negative effect on re-production (i.e., fewer,smaller eggs) andgrowth of egg-layingfemales.

Decline

Uncertain

Importance to tourism indicated by %tourists whonoted species as“very important/may not havecome otherwise”

Anticipated effect of climate change (see other biodiversity chapters)

Expectedchanges

4.2. Sensitivity: AnticipatedEffects on Tourism ofChanges in EmblematicSpecies

The seven most critical species fortourism (i.e., more than 50% of touristsindicated the species are “very impor-tant/may not have come otherwise”)were tortoises, sea turtles, marineiguana, penguin, blue-footed booby, sealion, and land iguanas. All seven are ex-pected to decline due to climate change(table 3). Despite these declines, we ex-pect tourism to endure in the Galápagosbecause of tourists’ broader interest innature.

More than half of the tourists surveyedindicated that emblematic species werecritical to their decision to visit and thatthey may not have traveled to the Galá-pagos otherwise. However, the experi-ence of naturalist guides, conserva-tionists, and other experts who werepresent at the climate change workshoporganized by Conservation Interna-

tional and WWF, some of whom wereinterviewed by our research team, indi-cates that most tourists will not stopcoming if some of the emblematicspecies disappear. They noted that, un-like in the past, and although nature re-mains a priority reason for visiting,most tourists are not knowledgeableabout specific species and habitats. Thisopinion is supported by the shift towardgeneric nature tourists and tourismthat includes the Galápagos as part ofa broader package. Our tourist surveysreported three times as many genericnature tourists (34% of tourists identi-fied themselves as visitors enjoying na-ture in general) compared to expertnature tourists (13% of tourists de-scribed themselves as having more spe-cialized knowledge of certain speciesand places) (figure 1). The remaining53% comprised people traveling to theGalápagos as part of a longer trip in theregion (38%), visitors interested in ad-venture sports (3%), people visitingfriends or family (2%), visitors withouta personal interest in the Galápagos but


90

Visitor that comes tovisit friends or family

2%

Visitor that istraveling around

Ecuador or SouthAmerica and

Galapagos is a partof a larger tour

39%

Visitor enjoying naturein general, no specific

objective andknowledgeable about

certain species orplaces34%

Visitor that thas specificknowledge aboutcertain species or

places13%

Other9%

Visitor that comes foradventure sports

3%

Figure 1. Types of Galápagos tourists.

traveling with friends or family (1%),and others who either did not answer ordid not fit into any of the given cate-gories (9%).

Given the shift toward generic naturetourism, we believe that declines insome emblematic species will not resultin significant drops in tourist visitation.Rather, the Galápagos will experiencerelatively stable tourism numbers oreven an increase in visitation, as longas generic nature tourists and visitorsseeking adventure and water sportscontinue traveling to the Galápagos.During El Niño years, when speciessuch as penguins and marine iguanassuffered population crashes, guidesnoted that tourism continued largelyunaffected. Only in the event of athreshold effect in which severe climatechange leads to the extinction of many

emblematic species will there be signif-icant decreases in tourist visitation,owing mainly to a loss of generic naturetourism (i.e. not knowledgeable aboutspecies or ecosystems).

While our surveys indicate that nature-based tourism remains a large, criticalcomponent of the Galápagos tourismeconomy, non-nature tourism (tourismbased on beaches and relaxation) andadventure and sports tourism (tourismbased on activities such as kayaking orsport fishing) also draw people to the is-lands. These types of tourism may notbe as sensitive to climate change as na-ture-based tourism, and they providesome income for the local population.However, they constitute only a smallpercentage of Galápagos tourism atpresent (see table 1 and figure 1), and ifthey were to grow, the long-term impli-cations for economic viability would beadverse. As Watkins and Cruz (2007)indicate, adventure and sport tourismwill attract clients only in the short

term. Eventually, the Galápagos willneed to compete with other destinationsthat can offer the same activities atmore economical costs. While someprices could be reduced, the isolated lo-cation of the Galápagos would make itdifficult to offer truly competitive rates.Furthermore, although some nationaltourists visit the archipelago for relax-ation and the enjoyment of its beachesrather than the viewing of local wildlife,their numbers are minimal in compari-son to generic nature tourists, and someof them may begin to consider less ex-pensive beach options on the mainlandor in neighboring countries.

4.3. Sensitivity: Importanceof Tourism Sector toEconomy andEmployment

As previously discussed, sensitivity ofthe tourism sector and the larger Galá-pagos society to climate change will de-pend on the severity of impacts onemblematic species. While climatechange events that result in the de-cline or extinction of some emblematicspecies may only affect the tourismsector and the larger Galápagos econ-omy marginally, climate events result-ing in the extinction of manyemblematic species would have sweep-ing negative effects. Generic naturetourism would collapse, leading togreat losses of revenue and sources ofemployment. Currently, tourism rev-enues make up 77% of the Galápagoseconomy (Epler 2007) and total an es-timated US$65 million annually (Epler2007; Taylor et al. 2006). The tourismsector employs approximately 40% ofGalápagos residents (Kerr et al. 2004).Survey results revealed that 55.7% ofpeople involved in the tourism sectorfeel that the activity has improved


91

their income, which suggests potentialreductions in living standards iftourism were to decline.

Residents of Santa Cruz would be mostaffected by changes in visitation andspending. The tourism sector is concen-trated on this island, with 50% of SantaCruz residents employed in tourism(figure 2). Most of the live-aboard boattours, from which the greatest revenuesare generated, are based on this island,and 40% of these operations are run bylocal businesspeople (Taylor et al. 2006in Watkins and Cruz 2007). In contrastto Santa Cruz, San Cristobal is home tothe provincial government seat, and itseconomy has depended mainly on thepublic sector since the 1970s (Wilen etal. 2000). On Isabela, fishing is still animportant economic activity, althoughin recent years both San Cristobal andIsabela have opened up more to tourismwith the development of new hotels andactivities. On Isabela, according to the2006 Census, 8.6% of the populationworked in hotels and restaurants(7.91% in fishing).

According to our tourist surveys, cur-rently foreign tourists are mostly genericnature tourists, whereas Ecuadoriantourists are both generic nature and non-nature visitors. The disappearance ofmany emblematic species will mean aloss of the majority of internationaltourists, which in turn will result in sub-stantial economic losses for Galápagostourism and the local economy. Nationaltourists spend a far higher percentage oftheir budget locally with a variety of ven-dors, leading to a multiplier effect (Taylorand Yúnez-Naude 1999). On the otherhand, international tourists—who spendan average of US$4,180 in the islands(Taylor et al. 2006)—have a greater im-pact on the economy, as they tend tospend more money than the average na-tional tourist (Taylor et al. 2006). Touristinterviews revealed that 37% of foreigntourists spend between US$2,000 andUS$4,000, and 35% spend more thanUS$4,000. In contrast, 78% of nationaltourists spend less than US$2,000, andsome spend as little as US$500 in totalfor airfare, transportation, food, accom-modations and activities.


