Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

The Wild Story of What Happened to Pablo Escobar’s Hungry, Hungry Hippos

News Feed
Thursday, July 11, 2024

Emily Lankiewicz Four decades ago, Pablo Escobar brought to his Medellín hideaway four hippopotamuses, the centerpieces of a menagerie that included llamas, cheetahs, lions, tigers, ostriches and other exotic fauna. After Colombian police shot Escobar dead in December 1993, veterinarians removed the animals—except the hippos, which were deemed too dangerous to approach. The hippos fled to the nearby Magdalena River and multiplied. Today, the descendants of Escobar’s hippos are believed to number nearly 200. Their uncontrolled growth threatens the region’s fragile waterways. Smithsonian contributor Joshua Hammer joins us to recount this strange history and explain why Colombian conservationists have embarked upon an unusual program to sterilize these hippos in the wild via “invasive surgical castration,” a procedure that is, as he has written for Smithsonian magazine, “medically complicated, expensive and sometimes dangerous for hippos as well as for the people performing it.” Then, ecologist Rebecca Lewison tells us how her long-term study of hippo populations in Africa offers hints of how these creatures will continue to alter the Colombian ecosystem—and what authorities can do about it. A transcript is below. To subscribe to “There’s More to That,” and to listen to past episodes on why we’re still counting calories even though that’s been largely discredited as a healthy eating tool, what the orcas tipping over yachts are really doing, and how the shocking crime perpetrated by wealthy teens Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb a century ago helped to turn true crime into a perennial subject of American public fascination, find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. Joshua Hammer: I can’t remember where I first heard about them. I think I must’ve had some awareness of them for the last couple of years. Chris Klimek: Josh Hammer is a journalist and author, and he’s been following a surprising story for Smithsonian magazine, one that goes all the way back to the 1980s. Hammer: That’s when the drug lord Pablo Escobar began importing exotic animals for his hacienda in Antioquia province in northwestern Colombia. Klimek: This was at the height of Pablo Escobar’s wealth and power, and the narco-terrorist wanted to live in a place that fit his larger-than-life image. Hammer: He bought a big patch of property near the Magdalena River, which is the longest river in Colombia, a jungle-y area. He cleared the area and began transforming it into his private playground and began importing these animals, most of them, we believe, from zoos in the U.S. There were kangaroos, there were dolphins for his artificial lakes, elephants. Klimek: But there was one kind of animal that unexpectedly created a wildlife crisis in northern Colombia, one that persists today—a big one. Hammer: The facts are a little murky, but it looks like he imported four hippos, three females and one male, from a zoo or some sort of wildlife refuge, or an animal breeder in either Texas or California. Klimek: You know when you buy two gerbils and then it turns into three or four or five gerbils? Well, the same thing happened with these hippos. And while Escobar eventually had to flee the area, they stuck around. Hammer: After he was killed, fleeing the police in Medellín in 1993, basically the hacienda was abandoned, and the animals fended for themselves. Then the hippos started to expand. They started to move beyond the borders of the hacienda, and here we are 40 years later, and they’re dealing with a population of about, well, rough estimate is about 200 hippos right now—and growing, obviously. Klimek: On its face, this is a pretty ridiculous situation. A drug lord’s feral hippos, swimming in the waters, eating their way through the Colombian jungles, interacting with the local populations, animal and human. But when you start to dig deeper, there’s a lot to be learned here about both the consequences of human behavior and conservation crises across the globe. From Smithsonian magazine and PRX Productions, this is “There’s More to That,” the show where we’re hungry, hungry for stories about invasive hippos. In this episode, one of the most complicated wildlife puzzles in the world and what it means for both animals and humans. I’m Chris Klimek.Klimek: Hi, it’s Chris. I hope you’re enjoying “There’s More to That.” We hope that our episodes are giving you a sense of what the world of Smithsonian magazine is all about, and we’d love to hear from you what you think of this season. More importantly, we want to know what you’d like to hear more of. Your input is key. If you have the time to help us design our future episodes, please take this survey. You can find it at SmithsonianMag.com/podcastsurvey. We’ll also put a link in our show notes. It should take about five minutes. Thanks again and, as always, thanks for listening.Klimek: So since it’s been more than 30 years and not all our listeners may know, who was Pablo Escobar? Hammer: Well, Escobar was born in a working-class neighborhood of Medellín. When he was in his teens, however, he began essentially a life of crime doing things like stealing tombstones from graveyards and sanding off the names and reselling them, and just forging documents, all sorts of stuff. And then in his early 20s, he began running cocaine. I guess at the time, neighboring countries like Peru and Bolivia were producers, and he was bringing the cocaine in, processed and unprocessed, flying it up in a small plane to landing strips in the United States. And later he got involved with a couple of other Colombian dealers and formed what became known as the Medellín Cartel, which pretty much controlled all cocaine trafficking for years between Colombia and the United States. And so he grew extremely wealthy and bought his way into a seat in the Colombian parliament, and was living with total impunity and making billions of dollars until the mid-’80s, when it all caught up with him. Klimek: What was life like in Colombia during Pablo Escobar’s lifetime? Hammer: Very violent. The drug traffickers were carrying out their own terrible acts of violence in the mid-’80s. Escobar was carrying out assassinations. He had death squads killing his enemies, car bombings. In 1989, an unwitting courier carried a bomb onboard an Avianca jet, which blew up mid-flight, killed about 130 people. It was savage. On top of that, you had this escalating civil war going on between FARC, the communist, Marxist guerrilla movement in Colombia, and the Colombian government. And then on top of that, you had these, what they call the autodefensas, which were these right-wing vigilante death squads, which were often in league with drug lords. They were getting a cut of the action from the drug trade, and they were also