In July 2010, UNESCO voted that the Galapagos islands would lose its endangered status as it was considered properly protected by the Ecudorian government. The BBC/Lonely Planet has an article out questioning whether the decision to remove the endangered status was premature. I wonder if they took into consideration the fishing of sharks etc. That seems to be off the table as far as I can see, which is a pity.
http://www.bbc.com/t...agos-been-saved
http://goo.gl/UHNfP
How is Galapagos 6 mths after losing UNESCO endangered status?
Started by Drew, Feb 05 2011 06:30 AM
1 reply to this topic
#1
Posted 05 February 2011 - 06:30 AM
Drew
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."
Moderator
"Journalism is what someone else does not want printed, everything else is public relations."
#2
Posted 05 February 2011 - 06:36 AM
In July 2010, UNESCO voted that the Galapagos islands would lose its endangered status as it was considered properly protected by the Ecudorian government. The BBC/Lonely Planet has an article out questioning whether the decision to remove the endangered status was premature. I wonder if they took into consideration the fishing of sharks etc. That seems to be off the table as far as I can see, which is a pity.
http://www.bbc.com/t...agos-been-saved
The link is not any good for us folk in the UK though. I will see if I can find an alternative.
Stew
Canon 5D MK2 - Sea and Sea housed - 17-40L 100mm - Sigma 15mm FE - twin YS250 pro's
Canon 350D - Sea and Sea housed - 60mm - 10-17mm - twin YS90's ( currently lent to Louise )
Sony PC1000 Video - Ikelite housed - twin Nocturnal slx 800i lights
Canon 350D - Sea and Sea housed - 60mm - 10-17mm - twin YS90's ( currently lent to Louise )
Sony PC1000 Video - Ikelite housed - twin Nocturnal slx 800i lights