92

Santa Cruz

San Cristobal

Isabela

Other

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Loca

tion

Number

Figure 2. Location of tourism companies in the Galápagos.

Source: Hardner and Gómez 2004.

The tourism sector would experience aloss of revenue not only in the Galápa-gos but also on the mainland. Hotelsand tours on the continent, domesticairfare between the islands and themainland, and local travel agenciesgross approximately US$100 millionannually (Epler 2007).

What is more, the effects of climatechange on the tourism economy couldextend beyond the tour operators.Tourism provides money for conserva-tion efforts, generating revenues for theGalápagos National Park, other localgovernment institutions, and local en-vironmental organizations. Since theenactment in 1988 of the Law of theSpecial Regime for the Conservationand Sustainable Development of theProvince of Galápagos (LOREG), moremoney from tourism has remained inthe archipelago as a whole, but most no-tably in political, administrative, andconservation institutions (Grenier2008). In 2006, an estimated US$36.5million was spent on the maintenanceof government institutions at variouslevels (Diaz Guevara 2006 in Watkinsand Cruz 2007). Approximately 40% ofthis budget derives from the tourismsector and the remaining 60% from thecentral government (Diaz Guevara2006 in Watkins and Cruz 2007).

Another important complication oftourism sensitivity relates to the shiftin the tourism industry from nature tonon-nature tourism. This shift is al-ready occurring and may accelerate asnature opportunities decline. Thischange might make the Galápagos lesscompetitive and could lead to an unde-sirable cycle of cost-cutting and exces-sive growth (Watkins and Cruz 2007).Climate change also can cause changesin visitation patterns. It is predictedthat as temperatures in tropical areas

such as the Galápagos increase, touristswill begin to choose destinations withhigher altitudes and latitudes wherethe climate is more attractive (Simpsonet al. 2008). Severe weather, diseases,and carbon quotas also may make trop-ical destinations less desirable.

4.4. Adaptive Capacityof the Tourism Sector

In studying the adaptive capacity ofpeople in the tourism sector, includingboat tour operators, hotel and restau-rant owners, land transportationproviders, and guides, we found thatthis sector possesses various types ofcapital that will help them adapt tochanges in tourist visitation and spend-ing. In terms of cultural capital, peoplein the tourism sector have relativelyhigh education levels in comparison tothe rest of Ecuador. Nearly 40% oftourism respondents in the householdsurvey completed high school, and aquarter have university or graduate de-grees, compared to 22% and 18% re-spectively at the national level in 2001.People with higher education levelsgenerally have more transferable skillsand can earn more in the workplace. Inaddition, they have access to better op-portunities both within and outsidetheir home countries. Surveys also re-vealed that nearly 32% of respondentsspeak at least one language in additionto Spanish. Knowing multiple lan-guages can give a person a competitiveadvantage, as it allows access to differ-ent opportunities locally and abroad.All respondents indicated that they areknowledgeable about and regularly usethe Internet.

With regard to economic capital, ourqualitative study revealed that peoplein the tourism sector have relatively


93

solid financial standing. In addition toowning a house in the islands, somealso have a house on the mainland.Banking and access to credit throughformal institutions also are highly im-portant in terms of their adaptive ca-pacity. In the qualitative study, allinformants reported having a checkingaccount and access to credit in theBanco del Pacífico (Pacific Bank).Some people in the tourism sector haveeven made alliances with individualsoutside of the islands to access fundsfor implementing their tourism proj-ects.

Many tourism workers have large so-cial networks that include family andfriends in the islands and on the conti-nent. Some have international ties andfriends in different countries. Ourstudy also showed that many people inthe tourism sector belong to a formal

tourism association that certifies themto perform activities as tour guides,hotel owners, or tourism agents; all ofthese extended networks provide emo-tional and economic support. However,the tourism sector has few stronggrassroots organizations that couldprovide assistance, information, andstrategies to help people to deal withclimate change. There are some excep-tions, such as grassroots networks oftour guides.

Many people involved in tourism in theGalápagos have alternative livelihoods(figure 3), indicating a general adaptivecapacity. However, the picture is differ-ent when one looks at specific islands.Thus, one serious disadvantage for theadaptive capacity of tourism is thatmore than 56% of people in tourism onSanta Cruz—where tourism is concen-trated—do not have alternative sources


94

Has at least one other economic activity 35 %65 %

Only employed in tourism

Table 4. Percentage of tourism workers engaged in alternative economic activities.

Alternative Economic Activities San Cristobal Isabela Santa Cruz

Do not have other economic activity 11.1 N/A 56.0

Owner of business 11.1 N/A 4.0

Manual labor N/A 11.1 N/A

Professional labor N/A N/A 8.0

Service or construction N/A 11.1 N/A

Taxi driver or marine transportation 11.1 33.3 N/A

Commerce N/A N/A 16.0

Other 66.7 44.4 20.0

Figure 3. Livelihood dependency of people employed in tourism industry.

of income. The lack of alternative liveli-hoods makes them heavily dependenton the tourism industry and limits theiradaptive capacity. Among those onSanta Cruz with another source of in-come were hotel owners who also owneda small boat, store, or business. In con-trast, people in the tourism sector onSan Cristobal and Isabela are better offin this respect, as 89% on San Cristobaland 100% on Isabela have a secondsource of income. Still, some of theseSan Cristobal and Isabela residentswith alternative livelihoods will be af-fected to some extent because secondaryjobs in transportation and local busi-nesses have tourists as part of theirclientele.

5. CLIMATE ChANGEEFFECTS ONFIShERIES

In this section, we consider the poten-tial impacts on fisheries of biodiversitychanges resulting from climate change.First, we analyze the importance offisheries to the economy and employ-ment in the Galápagos. Next, we exam-ine the likely impacts of climate changeon fish stocks, discussing species inorder of importance to employment andthe local economy. Finally, we considerthe adaptive capacity of the fishermenand the industry.

5.1. Sensitivity: Importanceof Fishing Industry tothe Economy andEmployment

Fisheries by nature are highly depend-ent on marine ecosystem health. Con-sequently, it is expected that climatechange effects (positive or negative) on

ecosystem health will directly affect

this industry. Fishing intensity and

the number of fishermen in the Galá-

pagos increased from the late 1990s to

the early 2000s, driven by demand

from a growing population, a growing

tourism industry, and international

markets. Sea cucumbers are still

highly prized by Asian markets as food

and aphrodisiacs, and though illegal,

shark finning is practiced to satisfy

Asian markets. Lobsters are mainly

exported to the United States, but they

also are consumed within the islands

and on the mainland. The establish-

ment and growth of locally based

tourism over the last three decades

also has created a high demand for fish

and other marine species such as slip-

pery lobster, octopus, and conch.