involved in killing suspected Marxists. So there were three major violent actors all causing chaos during the ’80s and ’90s in Colombia. It was a very, very difficult time. Up to 30,000 people were being killed in a year at the peak of the violence in Colombia. Klimek: Escobar cultivated an image of power amidst the violence and turmoil. Josh says we can only speculate about how the hippos fit into that picture. Hammer: Apparently there were a couple of other drug lords in South America that he was emulating. There’s something about this kind of criminality and these menageries, there’s an association with power and prestige to have wild animals, to be the master of your own menagerie. This menagerie that he built up served another purpose, too, because he opened it up to the public. He allowed local Colombians to come onto his property and do a safari in electric vehicles around the grounds. So this, of course, helped to make him a very popular figure among a lot of Colombians when he was just spreading the money around and sponsoring soccer clubs. And then this was part of the same scheme to establish roots in the community, make him a popular figure. Klimek: Where is he keeping these animals? Hammer: He kept them on a property called Hacienda Nápoles. It’s about three hours east of Medellín. It’s a big area. He built artificial lakes and his mansion, his villa there, and he had 1,500 people working on the grounds, free-roaming menagerie of animals, helicopter pad, dinosaur theme park, just some other weird stuff. There was also a bull ring, et cetera, et cetera. Klimek: How did the hippos end up roaming freely outside of the grounds of the hacienda? Hammer: So there were never any real borders of this hacienda. It was carved out of the wilderness. So within a few days of his being killed, a lot of people stormed the grounds. They ripped everything apart looking for money, looking for weapons. The place was in chaos. The staff fled, and nobody came back to tend the animals. The animals for a while were living on their own. After it fell into disrepair, it was eventually taken over by a private corporation and reborn as a safari park. I understand from talking to an official in the local government who was a young man in those days that there were electric vehicles that would take you around and let you tour the savanna. Elephants would come over to the vehicles and stick their trunk, just like an imitation African safari. Finally, the government decided to do something about it, so this would’ve been about maybe ’98, ’99. They gathered up the animals, and they shipped most of them off to three zoos in Colombia. But nobody wanted to get near the hippos because they were frightened of them, and so the hippos were left to their own devices. By that time, there may have been 10, 12, I’m not sure, but, I mean, the females can produce a baby every year and a half, and they can be incredibly fertile. Klimek: Then an almost Shakespearean power struggle began to play out. Hammer: The oldest male born of these three female hippos wanted to be the alpha male and basically killed his own father and established a new hippo pod, and that’s the dynamic that happens. A male hippo will get in a fight with the alpha male and be exiled from the herd and then have to go off and find his own environment and wander off a few kilometers, get a female or two—boom, a new hippo herd is created. And this is what’s been happening slowly over the decades. Some of these hippos have been spotted like 50 miles outside of the boundaries of the Hacienda Nápoles. So they can really wander far. Klimek: How are the hippos in the region faring now? Hammer: I think they’re thriving. They don’t have any natural predators. They’re not hunted, and they have access to a lot of water and a lot of fruit and a lot of vegetables and a lot of vegetation, all the things that hippos need. So they’re doing very well. Klimek: And why does that present a threat to people and to the environment? Hammer: I think there is this exaggerated threat about just how dangerous hippos are. I mean, you often see media reports of them being the most dangerous animal. I don’t think that’s necessarily true. I think that they can be aggressive. I think generally they’re pretty gentle. It’s sort of like, you leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone. But from what I understand, if you get pretty dense human populations and pretty dense hippo populations competing for the same territory—fishermen on the rivers and people settling the land along the rivers—and so you get a lot of opportunities for hippo-human clashes. Last year in a schoolyard, one hippo just wandered in, and kids were scared, teachers running every which way. And if you’re on a boat, they can come up underneath and drown you. They’re not totally harmless animals. Klimek: The presence of hippos has also changed the Magdalena River itself. Hammer: Another reason that people are concerned is just because they produce an awful lot of excrement. They can really pollute water resources. They’re an invasive species. They don’t really belong there. So the local species that are there, like the capybaras, the tortoises, other animals, it’s rapidly changing the biome and possibly threatening these other animals. Algae, bacteriological contamination, there definitely seems to be something going on with the water in Colombia in these areas. Klimek: How have authorities tried to solve the problem of this exploding hippo population in Colombia? Hammer: The first thing they did was way back in the early 2000s, a professional hunter was hired, and he actually shot and killed a hippo that had wandered about 50 miles or so outside the hacienda and then posed with the corpse of his hippo, and it created a huge uproar in Colombia. I believe this was 2008, maybe 2009. Then there was a series of protests in Bogotá, and all across Colombia people were outraged and distraught. The minister of the environment had to resign, and they basically declared a moratorium on killing hippos. They started to try to dart hippos in the wild and do these castrations. That didn’t really work, because the tranquilizers take a while to have an effect, and it was dangerous to follow these hippos around, and so the hippos would generally disappear. They managed to do this once. They were able to track a hippo and castrate it after the tranquilizer knocked him out. And then they tried chemical castrations, where they would dart it with a chemical. But the problem with that method is that they would have to use a two-step process, and it was almost impossible to track the hippo to deliver the second dart two months later. So that didn’t work. They tried to cordon off the hacienda, but that didn’t work either, because first of all, many of the hippos had already left the hacienda, and second of all, the property was too large. They couldn’t really construct anything strong enough to keep the animals in, so that didn’t work. They tried getting international zoos to take the hippos, and that created a huge protest among environmental groups who didn’t believe that the resources should be spent with this translocation program. And most zoos didn’t want them anyway, so that didn’t work. Finally, last year, they began this aggressive surgical castration campaign using traps and corrals and trying to lure the animals into these corrals, keeping them trapped, and then sterilizing them on the spot, and that has had a certain amount of success. So they’ve done about ten so far. The project began in earnest in October, and from what I understand, they were forced to stop for a couple of months because of a contract renegotiation and budget disputes. But now they apparently have picked it up again. So it’s averaging one and a half a month or something. They say that they need to sterilize at least 40 a year to keep the population from growing. So they’re falling short, and it’s a really difficult procedure. They’re getting better at it, clearly, but it still doesn’t seem to be sufficient to deal with the numbers.Rebecca Lewison: I remember somebody telling me, and I thought, “What? That can’t be right. There’s no way. How would there be hippos in Colombia?” Klimek: Rebecca Lewison is an ecologist at San Diego State University. She’s also co-chair of the Hippo Specialist Group of IUCN, an international conservation organization. She mostly spends her time worrying about hippos in Africa, but at some point in the late ’90s or early 2000s, she started getting inquiries about the Colombian hippos. Lewison: I’ve never been to Colombia, but what it looks like is a paradise for hippos, water everywhere, grass everywhere. I mean, I can see why they are thriving. Klimek: We went to Rebecca for some more in-depth information about hippo biology, conservation, and some ideas for a potential solution in Colombia. But we began the conversation by asking: What’s it like to see a hippo up close in the wild? Lewison: It’s just like, “Oh, my God, they’re so big,” which is kind of dumb, since you know they’re this massive animal. But when you first see them in the water, you just see that the top surface of their heads and their backs, and then when they actually come out, it’s the iceberg, there’s a lot under there. Klimek: What makes it hard to study hippos in the wild? Lewison: The challenge with hippos in the wild is when you go to a place that has hippos, they’re seemingly everywhere, which is not, of course, really true, but you’ll see a lot of them. They all come together and bunch up in rivers or lakes, but they’re really tough to study. And so compared to even other big gray things like elephants and rhinos, we really know comparatively little about them, because they are essentially marine mammals. They’re in the water all day and they only come out at night to feed. So nighttime is a tough time to be doing fieldwork, not super safe, and most of the places where they’re in the water, you can’t get in there with them. It’s a hundred percent not safe either because of hippos or because of crocodiles, and the water is not clear, so we don’t really know what’s happening. Other things that make them really hard to study is they basically don’t have a neck. So most of the ways that we put collars on animals, it goes around their neck, and they don’t have a neck. They use their neck, and so collaring them doesn’t really work. And in another just crazy turn of events, they are very difficult to chemically immobilize or tranquilize. We don’t really understand it, but they tend to not do well with all the drugs that we use for elephants and rhinos. It’s just made it really hard to study them and learn really basic things like who’s related to who. Identifying individuals is really tough, because we don’t really see much of them. Counting hippos is really hard, and you’d say, “Well, why? They’re massive, 4,000, 5,000 pounds.” But they’re in the water, and counting things in the water is really tough. They submerge. They don’t just stay. It’s not like you can say, “OK, everybody out of the water. I have to count you.” We’re increasingly using drones, but even with that, that can cause disturbance, so maybe a hippo will go underwater. Klimek: What’s the biggest threat to hippos in their native habitat now? Lewison: The biggest threat is definitely habitat loss. They require freshwater, and that really puts them at the crosshairs of people who also really rely on freshwater. And that’s probably the most valuable and limited resource on Earth, is freshwater, and it really puts them in direct conflict with people. Right behind that is a threat that is here but is potentially intensifying, which is just the impacts of climate change, because we know that impacts water quality and quantity. But I think it really all of that boils down to they just are running out of places to be. Klimek: Where are global hippo populations now, generally? Lewison: We don’t have great, great counts of them, but we think there’s about 200,000 to 300,000, which is surprisingly few. That’s even less elephants than there are. From a conservation perspective, there’s certainly populations in countries where hippo populations seem to be stable—those are typically in eastern and southern Africa—and definitely countries where hippo populations are declining, which is absolutely in western African countries. And in large part that is actually driven by just large-scale habitat loss. So overall the conservation outlook is not great. They are listed on the IUCN Red List, which is our international way of keeping track of the conservation status of animals, and they are listed as vulnerable because of that. And just increasingly, we just have concerns about their viability going forward. Klimek: The hippo situation in Colombia is completely unprecedented, so Rebecca says she has to look to African hippos for answers about what’s going on. Lewison: Hippos in Africa really exhibit this sort of boom-bust cycle oftentimes, particularly in places where the water and grass resources vary a lot within a year, which is a lot of places in eastern, southern Africa that have a dry season and a wet season. When there’s a drought, hippo populations can crash, a lot of mortality, both of adults and absolutely of juveniles because of either not enough water or not enough resources. What we also see for hippo populations, which is what makes a lot of us optimistic for a future for hippos, is that they respond very well to good conditions. When there’s a lot of rain and a lot of water, we see hippo populations flourish and really grow and expand and increase very quickly, and that’s certainly what they seem to have in Colombia. One thing that I think is interesting in Colombia is I think they’re spending a lot more time out of the water than hippos do in Africa, in part because the climate, it’s humid, it’s much more forgiving for