Between 1999 and 2006, the number of

registered fishermen increased from

795 to 1,006 (figure 1), and the fishing

fleet doubled. It is estimated that cur-

rently there are between 436 and 466

active fishermen (Moreno 2007 in Cas-

trejón 2008). Fisheries in the Galápa-

gos account for an annual income of

approximately five to six million dol-

lars (Taylor et al. 2006). Isabela is

most dependent on fishing for employ-

ment, but even there fishing consti-

tutes only 7.91% of employment (INEC

2006).

Presently, the economic significance of

this sector compared to others, includ-

ing tourism, is small (table 5). Fishing

constitutes less than 4% of the Galá-

pagos economy (Watkins and Cruz

2007), and employs 4.92% of people in

San Cristobal, 7.91% in Isabela and

2.29% in Santa Cruz. In all three is-

lands, fishing is one of the least com-

mon sources of employment (INEC

2006).


95


96

1971

Num

ber

of

Fish

erm

en

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

156

156

392

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

Year

Fishermenregistered inthe GalapagosNational Park

SeaCucumberfishermen

Lobsterfishermen

455 457

613682

978 997 1001 1006

1115

919

795 834

Table 5. Economic activities in San Cristobal, Isabela, and Santa Cruz Islands.

Economic activity % of population employed in sectorSan Cristobal Isabela Santa Cruz

Fishing 4.92 7.91 2.29

Agriculture 6.38 11.74 8.26

Hotels and restaurants 5.03 8.28 7.41

Construction 7.24 8.16 7.35

Commerce 10.09 10.63 11.67

Transportation and logistics 12.13 7.66 19.55

Public administration and defense 25.43 16.69 8.49

Teaching 7.99 5.56 4.98

Manufacturing 3.92 3.34 5.12

Others 16.87 20.03 24.88

Source: 2006 Galápagos Census.

Figure 4. Numbers of registered fishermen in Galápagos National Park and active fishermen in the sea cucumber and lobster fisheries.

5.2. Sensitivity: Species thatWill be Most Affected

In this study, we considered the extent

to which commercially important fish

species in the Galápagos may be af-

fected by climate change. In order of

economic importance based on total

landing value, the main marine re-

sources in the Galápagos are sea cu-

cumber (Isostichopus fuscus), spiny red

and green lobsters (Panulirus penicilla-

tus and P. gracilis), and a variety of de-

mersal white fish of the Serranidae

family (mero, bacalao, camotillo). Large

pelagic fish such as wahoo and tuna are

important for local consumption, and

small pelagic fish such as mullets, sar-

dines, and mackerel are important for

bait. Local people also consume other

marine species, such as slippery lobster

and octopus.

All of these commercially importantspecies are either overfished or theirstatus is unknown (table 6). Overfish-ing already has had an adverse effect onecosystem health, and any negative ef-fects of climate change, such as thewarming of ocean waters, could worsenthe decline of stocks. The extent towhich any positive effects of climatechange, such as expansion of tropicalspecies’ ranges, may compensate for thedeclines is unclear. One of the processescritical for the maintenance of manyfisheries and one that may be threat-ened by climate change is the couplingof El Niño and La Niña. Many marinespecies reproduce and hatch their larvaeduring El Niño and need the cold, nutri-ent-rich currents of La Niña for larvaeto survive. A decoupling of these twoevents caused by climate change mayhave adverse effects on various speciesof commercial importance.


97

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF


98

Tab

le 6

. Ec

onom

ic im

por

tanc

e, m

arke

t dem

and

s, c

urre

nt s

tatu

s,

and

exp

ecte

d c

limat

e ch

ang

e ef

fect

s on

com

mer

cial

ly im

por

tant

fish

erie

s in

the

Gal

ápag

os.

Spec

ies

(in o

rder

of

econ

omic

impo

rtan

ce)

Impo

rtan

ce to

em

ploy

men

tin

fish

erie

s (an

d/or

to

econ

omy)

Mar

ket d

eman

dsCu

rren

t sta

tus

Expe

cted

clim

ate

chan

geeff

ects

Ove

rall

effec

t

Sea

cucu

mbe

rD

eclin

ing

num

ber o

f fish

er-

men

, but

still

em

ploy

s 25%

of fi

sher

men

. Bet

wee

n Ju

ly20

08 a

nd Ja

nuar

y 20

09,

only

368

fish

erm

en o

ut o

f apo

ssib

le 1

,200

regi

ster

edfis

herm

en p

artic

ipat

ed in

the

sea

cucu

mbe

r fish

erie

s,w

hich

is th

e lo

wes

t num

ber

of fi

sher

men

sinc

e th

e 19

99se

ason

.

Hig

hly

priz

ed b

y A

sian

mar

-ke

ts.

Ove

rfish

ed, a

nd c

atch

is d

e-cl

inin

g. In

200

9, th

e fis

hery

was

clo

sed

due

to lo

w p

op-

ulat

ion

dens

ities

.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.

Spin

y re

d an

d gr

een

lobs

ters

Dec

linin

g nu

mbe

r of fi

sher

-m

en, b

ut st

ill e

mpl

oys 2

5%of

regi

ster

ed fi

sher

men

(384

indi

vidu

als)

.

Mai

nly

expo

rted

to th

e U

.S.

Als

o co

nsum

ed in

the

Gal

á-pa

gos a

nd m

ainl

and

Ecua

dor.

Ove

rfish

ed, b

ut b

ette

rm

anag

ed th

an se

a cu

cum

-be

r. In

200

9, lo

wer

pric

esfo

r spi

ny lo

bste

r mea

nt th

atth

ese

fishe

ries w

ere

not a

sim

port

ant.

The

stoc

ks se

emto

be

in a

pro

cess

of r

ecov

-er

y.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.

Slip

pery

lobs

ter

Unk

now

n.In

cide

ntal

cat

ch o

f spi

nylo

bste

r.U

nkno

wn.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.


99

Nea

r-co

asta

l dem

ersa

lfis

h (e

.g. w

hite

fish

, G

aláp

agos

gro

uper

[b

acal

ao],

[mer

o], c

od a

ndse

abas

s [ca

mot

illo]

, and

som

e co

asta

l pel

agic

s)

In 2

009,

the

fishe

ry w

asve

ry im

port

ant f

or lo

cal

fishe

rmen

’s in

com

e. F

ishi

ngis

par

ticul

arly

impo

rtan

tbe

twee

n Se

ptem

ber a

ndM

arch

bec

ause

of d

eman

dfo

r the

se fi

sh in

mai

nlan

dEc

uado

r.

Unk

now

n.Po

ssib

ly o

vere

xplo

ited.

De-

mer

sals

hav

e de

clin

ed in

shal

low

coa

stal

regi

ons,

re-

sulti

ng in

fish

ing

atse

amou

nts a

nd in

dee

per

wat

ers.

Hig

her t

empe

ratu

res a

reex

pect

ed to

cau

se ra

nge

redu

ctio

ns in

col

d-ad

apte

dsp

ecie

s.

Dec

lines

.

Larg

e pe

lagi

c fis

h (e

.g.

wah

oo, y

ello

wfin

tuna

,bi

g-ey

ed tu

na, s

wor

dfish

,sh

arks

, and

rays

)

Impo

rtan

t for

fish

erm

en’s

inco

me

year

roun

d.

Con-

sum

ed b

y th

e lo

cal p

opul

a-tio

n an

d by

tour

ists

inre

stau

rant

s and

tour

boa

ts.

Unk

now

n.In

crea

sing

pre

ssur

e as

fish

-er

men

shift

from

dem

ersa

lsp

ecie

s to

pela

gics

. Big

-ey

ed tu

na o

vere

xplo

ited.

Yello

wfin

and

wah

oo c

lose

to c

apac

ity.

Thes

e sp

ecie

s hav

e affi

nity

for w

arm

er te

mpe

ratu

res,

so th

eir p

opul

atio

ns m

aysh

ift. P

rote

ctio

n fro

m in

-du

stria

l fish

ing

fleet

als

ow

ill e

nsur

e st

abili

ty.

Incr

ease

s.

Min

or b

enth

ic re

sour

ces

(e.g

. oct

opus

, chu

ro, a

ndca

ncha

lagu

a)

Impo

rtan

t for

loca

l con

-su

mpt

ion.

Exa

ct n

umbe

rsun

know

n.

Incr

easi

ng d

eman

d fro

mto

uris

ts a

nd lo

cals

.U

nkno

wn.

In

tert

idal

hab

itats

are

ex-

pect

ed to

be

affec

ted

byw

arm

ing

wat

ers a

nd la

ck o

fpr

oduc

tive

envi

ronm

ent.

Dec

lines

.

Shar

ks

Diffi

cult

to e

stim

ate,

as fi

sh-

ing

shar

ks is

ille

gal. T

here

are

repo

rts f

rom

inte

rvie

ws

with

fish

erm

en, p

artic

ular

lyin

Isab

ela,

that

shar

ks a

rean

impo

rtan

t sou

rce

of in

-co

me

for s

ome

fam

ilies

of

fishe

rmen

invo

lved

in th

eca

ptur

e an

d tr

ade

of sh

ark

fins.

Freq

uenc

y un

know

n bu

tre

late

d to

the

dem

and

inEa

st A

sian

mar

kets

.

Spec

ific

data

una

vaila

ble

beca

use

capt

ure

is il

lega

l.U

nkno

wn.

Unk

now

n.

Spec

ies

(in o

rder

of

econ

omic

impo

rtan

ce)

Impo

rtan

ce to

em

ploy

men

tin

fish

erie

s (an

d/or

to

econ

omy)

Mar

ket d

eman

dsCu

rren

t sta

tus

Expe

cted

clim

ate

chan

geeff

ects

Ove

rall

effec

t

Sea Cucumber

This species already is heavily exploited(figure 5) due to overfishing, and it isexpected to decline further with climatechange, although brief post-El Niño in-creases may occur. While historicallysea cucumber has been the most prof-itable fishery in the Galápagos, thenumber of people fishing for sea cucum-ber has declined substantially, mainlybecause of declining catch per unit ef-fort (CPUE). Between July 2008 andJanuary 2009, only 368 fishermen par-ticipated in the sea cucumber fishery,which was the lowest since the 1999season (Murillo 2009). In 2008, fisher-men in this fishery obtained revenuesof approximately US$1,500 per month(Murillo 2009). Household surveys re-veal that when the fishery was open,21% of San Cristobal fishermen, 19% ofIsabela fishermen, and 23% of SantaCruz fishermen participated in the fish-ery, although not exclusively. The sur-vey data indicate that fishermen wouldbe affected equitably from all three is-lands if climate change were to drasti-cally reduce this fishery.

Spiny Lobster

Like the sea cucumber, spiny lobster de-clined in the early 2000s due to over-fishing (figure 6). However, spinylobster populations have shown signs ofrecovery in the past two years due inpart to effective management by theGalápagos National Park (Murillo2009). Nonetheless, future climatechange events could threaten thisspecies, although brief post-El Niño in-creases may occur. While this is the sec-ond-most profitable fishery in theGalápagos, there are currently only 384fishermen and 151 fishing boats in thisfishery (Murillo 2009). The surveyshowed that 16% of San Cristobal fish-ermen, 19% of Isabela fishermen, and23% of Santa Cruz fishermen partici-pate in this fishery when it is open, andobtain revenues of approximatelyUS$1,800 per month during the fishingseason (Murillo 2009). All of the fisher-men who participate in the spiny lob-ster fishery also participate in the seacucumber fishery.


100

Year

OpenAccess

Ban

Ban

Co-Management

1993

1992

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Cat

ch (

10

ind

ivid

ual

s)6

10

8

6

4

2

0

Figure 5. Annual catch of sea cucumber in the Galápagos Marine Reserve from 1992 to 2007.

Source: Castrejón 2008.

Slippery Lobster

The slippery lobster is an incidentalcatch of the spiny lobster fishery. Thus,the largest level of exploitation of theslippery lobster takes place during thespiny lobster fishing season from Sep-tember through December. During therest of the year, only a small number offishermen fish for slippery lobster. Thepresent state of the slippery lobsterfishery is uncertain; no data exist onthe density of the population. Neverthe-less, fishermen may take a greater in-terest in the capture and marketing ofthe slippery lobster due to overexploita-tion of the spiny lobster fishery. Likethe sea cucumber and spiny lobster,this species is expected to experiencepost-El Niño increases. However, as inall of these fisheries, climate changemay transform some of the key ecologi-cal conditions, such as the coupling ofEl Niño and La Niña.

Coastal Demersal Fish (Primarily

Grouper)

Coastal demersal fish populations havebeen overexploited, and fishing effortsare shifting to deep-sea demersal species

(e.g. mero, brujo, and camotillo). Thesespecies are expected to decline furtherdue to climate change-induced warmingof waters. Fishermen in these fisherieshave reported monthly revenues of ap-proximately US$700 year-round, com-pared with US$1,500 per month for seacucumber and lobster. There are approx-imately 200 fishermen in demersal fish-eries, and a small portion of thesefishermen also are involved in the seacucumber and lobster fisheries (Murillo2009). In 2009, 11% of San Cristobalfishermen, 23% of Isabela fishermen,and 14% of Santa Cruz fishermen werefishing for grouper, indicating that amodest portion of fishermen would be af-fected if demersals declined further.