a hippo. They have pretty sensitive skin, which is funny to say because they also are known to have some of the thickest skin, but there’s some sensitivity around them. Without water, they will die, or moisture, but I think they have that. And so maybe that’s another reason that people are really connecting to them is they can see them so much more than you can in the African context. Klimek: Many places, non-native animal populations have been controlled by introducing predator species. Why would that not work here? Lewison: I just don’t know what you’d introduce. The largest predator to the hippo, the most pervasive threat from predation for hippos is people. It is true that in Africa, lions, they will hunt younger hippos, smaller hippos. I don’t think we want to introduce African lions to Colombia. They certainly have their own carnivores, but it’s just not going to happen. There just isn’t anything bigger. Dinosaurs? We’ve all seen that movie, so we know how that goes. We don’t have an option here of going up the food chain. Their skin is that thick. Save with a gun, they’re pretty hard to kill, and I don’t think there’s going to be a strategy to introduce anything that’s big enough to get them. And honestly, predation just doesn’t have a big impact even in African settings. It’s really the environment that controls hippo populations. Klimek: How do you feel about the possibility of culling these hippos? Should that be considered as a potential solution? Lewison: It’s a tough question, again, because of how I think folks in the area have really identified with the hippos, absolutely are concerned about animal welfare, and I obviously take all of that very seriously as well. I just don’t think at this point there’s any really good solutions. The good solution needed to come in 1993, and we’re way beyond that. So now the situation where we are, the fork in the road, I do think that this approach makes sense. I honestly do worry about the potential of hippo-human conflict. I’ve spent a lot of time with hippos. I don’t find them to be particularly aggressive, but in areas where they are constantly under pressure, the analogy I typically use, the first time someone, if they break into your house, you’re surprised. By time ten, if someone breaks into your house, you’re ready to attack. And I think that’s where we see a lot of hippo-human conflict that have led to human fatalities. Typically, I’m one of the people that when there is an attack that people call and say, “What can you tell us? What should we do?” And in the African settings, I think I wouldn’t get in a boat, in a canoe. I’m not interested in those trips because I am the person who hears about all of them that go south. I feel differently about being on land around hippos, but in the water in particular, there’s not much you can do. If a hippo is under threat and they’re coming for you, that’s not the time to be saying, “Well, what could I have done differently in this situation?” But yeah, there really aren’t any easy answers here in terms of protecting people, which I think is the most at the top of the list. Of course, protecting hippos, but I would put in front of that even protecting the native plants and animals. This is their national treasure and something that I know they want to protect. Klimek: So taking into account everything you’ve been saying about how this is a complex problem and none of the potential solutions are particularly good, what would be your recommendation as to how to balance human needs and wildlife needs? Lewison: I think we’re on the path. The folks that I’ve talked to and heard from are trying to be thoughtful to all of the sides, to the people who feel connected to the animals, obviously to the animals themselves and their welfare, but also to the native plants and animals. And I think we are now hopefully moving toward the place of making this somewhat more sustainable. Of course, I have those fears of potential conflict if the population does grow. You hear stories of people getting gored by bison in Yellowstone. That’s because people do dumb things around wild animals. And even though these are animals that are not from here, they are still wild. What I always want people to understand is the place where hippos are from is Africa, and the place where they really need desperate attention and support and conservation action is Africa, because while they’re thriving in Colombia, they are not thriving in the land where they have evolved. And that’s where I spend most of my time, is really trying to get organizations and governments and agencies to collaborate and coordinate so we can come up with sustainable conservation plans that absolutely protect people and their livelihoods and hippos and their ability to persist into the future. I love that there’s a whole new group of people who didn’t even know about hippos, had never even thought about them, and now care about them, and I just hope that that extends to caring about hippos where they’re from. Klimek: Rebecca Lewison is a conservation ecologist and professor at San Diego State University. She’s the director of SDSU’s Institute for Ecological Management and Monitoring. Thank you, Rebecca. This has been a fascinating talk. Lewison: Great to talk with you, Chris. Thanks so much.Klimek: To read Josh Hammer’s reporting about the Colombian hippos, go to SmithsonianMag.com. We’ll put a link to it in our show notes along with links to some of Lewison’s work. This week’s dinner party fact goes back to a time and place where hippos were presented as a potential solution to a problem rather than the cause of one—equally shocking, though. Donny Bajohr: Hey, everyone. I’m Donny Bajohr, one of three photo editors here at the magazine, and I have a tasty treat for you for this episode’s dinner party fact. In the early 20th century, America had a problem—actually, two problems. They had a meat shortage and they had an invasive species in the South, the hyacinth. So Congressman Robert Broussard brought a bill to the House to solve both problems with one animal: the hippo. He wanted to bring over the hippo to eat up some hyacinth and feed Americans. Congressman Broussard’s bill didn’t pass, but it’s too bad, because I would love to hang a fang in some hippo meat. Klimek (laughing): “Hang a fang!” Did you just come up with that? Bajohr: You never heard that phrase? Klimek: No. “Hang a fang.” I love it. Klimek: “There’s More to That” is a production of Smithsonian magazine and PRX Productions. From the magazine, our team is me, Debra Rosenberg and Brian Wolly. From PRX, our team is Jessica Miller, Genevieve Sponsler, Adriana Rozas Rivera, Ry Dorsey and Edwin Ochoa. The executive producer of PRX Productions is Jocelyn Gonzales. Our episode artwork is by Emily Lankiewicz. Fact-checking by Stephanie Abramson. Our music is from APM Music. I’m Chris Klimek. Thank you for listening. Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