Large Pelagic Fish (e.g. Wahoo,

Yellowfin Tuna, Big-Eye Tuna, Mahi

Mahi, and Swordfish)

These species also are under pressure,although their status is less clear.Wahoo landings increased from 7 tonsin 1997 to 36 tons in 1998 and 39 tonsin 1999. In contrast, tuna landings de-clined from 41 tons in 1997 to 10 tonsin 1998 and 4.3 tons in 1999 (Fun-dación Natura 2002). One species of


101

1960

Lo

bst

er T

ails

(M

etri

c To

ns)

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

YearSource: Castrejón 2008.

Figure 6. Historical annual captures of spiny lobster (P. penicillatus and P. gracilis) in the Galápagos Marine Reserve from 1960–2006.

tuna, Thunnus obesus, which is veryeconomically important, is listed asvulnerable (Castrejón 2008). Shiftsinto this industry by demersal fisher-men are expected to intensify pressure.Climate change actually may result inpopulation increases due to the species’affinity to warmer waters, althoughany such increase may be eclipsed byfishing pressure. Qualitative inter-views about previous El Niño eventsindicate that wahoo and mahi mahicaptures increased. As pelagic fish arehighly migratory, they could be moreresilient to a reduction of upwelling. Ashift to open-water fisheries, if properlymanaged, could possibly strengthen theresilience of the coastal ecosystem, pro-vided that overall fishing pressuredoes not increase (CDF 2009). Thesame 200 fishermen in demersal fish-eries also participate in pelagic fish-eries (Murillo 2009). In 2009, 40% ofSan Cristobal fishermen and 29% of Is-abela fishermen were fishing for tunaand wahoo, and 14% of Santa Cruzfishermen were fishing for wahoo.Tuna and wahoo are year-round fish-eries, and interviews found that fisher-

men earn approximately US$700 per

month for tuna and US$600 per month

for wahoo. The pelagic fishery is be-

coming increasingly popular, including

a shift to sport fishing. It may be a vi-

able alternative to the heavily over-

fished sea cucumber, lobsters, and

demersal fish, as long as the CPUE is

capped at a sustainable level to avoid

declines such as those already ob-

served for tuna. Currently, an esti-

mated 30% of the 200 fishermen in

demersal and pelagic fisheries also are

involved in the sea cucumber and

spiny lobster fisheries (Murillo 2009).

Minor Benthic Resources (e.g.

Octopus, Churo, and Canchalagua)

Churo (marine snails), octopus, and

canchalagua (chitons) are captured

throughout the year and are increas-

ingly being consumed by tourists and

local residents. Presently, there is no

regulation on the level of exploitation

of these fisheries. The intertidal zone,

in which these resources thrive, is ex-

pected to be one of the areas most ad-

versely affected by climate change due

to changes in temperature and salinity

and a decrease in pH.

Sharks

According to interviews, illegal shark

fishing is practiced by some fishermen

from all of the islands, although it

seems to be more common among fish-

ermen in Isabela. This practice is im-

portant as a source of income for some

fishing families. Data are not available

on the frequency of illegal shark fish-

ing or the effects of climate change on

sharks, but this and other illegal activ-

ities lower the resilience of the ecosys-

tem, which can exacerbate negative

climate change effects.


102

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

5.3. Adaptive Capacity ofthe Fishing Industry

We found that Galápagos fishermenhave characteristics that indicate a mod-erately strong ability to adapt to change.In terms of social capital, fishermenhave strong social networks within theislands and on the continent. In addi-tion, fishermen are members of coopera-tives that provide institutional supportwhen negotiating the fishing calendarand the total allowable catch of specieswith the GNP. Both of these networkscan be critical support systems duringtimes of hardship. With regard to eco-nomic capital, fishermen are able to ob-tain loans easily, which can providethem with alternative economic invest-ment opportunities in times of change.

Perhaps the most important adaptivestrategy of fishermen is that they arenot specialized. Galápagos fishermencan engage in a wide variety of fish-eries inside the GMR, providing themwith more economic security. Further-more, 90% of fishermen in Galápagoshave alternative livelihood activitiesthat supplement their income fromfishing, though patterns vary by is-land. According to our interviews,when past El Niño events caused cer-tain species to decline, some fishermenshifted to other activities, such as driv-ing taxis or working in their own smallbusinesses. Examples of other alterna-tive economic activities for fishermenare agriculture, construction, tourism,and auto repair.

Despite these advantages, however,our surveys show that, in general, fish-ermen have low education levels andfew speak other languages besidesSpanish. Furthermore, only a smallpercentage of fishermen are knowl-edgeable about the Internet.

6. CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS:ADAPTATION TOCLIMATE ChANGE INThE GALÁPAGOS

6.1. Conclusions

Given tourism’s heavy dependence onnature and the affinity of tourists foremblematic species, the tourism indus-try may be hard hit if climate changeleads to the extinction of many of thesespecies. A potential decline in genericnature tourism, which currently is themost prevalent type of tourism in the is-lands, is a significant concern becausetourism is extremely important to theGalápagos economy and employment.Generic nature tourism driven by inter-national tourists provides far greaterrevenues than non-nature tourism, andit provides financial support for conser-vation efforts. The residents of SantaCruz, where tourism is concentrated,are heavily dependent on generic na-ture tourism for their livelihoods. How-ever, Santa Cruz residents’ education,language skills, institutional and socialsupport networks, solid financial stand-ing, access to credit, and Internet andcommunication skills will help themshift livelihoods.

Fisheries are highly dependent onhealthy marine ecosystems. Conse-quently, it is expected that climatechange effects—whether positive ornegative—on ecosystem health will di-rectly affect this industry. In particular,sea cucumber, spiny lobster, andcoastal demersal fish, which are al-ready in decline due to overfishing, willlikely decline even further as warmingwaters reduce their habitat range andmake them more accessible to fishing.


103

Although pelagic fish species may be af-fected positively by climate change, thepotential benefits are likely to be out-weighed by a shift in fishing pressurefrom coastal demersals to large pelagicfish. Because of the low contribution offishing to the economy (less than 4%)and employment in Galápagos, how-ever, any changes in the industry arenot expected to have a significant im-pact on the Galápagos economy and em-ployment. In addition, 90% of fishermenhave alternative livelihoods, access tocredit, and strong social and institu-tional networks, so they are in a moder-ately good position to adapt to climatechange, despite their limited educationand communication skills.

6.2. RecommendationsA. Enhance resiliency of species and

habitats

We recommend enhancing the re-siliency of the species and habitats atrisk to climate change, particularlythose that are critical to tourism andfisheries.

For Tourism

a. Protect the species that attract inter-national tourists to the Galápagos:tortoises, sea turtles, marine iguana,penguin, blue-footed booby, sea lion,and land iguanas.

b. Develop strategies to address the un-certainty surrounding climate change.For example, key emblematic speciesmay decline due to climate change,and marketing and promotion cam-paigns should be designed to accom-modate these changes in a mannerthat continues to attract interna-tional tourists and maintains theimage of Galápagos as a unique des-tination.

For Fisheries

a. Establish sustainable managementmeasures for demersal fish, whichare at particular risk from climatechange, in new areas such asseamounts, but also in coastal wa-ters. Study and improve conserva-tion efforts for seamounts,mangroves, and other key areas solocal people can use the areas in asustainable manner. These areashave special importance for the re-gion’s biodiversity, but they havebeen little studied and local fisher-men are increasingly exploiting theresources that can be found there.The vulnerability of these areas willincrease with climate change.

b. Place an emphasis on protecting seacucumber, spiny lobster, and demer-sal species from overfishing, as theyare the most vulnerable to climatechange.

c. Establish sustainable managementregulations for pelagic species thatmay not be heavily fished currentlybut could become more important inthe future due to climate change.

B. Enhance people’s adaptive capacity.

Much can be done to enhance the adap-tive capacities of people in the tourismand fisheries sectors, along with thelarger Galápagos society. The challengefor authorities, conservationists, andcommunities is to implement win-winapproaches that favor conservation butalso reinforce the resilience of humancommunities.

a. Promote diversification of economiclivelihood activities, particularlywithin the tourism sector where di-versification is currently low. It is es-sential to develop sustainableeconomic activities that are not di-rectly related to tourism and that


104

can bring an alternative source of in-come to the local population to re-duce dependency on the tourismsector. This is especially true in thecase of Santa Cruz but also to somedegree in San Cristobal. Fishermenand tourism workers could be in-cluded in conservation activities—monitoring of illegal fisheries,eradication of invasive species, andcleaning of the Park’s marine andterrestrial areas—to increase thenumber of livelihood activities. Withsome training, local people also couldparticipate in research activities asfield assistants. Some people couldbecome more involved in agriculture,especially organic agriculture, as ispresently taking place with coffee.

b. Strengthen education, particularlyamong fishermen. As is true in manyother parts of Ecuador, people livingin the Galápagos have a low level ofeducation, which limits adaptive ca-pacity. This is particularly true forGalápagos fishermen, who have oneof the lowest education levels of all ofthe sectors. Education must be en-hanced because people who havemore education are better equippedto deal with change in general andwith climate change in particular, asthey have more options to migrate orshift to other economic activities. Ahigh-quality education that in-creases both general knowledge andspecialized skills is essential to pre-pare the society for uncertainty andto lower general vulnerabilities. Stu-dents must be prepared to handlespecific issues while simultaneouslylearning how to adapt flexibly to achanging world.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was carried out withinthe context of the Galápagos ClimateChange Vulnerability Assessment Proj-ect led by Conservation International inpartnership with WWF, the GalápagosNational Park, the Charles DarwinFoundation, and the Ecuadorian Min-istry of Environment. The results of thiswork were presented at the Vulnerabil-ity Assessment Workshop held in April2009 in Galápagos and will be inte-grated into adaptation recommenda-tions. The aim of the GalápagosClimate Change Vulnerability Assess-ment Project was to provide key scien-tific information on the vulnerability ofGalápagos to climate change, includingresearch on oceanography, vulnerabil-ity of marine and terrestrial species andecosystems, and possible impacts of cli-mate change on key socio-economic sec-tors.

We gratefully acknowledge the finan-cial support of Conservation Interna-tional and WWF.

We would like to mention several indi-viduals who have provided valuablefeedback throughout this study: Noémid’Ozouville, Giuseppe Di Carlo, EliécerCruz, Irma Larrea, Lauren Spurrier,Mauricio Castrejón and Ulf Hardter.

We also would like to thank HarryReyes for contributing new fisheriesdata from the Galápagos National Park.

Finally, we would like to thank PaolaPozo, Tania Quisingo, and Sara Ro-dríguez for their assistance in collectingprimary and secondary information.


105

REFERENCES

Allison EH, Perry AL, Badjeck MC, Adger WN, Brown K, Conway D, Halls AS, Pilling GM,Reynolds JD, Andrew NL. 2009. Vulnerability of national economies to the impacts ofclimate change on fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 10: 173-196.

Castrejón M. 2008. El sistema de co-manejo pesquero de la Reserva Marina de Galápa-gos: situación actual, retos y perspectivas de cambio. Fundación Charles Darwin.

Charles Darwin Foundation. 2009. Galápagos and climate change. Final Technical Re-port.

Epler B. 2007. Tourism, the economy, population growth and conservation in Galápagos.Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Charles Darwin Foundation Internal Report.Galápagos.

Fundacion Natura. 2002. Galápagos Report 2001-2002. Santa Cruz, Galápagos. Grenier C. 2008. Capacidad de carga turística/huella geográfica del turismo en centros

poblados de Galápagos. Estudio de Capacidad de Carga Turística con Base Terrestreen la Provincia de Galápagos- Proyecto “Desarollo Sostenible de los Sectores Produc-tivos de Galápagos”. Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Final Report for Banco Interamericanode Desarrollo and Cámara Provincial de Turismo de Galápagos. Report No. ATN-ME-9410-EC.

Hardner J and Gomez P. 2004. Incorporación de la mano de obra del sector pesqueroartesanal en las actividades turísticas de Galápagos. Palo Alto (CA): Hardner andGullison Associates, LLC.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INEC). 2006 Galápagos Census. Available athttp://www.inec.gov.ec.

Kerr S, Cardenas S, Hendy J. 2004. Migration and the environment in the Galápagos: Ananalysis of economic and policy incentives driving migration, potential impacts frommigration control, and potential policies to reduce migration pressure. Motu Eco-nomic and Public Policy Research.

Murillo JC. 2009. Efectos del manejo de la RMG en los aspectos económicos y de orde-namiento de la actividad pesquera artesanal de Galápagos. Unpublished report forthe Galápagos National Park. San Cristobal, Galápagos.

Snell H and Rea S. 1999. The 1997-98 El Niño in Galápagos: Can 34 years of data estimate120 years of pattern? Noticias de Galápagos: a biannual news publication about sci-ence and conservation in Galápagos, Galápagos National Park Service and theCharles Darwin Research Station: 11.

Simpson MC, Gössling S, Scott D, Hall CM, Gladin E. 2008. Climate Change Adaptationand Mitigation in the Tourism Sector: Frameworks, Tools and Practices. Paris, France:UNEP, University of Oxford, UNWTO, WMO.

Taylor JE and Yúnez-Naude A. 1999. Estudio Económico de Galápagos. Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank. Unpublished report.

Taylor JE, Stewart M, Hardner J. 2006. Estimating the Importance of the Tourism andFisheries Sectors in the Galápagos Economy. University of California at Davis.

Taylor JE, Stewart M, Hardner J. 2006. Ecotourism and Economic Growth in the Galápa-gos: An Island Economy-wide Analysis. Davis (CA): Department of Agricultural andResource Economics, University of California, Davis. Working Paper No. 06-001.