Ever since the demise of infamous drug kingpin, his pet hippos have flourished, wreaking havoc on the ecosystem and terrorizing local communities

Smithmag-Podcast-S02-Ep11-Hippo-article.jpg
Emily Lankiewicz

Four decades ago, Pablo Escobar brought to his Medellín hideaway four hippopotamuses, the centerpieces of a menagerie that included llamas, cheetahs, lions, tigers, ostriches and other exotic fauna. After Colombian police shot Escobar dead in December 1993, veterinarians removed the animals—except the hippos, which were deemed too dangerous to approach. The hippos fled to the nearby Magdalena River and multiplied.

Today, the descendants of Escobar’s hippos are believed to number nearly 200. Their uncontrolled growth threatens the region’s fragile waterways. Smithsonian contributor Joshua Hammer joins us to recount this strange history and explain why Colombian conservationists have embarked upon an unusual program to sterilize these hippos in the wild via “invasive surgical castration,” a procedure that is, as he has written for Smithsonian magazine, “medically complicated, expensive and sometimes dangerous for hippos as well as for the people performing it.” Then, ecologist Rebecca Lewison tells us how her long-term study of hippo populations in Africa offers hints of how these creatures will continue to alter the Colombian ecosystem—and what authorities can do about it.

A transcript is below. To subscribe to “There’s More to That,” and to listen to past episodes on why we’re still counting calories even though that’s been largely discredited as a healthy eating tool, what the orcas tipping over yachts are really doing, and how the shocking crime perpetrated by wealthy teens Nathan Leopold and Richard Loeb a century ago helped to turn true crime into a perennial subject of American public fascination, find us on Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.


Joshua Hammer: I can’t remember where I first heard about them. I think I must’ve had some awareness of them for the last couple of years.

Chris Klimek: Josh Hammer is a journalist and author, and he’s been following a surprising story for Smithsonian magazine, one that goes all the way back to the 1980s.

Hammer: That’s when the drug lord Pablo Escobar began importing exotic animals for his hacienda in Antioquia province in northwestern Colombia.

Klimek: This was at the height of Pablo Escobar’s wealth and power, and the narco-terrorist wanted to live in a place that fit his larger-than-life image.

Hammer: He bought a big patch of property near the Magdalena River, which is the longest river in Colombia, a jungle-y area. He cleared the area and began transforming it into his private playground and began importing these animals, most of them, we believe, from zoos in the U.S. There were kangaroos, there were dolphins for his artificial lakes, elephants.

Klimek: But there was one kind of animal that unexpectedly created a wildlife crisis in northern Colombia, one that persists today—a big one.

Hammer: The facts are a little murky, but it looks like he imported four hippos, three females and one male, from a zoo or some sort of wildlife refuge, or an animal breeder in either Texas or California.

Klimek: You know when you buy two gerbils and then it turns into three or four or five gerbils? Well, the same thing happened with these hippos. And while Escobar eventually had to flee the area, they stuck around.

Hammer: After he was killed, fleeing the police in Medellín in 1993, basically the hacienda was abandoned, and the animals fended for themselves. Then the hippos started to expand. They started to move beyond the borders of the hacienda, and here we are 40 years later, and they’re dealing with a population of about, well, rough estimate is about 200 hippos right now—and growing, obviously.

Klimek: On its face, this is a pretty ridiculous situation. A drug lord’s feral hippos, swimming in the waters, eating their way through the Colombian jungles, interacting with the local populations, animal and human. But when you start to dig deeper, there’s a lot to be learned here about both the consequences of human behavior and conservation crises across the globe.

From Smithsonian magazine and PRX Productions, this is “There’s More to That,” the show where we’re hungry, hungry for stories about invasive hippos. In this episode, one of the most complicated wildlife puzzles in the world and what it means for both animals and humans. I’m Chris Klimek.


Klimek: Hi, it’s Chris. I hope you’re enjoying “There’s More to That.” We hope that our episodes are giving you a sense of what the world of Smithsonian magazine is all about, and we’d love to hear from you what you think of this season. More importantly, we want to know what you’d like to hear more of. Your input is key. If you have the time to help us design our future episodes, please take this survey. You can find it at SmithsonianMag.com/podcastsurvey. We’ll also put a link in our show notes. It should take about five minutes. Thanks again and, as always, thanks for listening.


Klimek: So since it’s been more than 30 years and not all our listeners may know, who was Pablo Escobar?

Hammer: Well, Escobar was born in a working-class neighborhood of Medellín. When he was in his teens, however, he began essentially a life of crime doing things like stealing tombstones from graveyards and sanding off the names and reselling them, and just forging documents, all sorts of stuff. And then in his early 20s, he began running cocaine.

I guess at the time, neighboring countries like Peru and Bolivia were producers, and he was bringing the cocaine in, processed and unprocessed, flying it up in a small plane to landing strips in the United States. And later he got involved with a couple of other Colombian dealers and formed what became known as the Medellín Cartel, which pretty much controlled all cocaine trafficking for years between Colombia and the United States. And so he grew extremely wealthy and bought his way into a seat in the Colombian parliament, and was living with total impunity and making billions of dollars until the mid-’80s, when it all caught up with him.

Klimek: What was life like in Colombia during Pablo Escobar’s lifetime?

Hammer: Very violent. The drug traffickers were carrying out their own terrible acts of violence in the mid-’80s. Escobar was carrying out assassinations. He had death squads killing his enemies, car bombings. In 1989, an unwitting courier carried a bomb onboard an Avianca jet, which blew up mid-flight, killed about 130 people. It was savage.

On top of that, you had this escalating civil war going on between FARC, the communist, Marxist guerrilla movement in Colombia, and the Colombian government. And then on top of that, you had these, what they call the autodefensas, which were these right-wing vigilante death squads, which were often in league with drug lords. They were getting a cut of the action from the drug trade, and they were also involved in killing suspected Marxists. So there were three major violent actors all causing chaos during the ’80s and ’90s in Colombia. It was a very, very difficult time. Up to 30,000 people were being killed in a year at the peak of the violence in Colombia.

Klimek: Escobar cultivated an image of power amidst the violence and turmoil. Josh says we can only speculate about how the hippos fit into that picture.

Hammer: Apparently there were a couple of other drug lords in South America that he was emulating. There’s something about this kind of criminality and these menageries, there’s an association with power and prestige to have wild animals, to be the master of your own menagerie. This menagerie that he built up served another purpose, too, because he opened it up to the public.

He allowed local Colombians to come onto his property and do a safari in electric vehicles around the grounds. So this, of course, helped to make him a very popular figure among a lot of Colombians when he was just spreading the money around and sponsoring soccer clubs. And then this was part of the same scheme to establish roots in the community, make him a popular figure.

Klimek: Where is he keeping these animals?

Hammer: He kept them on a property called Hacienda Nápoles. It’s about three hours east of Medellín. It’s a big area. He built artificial lakes and his mansion, his villa there, and he had 1,500 people working on the grounds, free-roaming menagerie of animals, helicopter pad, dinosaur theme park, just some other weird stuff. There was also a bull ring, et cetera, et cetera.

Klimek: How did the hippos end up roaming freely outside of the grounds of the hacienda?