Wilen JE, Stewart M, Layton DF. 2000. Economic Analysis of the Galápagos Marine Re-serve Resources Management Plan. Davis (CA): University of California, Davis.

Watkins G and Cruz F. 2007. Galápagos en Riesgo: Un Análisis Socioeconómico de laSituación Actual en el Archipiélago. Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Fundación Charles Dar-win. Galápagos.


106

ADDITIONAL LITerATUre

Adger WN. 2003. Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Eco-nomic Geography 79: 387-404.

Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, O’Brien K, Pulhin J, Pulwarty R, Smit B, andTakahashi K. 2007. Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and ca-pacity. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change. Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ and Han-son CE, Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 717-743.

Anderson DJ. 1989. Differential responses of boobies and other seabirds in the Galápa-gos to the 1986-87 El Niño-Southern Oscillation event. Marine Ecology Series52:209-216.

Boersma, PD. 1998. The 1997-1998 El Niño: Impacts on penguins. Penguin Conservation11 (3):10-11

Cramer W, Bondeau A, Schaphoff S, Lucht W, Smith B, and Sitch S. 2004. Tropical forestsand the global carbon cycle: impacts of atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate changeand rate of deforestation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biologi-cal Sciences 359(1443): 331-343.

Díaz Guevara C. 2006. Planificación Operativa Regional 2006: Agregación de la planifi-cación operativa regional, organismos regionales de dependencia nacional, organis-mos seccionales y autónomos de la región de Galápagos para el año 2006. PuertoBaquerizo Moreno, San Cristóbal, Galápagos, INGALA

Dockerty T, Lovett A, Appleton K, Bone A, and Sunnenberg G. 2006. Developing scenar-ios and visualisations to illustrate potential policy and climatic influences on futureagricultural landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 114(1): 103-120.

Dolan AH and Walker IJ. 2003. Understanding vulnerability of coastal communities to cli-mate change-related risks. Journal of Coastal Research, SI 39 (Proceedings of the 8thInternational Coastal Symposium), pg –pg. Itajaí, SC – Brazil, ISSN 0749-0208.

Edgar GJ, Banks SA, Brandt M, Bustamante RH, Chiriboga A, Earle SA, Garske LE, GlynnPW, Grove JS, Henderson S, Hickman CP, Miller KA, Rivera F, and Wellington GM.2009. El Niño, grazers and fisheries interact to greatly elevate extinction risk for Galá-pagos marine species. Global Change Biology DOI 10.1111/j.1365-486.2009.02117.x.

Feddema JJ, Oleson KW, Bonan GB, Mearns LO, Buja LE, Meehl GA, and Washington WM.2005. The importance of land-cover change in simulating future climates. Science310(5754): 1674-1678.

Fussel H-M. 2007. Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climatechange research. Global Environmental Change 17(2): 155-167.

Karl TR and Trenberth KE, 2003. Modern global climate change. Science 302(5651): 1719-1723.

Kates RW. 2009. Cautionary tales: adaptation and the global poor. In: Lisa E, Schipper Fand Burton I, Eds. The Earthscan Reader on Adaptation to Climate Change. Earth-scan, London, pp. 283-294.

Kelly M and Adger K. 2009. Theory and Practice in Assessing Vulnerability to Climatechange and Facilitating Adaptation. In: Lisa E, Schipper F and Burton I, Eds. TheEarthscan Reader on Adaptation to Climate Change. Earthscan: London, pp. 169-186.

Perch-Nielsen SL, Bättig MB, and Imboden D. 2008. Exploring the link between climatechange and migration. Climatic Change 91(3): 375-393.

Llerena A., Márquez C., Snell HL and Jaramillo A. 2004. Abundancia de Amblyrynchuscristatus en El Niño (97-98) y La Niña (01-02) en Santa Cruz, Galápagos. Ecología Apli-cada 3.

McLachlan JS, Hellmann JJ and Schwartz MW. 2007. A framework for debate of assistedmigration in an era of climate change. Conservation Biology 21(2): 297.

McLeman R. and Smit B. 2006. Migration as an adaptation to climate change. ClimaticChange 76(1): 31-53.

Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors │ ChApTer 5

107

Murillo JC, Chasiluisa C, Bautil B, Vizcaíno J, Nicolaides F, Moreno J, Molina L, Reyes H,García L, Villalta M and Ronquillo J. 2003. Pesquería de pepino de mar en Galápagosdurante el año 2003. Análisis comparativo con las pesquerías 1999–2002. En: Evalu-ación de las pesquerías en la Reserva Marina de Galápagos. Informe Compendio2003. Fundación Charles Darwin y Dirección Parque Nacional Galápagos: Santa Cruz,Galápagos, Ecuador.

O'Connor RE, Bord RJ and Fisher A. 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental be-liefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis 19(3): 461-471.

Reuveny R. 2007. Climate change-induced migration and violent conflict. Political Geog-raphy 26(6): 656-673.

Lisa E, Schipper F and Burton I, Eds. 2009. The Earthscan Reader on Adaptation to Cli-mate Change. Earthscan Publishing for a Sustainable Future: London, England.

Salazar S. and Bustamante RH. 2003. Effects of the 1997-98 El Niño on population sizeand diet of the Galápagos sea lion (Zalophus wollebaeki). Noticias de Galápagos62:40-45.

Solecki WD and Oliveri C. 2004. Downscaling climate change scenarios in an urban landuse change model. Journal of Environmental Management 72(1-2): 105-115.

Steinfartz S., Glaberman S., Lanterbecq, D., Marquez C. Rassman K. and Caccone A. 2007.Genetic impact of a severe El Niño event on Galápagos Marine Iguanas (Am-blyrhynchus cristatus). PLoS ONE 2: e1285.

Valle CA., Cruz F., Cruz JB., Merlen G. and Coulter MC. 1987. The impact of the 1982-1983El Niño-Southern Oscillation on seabirds in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Journalof Geophysical Research. C. Oceans 92:14437-14444.

Vargas FH, Harrison S., Rea S. and Macdonald DW. 2006. Biological effects of El Niño onthe Galápagos penguin. Biological Conservation 127:107-114.

Watkins G. and Oxford P. 2008. Galápagos: Both Sides of the Coin. Enfoque Ediciones:Quito.