Hammer: So there were never any real borders of this hacienda. It was carved out of the wilderness. So within a few days of his being killed, a lot of people stormed the grounds. They ripped everything apart looking for money, looking for weapons. The place was in chaos. The staff fled, and nobody came back to tend the animals.

The animals for a while were living on their own. After it fell into disrepair, it was eventually taken over by a private corporation and reborn as a safari park. I understand from talking to an official in the local government who was a young man in those days that there were electric vehicles that would take you around and let you tour the savanna. Elephants would come over to the vehicles and stick their trunk, just like an imitation African safari.

Finally, the government decided to do something about it, so this would’ve been about maybe ’98, ’99. They gathered up the animals, and they shipped most of them off to three zoos in Colombia. But nobody wanted to get near the hippos because they were frightened of them, and so the hippos were left to their own devices. By that time, there may have been 10, 12, I’m not sure, but, I mean, the females can produce a baby every year and a half, and they can be incredibly fertile.

Klimek: Then an almost Shakespearean power struggle began to play out.

Hammer: The oldest male born of these three female hippos wanted to be the alpha male and basically killed his own father and established a new hippo pod, and that’s the dynamic that happens. A male hippo will get in a fight with the alpha male and be exiled from the herd and then have to go off and find his own environment and wander off a few kilometers, get a female or two—boom, a new hippo herd is created. And this is what’s been happening slowly over the decades. Some of these hippos have been spotted like 50 miles outside of the boundaries of the Hacienda Nápoles. So they can really wander far.

Klimek: How are the hippos in the region faring now?

Hammer: I think they’re thriving. They don’t have any natural predators. They’re not hunted, and they have access to a lot of water and a lot of fruit and a lot of vegetables and a lot of vegetation, all the things that hippos need. So they’re doing very well.

Klimek: And why does that present a threat to people and to the environment?

Hammer: I think there is this exaggerated threat about just how dangerous hippos are. I mean, you often see media reports of them being the most dangerous animal. I don’t think that’s necessarily true. I think that they can be aggressive. I think generally they’re pretty gentle. It’s sort of like, you leave me alone, I’ll leave you alone.

But from what I understand, if you get pretty dense human populations and pretty dense hippo populations competing for the same territory—fishermen on the rivers and people settling the land along the rivers—and so you get a lot of opportunities for hippo-human clashes. Last year in a schoolyard, one hippo just wandered in, and kids were scared, teachers running every which way. And if you’re on a boat, they can come up underneath and drown you. They’re not totally harmless animals.

Klimek: The presence of hippos has also changed the Magdalena River itself.

Hammer: Another reason that people are concerned is just because they produce an awful lot of excrement. They can really pollute water resources. They’re an invasive species. They don’t really belong there. So the local species that are there, like the capybaras, the tortoises, other animals, it’s rapidly changing the biome and possibly threatening these other animals. Algae, bacteriological contamination, there definitely seems to be something going on with the water in Colombia in these areas.

Klimek: How have authorities tried to solve the problem of this exploding hippo population in Colombia?

Hammer: The first thing they did was way back in the early 2000s, a professional hunter was hired, and he actually shot and killed a hippo that had wandered about 50 miles or so outside the hacienda and then posed with the corpse of his hippo, and it created a huge uproar in Colombia. I believe this was 2008, maybe 2009. Then there was a series of protests in Bogotá, and all across Colombia people were outraged and distraught. The minister of the environment had to resign, and they basically declared a moratorium on killing hippos.

They started to try to dart hippos in the wild and do these castrations. That didn’t really work, because the tranquilizers take a while to have an effect, and it was dangerous to follow these hippos around, and so the hippos would generally disappear. They managed to do this once. They were able to track a hippo and castrate it after the tranquilizer knocked him out.

And then they tried chemical castrations, where they would dart it with a chemical. But the problem with that method is that they would have to use a two-step process, and it was almost impossible to track the hippo to deliver the second dart two months later. So that didn’t work.

They tried to cordon off the hacienda, but that didn’t work either, because first of all, many of the hippos had already left the hacienda, and second of all, the property was too large. They couldn’t really construct anything strong enough to keep the animals in, so that didn’t work.

They tried getting international zoos to take the hippos, and that created a huge protest among environmental groups who didn’t believe that the resources should be spent with this translocation program. And most zoos didn’t want them anyway, so that didn’t work.

Finally, last year, they began this aggressive surgical castration campaign using traps and corrals and trying to lure the animals into these corrals, keeping them trapped, and then sterilizing them on the spot, and that has had a certain amount of success. So they’ve done about ten so far. The project began in earnest in October, and from what I understand, they were forced to stop for a couple of months because of a contract renegotiation and budget disputes.

But now they apparently have picked it up again. So it’s averaging one and a half a month or something. They say that they need to sterilize at least 40 a year to keep the population from growing. So they’re falling short, and it’s a really difficult procedure. They’re getting better at it, clearly, but it still doesn’t seem to be sufficient to deal with the numbers.


Rebecca Lewison: I remember somebody telling me, and I thought, “What? That can’t be right. There’s no way. How would there be hippos in Colombia?”

Klimek: Rebecca Lewison is an ecologist at San Diego State University. She’s also co-chair of the Hippo Specialist Group of IUCN, an international conservation organization. She mostly spends her time worrying about hippos in Africa, but at some point in the late ’90s or early 2000s, she started getting inquiries about the Colombian hippos.

Lewison: I’ve never been to Colombia, but what it looks like is a paradise for hippos, water everywhere, grass everywhere. I mean, I can see why they are thriving.

Klimek: We went to Rebecca for some more in-depth information about hippo biology, conservation, and some ideas for a potential solution in Colombia. But we began the conversation by asking: What’s it like to see a hippo up close in the wild?