108

Annex IList of participants

International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis of the Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate

Change in the Galápagos Islands

Last/First Name Affiliation Country/locationArana, David AGROCALIDAD Galápagos, Ecuador

Banks, Stuart Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Blake, Stephen Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Bush, Mark Florida Institute of Technology USA

Cajas Cadena, José AGROCALIDAD Ecuador

Castrejón, Mauricio Consultant/WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Causton, Charlotte Charles Darwin Foundation USA

Cazar, Salvador Conservation International Ecuador

Diaz Granados, María Claudia Conservation International Colombia

Cole, Julia University of Arizona USA

Cruz, Eliécer WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Cueva, Filemón Asociación de Cafetaleros Galápagos, Ecuador

De Koning, Free Conservation International Ecuador

Deem, Sharon Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Denkinger, Judith Universidad San Francisco de Quito Galápagos, Ecuador

Di Carlo, Giuseppe Conservation International USA

D’Ozouville Noémi Consultant/Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Drews, Carlos WWF Costa Rica

Edgar, Graham University of Tasmania Australia

Espinosa, Eduardo Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Farell, Sergio Consultant/NOAA Mexico

Farmer, Ginny Conservation International USA

Gardener, Mark Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Glynn, Peter University of Miami USA

Goyes, Patricio INOCAR Ecuador

Grenier, Christophe Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Guevara, Alexandra Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Hannah, Lee Conservation International USA

Hardter, Ulf WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Henderson, Scott Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Krutwa, Annika Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Kuhn, Angela Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Loose, Ana María Factor Verde Galápagos, Ecuador

López, Javier Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Manzello, Derek NOAA USA

Martínez, Camilo SENPLADES Ecuador

Martínez, Rodney Centro Internacional para la Investigación del Fenómeno Ecuadorde El Niño (CIIFEN)

Martínez, Priscilla Fundación Nazca Ecuador

Mena, Carlos Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Merlen, Godfrey Galápagos, Ecuador

ANNExES

109

Moss, Richard WWF USA

Muñoz, Edgar Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Naranjo, Sixto Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Nunez, Pablo FEMM Italy

Ortiz, Fernando Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Palacios, Daniel NMFS, NOAA USA

Peñaherrera, César Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Pidgeon, Emily Conservation International USA

Pozo, Pablo CAPTURGAL Galápagos, Ecuador

Quesada, Marco Conservation International Costa Rica

Quiroga, Diego Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Rea, Solanda Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Reck, Gunter Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Restrepo-Correa, Alejandra Florida Institute of Technology USA

Reyes, Harry Parque Nacional Galápagos Ecuador

Rivera, Ariel Tetra Tech Puerto Rico

Rodríguez, Ana María Conservation International Ecuador

Ruiz, Diego Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Sachs, Julian University of Washington USA

Salazar, Sandie GAIAS Galápagos, Ecuador

Salazar, Xavier Municipio de Santa Cruz Galápagos, Ecuador

Santos, José Escuela Politécnica Ecuador

Santos, Virgilio Municipio de Santa Cruz Galápagos, Ecuador

Schubauer, Anna Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Spurrier, Lauren WWF USA

Suárez, Luis Conservation International Ecuador

Sumalla, Radish University of British Columbia Canada

Suzuki, Haruna Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Tiernan, John Paul Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Tirado, Nathalia Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Trueman, Mandy Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Tyman, Zackary SIT Ecuador USA

Utreras, Emily Conservation International Ecuador

Valverde, Susana Factor Verde Galápagos, Ecuador

Vargas, Hernán Fondo Peregrino Panama

Vecchi, Gabriel GFDL, OAS, NOAA USA

Vera, Mariana Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Villalta, Mario Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Villegas, Tania Ministerio del Ambiente Ecuador

Walsh, Stephen University of North Carolina USA

Xie, Lian North Carolina State University USA


110

Annex IIDeclaration of Santa Cruz

Facing Climate Changes Together in the Galápagos Islands

Within the framework of the International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis ofthe Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate Changein the Galápagos Islands held from April 20th to 23rd, 2009 on Santa Cruz Island, withthe participating organizations: Ecuadorian Ministry of Environment, the Munici-pality of Santa Cruz, the Ecuadorian Secretary for Planning and Development (SEN-PLADES), the Galápagos National Park (GNP), the Navy Oceanographic Institute(INOCAR), Centro Internacional para la Investigación del Fenómeno de El Niño (CI-IFEN), the Ecuadorian Agency for Agricultural Quality Assurance (Agrocalidad-SIC-GAL); representatives from Conservation International (CI), WWF, the CharlesDarwin Foundation (CDF), the Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ) and theparticipating experts.

Considering:

1. That the Ecuadorian government contemplates within the National DevelopmentPlan, especially in Objective 4, the identification of responses to climate changeas part of its responsibility to its citizens and the entire World.

2. That the Ministry of Environment is developing the National Strategy against Cli-mate Change.

3. That the Technical Secretariat of Risk Management is developing the NationalPolicy of Risk Management.

4. That the Galápagos Islands, as part of the World Natural Heritage Sites, are apriority site, vulnerable to climate change due to its unique oceanographic,weather, biological and socioeconomic conditions.

5. That the Galápagos Islands are a strategic site and a natural laboratory generat-ing biophysical information that will enable the Republic of Ecuador to prepareand help other countries in the Eastern Tropical Pacific region to plan and be ableto face the challenges posed by climate change.

Agree:1. To consider within the policies, strategies and plans for the Galápagos Islands,

the recommendations and priority action plans identified by the experts in theworkshop.

2. To create a Climate Change Working Group that will enable the formulation andimplementation of an adaptation plan, according to the specific needs of the Galá-pagos; with the participation of public and local national institutions, educationaland research centers, non-governmental organizations, private sector and localcommunities.

3. To apply the precautionary and intergenerational responsibility principles to man-age existing pressures on the environment so as to increase resilience and adaptation against uncertainty of future conditions associated to climate change.

Santa Cruz, Galápagos Islands, April 22nd 2009, celebrating World Earth Day andcelebrating the 50 years of the creation of the Galápagos National Park.

ANNExES

111

WWF’s mission is to stop the degrada-

tion of the planet’s natural environ-

ment and to build a future in which

humans live in harmony with nature

by:

• Conserving the world’s biological

diversity.

• Ensuring that the use of renewable

natural resources is sustainable.

• Promoting the reduction of pollution

and wasteful consumption.

Building upon a strong foundation

of science, partnership and field

demonstration, CI empowers societies

to responsibly and sustainably care for

nature, our global biodiversity, for the

well-being of humanity.

World Wildlife Fund

1250�Twenty-Fourth�St.,�N.W.

Washington,�DC�20037�USA

Web:�www.worldwildlife.org

Tel.:�(202)�495-4800

Fax:�(202)�233-6971

WWF-Galápagos Program

18�de�Febrero�y�Piqueros�esquina

Puerto�Ayora,�Santa�Cruz�Island

Galápagos,�Ecuador

Tel.�&�Fax:�(593�5)�252-6053

Conservation International

22011�Crystal�Drive,�Suite�500�

Arlington,�VA�22202�USA

Web:�www.conservation.org

Tel.:�(703)�341-2400

Fax:�(703)�892-0826

Conservation International in Galápagos

Calle�Juan�León�Mera�s/n�y�Avenida�Scalesia

Puerto�Ayora,�Santa�Cruz�Island

Galápagos,�Ecuador

Tel.:�(593�5)�252-7527

climate change vulnerability assessment of the...

Documents