Lewison: It’s just like, “Oh, my God, they’re so big,” which is kind of dumb, since you know they’re this massive animal. But when you first see them in the water, you just see that the top surface of their heads and their backs, and then when they actually come out, it’s the iceberg, there’s a lot under there.

Klimek: What makes it hard to study hippos in the wild?

Lewison: The challenge with hippos in the wild is when you go to a place that has hippos, they’re seemingly everywhere, which is not, of course, really true, but you’ll see a lot of them. They all come together and bunch up in rivers or lakes, but they’re really tough to study. And so compared to even other big gray things like elephants and rhinos, we really know comparatively little about them, because they are essentially marine mammals. They’re in the water all day and they only come out at night to feed.

So nighttime is a tough time to be doing fieldwork, not super safe, and most of the places where they’re in the water, you can’t get in there with them. It’s a hundred percent not safe either because of hippos or because of crocodiles, and the water is not clear, so we don’t really know what’s happening.

Other things that make them really hard to study is they basically don’t have a neck. So most of the ways that we put collars on animals, it goes around their neck, and they don’t have a neck. They use their neck, and so collaring them doesn’t really work.

And in another just crazy turn of events, they are very difficult to chemically immobilize or tranquilize. We don’t really understand it, but they tend to not do well with all the drugs that we use for elephants and rhinos. It’s just made it really hard to study them and learn really basic things like who’s related to who.

Identifying individuals is really tough, because we don’t really see much of them. Counting hippos is really hard, and you’d say, “Well, why? They’re massive, 4,000, 5,000 pounds.” But they’re in the water, and counting things in the water is really tough. They submerge. They don’t just stay. It’s not like you can say, “OK, everybody out of the water. I have to count you.” We’re increasingly using drones, but even with that, that can cause disturbance, so maybe a hippo will go underwater.

Klimek: What’s the biggest threat to hippos in their native habitat now?

Lewison: The biggest threat is definitely habitat loss. They require freshwater, and that really puts them at the crosshairs of people who also really rely on freshwater. And that’s probably the most valuable and limited resource on Earth, is freshwater, and it really puts them in direct conflict with people.

Right behind that is a threat that is here but is potentially intensifying, which is just the impacts of climate change, because we know that impacts water quality and quantity. But I think it really all of that boils down to they just are running out of places to be.

Klimek: Where are global hippo populations now, generally?

Lewison: We don’t have great, great counts of them, but we think there’s about 200,000 to 300,000, which is surprisingly few. That’s even less elephants than there are. From a conservation perspective, there’s certainly populations in countries where hippo populations seem to be stable—those are typically in eastern and southern Africa—and definitely countries where hippo populations are declining, which is absolutely in western African countries. And in large part that is actually driven by just large-scale habitat loss.

So overall the conservation outlook is not great. They are listed on the IUCN Red List, which is our international way of keeping track of the conservation status of animals, and they are listed as vulnerable because of that. And just increasingly, we just have concerns about their viability going forward.

Klimek: The hippo situation in Colombia is completely unprecedented, so Rebecca says she has to look to African hippos for answers about what’s going on.

Lewison: Hippos in Africa really exhibit this sort of boom-bust cycle oftentimes, particularly in places where the water and grass resources vary a lot within a year, which is a lot of places in eastern, southern Africa that have a dry season and a wet season. When there’s a drought, hippo populations can crash, a lot of mortality, both of adults and absolutely of juveniles because of either not enough water or not enough resources.

What we also see for hippo populations, which is what makes a lot of us optimistic for a future for hippos, is that they respond very well to good conditions. When there’s a lot of rain and a lot of water, we see hippo populations flourish and really grow and expand and increase very quickly, and that’s certainly what they seem to have in Colombia.

One thing that I think is interesting in Colombia is I think they’re spending a lot more time out of the water than hippos do in Africa, in part because the climate, it’s humid, it’s much more forgiving for a hippo. They have pretty sensitive skin, which is funny to say because they also are known to have some of the thickest skin, but there’s some sensitivity around them. Without water, they will die, or moisture, but I think they have that. And so maybe that’s another reason that people are really connecting to them is they can see them so much more than you can in the African context.

Klimek: Many places, non-native animal populations have been controlled by introducing predator species. Why would that not work here?

Lewison: I just don’t know what you’d introduce. The largest predator to the hippo, the most pervasive threat from predation for hippos is people. It is true that in Africa, lions, they will hunt younger hippos, smaller hippos. I don’t think we want to introduce African lions to Colombia. They certainly have their own carnivores, but it’s just not going to happen. There just isn’t anything bigger. Dinosaurs? We’ve all seen that movie, so we know how that goes.

We don’t have an option here of going up the food chain. Their skin is that thick. Save with a gun, they’re pretty hard to kill, and I don’t think there’s going to be a strategy to introduce anything that’s big enough to get them. And honestly, predation just doesn’t have a big impact even in African settings. It’s really the environment that controls hippo populations.

Klimek: How do you feel about the possibility of culling these hippos? Should that be considered as a potential solution?

Lewison: It’s a tough question, again, because of how I think folks in the area have really identified with the hippos, absolutely are concerned about animal welfare, and I obviously take all of that very seriously as well. I just don’t think at this point there’s any really good solutions. The good solution needed to come in 1993, and we’re way beyond that. So now the situation where we are, the fork in the road, I do think that this approach makes sense.

I honestly do worry about the potential of hippo-human conflict. I’ve spent a lot of time with hippos. I don’t find them to be particularly aggressive, but in areas where they are constantly under pressure, the analogy I typically use, the first time someone, if they break into your house, you’re surprised. By time ten, if someone breaks into your house, you’re ready to attack. And I think that’s where we see a lot of hippo-human conflict that have led to human fatalities.

Typically, I’m one of the people that when there is an attack that people call and say, “What can you tell us? What should we do?” And in the African settings, I think I wouldn’t get in a boat, in a canoe. I’m not interested in those trips because I am the person who hears about all of them that go south. I feel differently about being on land around hippos, but in the water in particular, there’s not much you can do. If a hippo is under threat and they’re coming for you, that’s not the time to be saying, “Well, what could I have done differently in this situation?”

But yeah, there really aren’t any easy answers here in terms of protecting people, which I think is the most at the top of the list. Of course, protecting hippos, but I would put in front of that even protecting the native plants and animals. This is their national treasure and something that I know they want to protect.

Klimek: So taking into account everything you’ve been saying about how this is a complex problem and none of the potential solutions are particularly good, what would be your recommendation as to how to balance human needs and wildlife needs?

Lewison: I think we’re on the path. The folks that I’ve talked to and heard from are trying to be thoughtful to all of the sides, to the people who feel connected to the animals, obviously to the animals themselves and their welfare, but also to the native plants and animals. And I think we are now hopefully moving toward the place of making this somewhat more sustainable. Of course, I have those fears of potential conflict if the population does grow. You hear stories of people getting gored by bison in Yellowstone. That’s because people do dumb things around wild animals. And even though these are animals that are not from here, they are still wild.

What I always want people to understand is the place where hippos are from is Africa, and the place where they really need desperate attention and support and conservation action is Africa, because while they’re thriving in Colombia, they are not thriving in the land where they have evolved. And that’s where I spend most of my time, is really trying to get organizations and governments and agencies to collaborate and coordinate so we can come up with sustainable conservation plans that absolutely protect people and their livelihoods and hippos and their ability to persist into the future.

I love that there’s a whole new group of people who didn’t even know about hippos, had never even thought about them, and now care about them, and I just hope that that extends to caring about hippos where they’re from.

Klimek: Rebecca Lewison is a conservation ecologist and professor at San Diego State University. She’s the director of SDSU’s Institute for Ecological Management and Monitoring. Thank you, Rebecca. This has been a fascinating talk.

Lewison: Great to talk with you, Chris. Thanks so much.


Klimek: To read Josh Hammer’s reporting about the Colombian hippos, go to SmithsonianMag.com. We’ll put a link to it in our show notes along with links to some of Lewison’s work. This week’s dinner party fact goes back to a time and place where hippos were presented as a potential solution to a problem rather than the cause of one—equally shocking, though.

Donny Bajohr: Hey, everyone. I’m Donny Bajohr, one of three photo editors here at the magazine, and I have a tasty treat for you for this episode’s dinner party fact. In the early 20th century, America had a problem—actually, two problems. They had a meat shortage and they had an invasive species in the South, the hyacinth. So Congressman Robert Broussard brought a bill to the House to solve both problems with one animal: the hippo. He wanted to bring over the hippo to eat up some hyacinth and feed Americans. Congressman Broussard’s bill didn’t pass, but it’s too bad, because I would love to hang a fang in some hippo meat.

Klimek (laughing): “Hang a fang!” Did you just come up with that?

Bajohr: You never heard that phrase?

Klimek: No. “Hang a fang.” I love it.

Klimek: “There’s More to That” is a production of Smithsonian magazine and PRX Productions. From the magazine, our team is me, Debra Rosenberg and Brian Wolly. From PRX, our team is Jessica Miller, Genevieve Sponsler, Adriana Rozas Rivera, Ry Dorsey and Edwin Ochoa. The executive producer of PRX Productions is Jocelyn Gonzales. Our episode artwork is by Emily Lankiewicz. Fact-checking by Stephanie Abramson. Our music is from APM Music.

I’m Chris Klimek. Thank you for listening.

Get the latest Science stories in your inbox.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Feds Propose Protection for Giant Salamanders Devastated by Hurricane Helene

A giant salamander that evolved on the supercontinent Pangaea and outlived the dinosaurs has been proposed for federal protection by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

You never forget your first time seeing a giant salamander, according to Andy Hill. He was a teenager, standing thigh-high in the Watauga River outside Boone, North Carolina, casting a line on an early fall day when he saw his first eastern hellbender. The salamander stretched 2 feet long and was camouflaged among rocks beneath the clear water.“You never lose your sense of wonder and otherworldliness when you see one,” said Hill, who now works as the Watauga Riverkeeper for MountainTrue, a nonprofit protecting natural ecosystems in western North Carolina, home to part of the Blue Ridge Mountains.The ancient species, which evolved on the supercontinent Pangaea and outlived the dinosaurs, was submitted for federal protection Friday by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If the proposal is adopted after a period of public comment, the creatures will be protected under the Endangered Species Act. Their population in the U.S. has rapidly declined in recent decades; dams, industry and even flooding worsened by climate change have threatened their habitat and ability to reproduce and find food. Today, just 12% of eastern hellbenders are successfully reproducing.Hellbenders in the Blue Ridge Mountains had been considered the healthiest population of the eastern subspecies but were devastated this fall by Hurricane Helene. Thousands were displaced or found dead amid rubble. Others were found in flooded church basements and returned to the river. But some rivers are so polluted, there’s still a “do not touch” advisory for people.Tierra Curry burst into tears when she learned of the proposed protection. “I just think it's a moral failure that we're pushing them to the brink of extinction,” said Curry, a senior scientist at the Center for Biological Diversity.The slimy, brown creature with a broad, flat head may never win a beauty contest, but it is famous as the largest amphibian in North America. The hellbender breathes dissolved oxygen in the water through its skin. Water that becomes slow-moving, warm or polluted holds less oxygen.Over the past five years, two dams were removed on the Watauga River to help improve water quality and reconnect hellbender communities. The most recent one came down this summer — and two months later, Helene upended life not just for people, but also for animals like the salamander.For those working to ensure the species' survival, the newly proposed federal protection couldn't come soon enough, said Erin McCombs, Southeast conservation director for American Rivers. “We have to be paying more attention to the health of our nation's rivers and streams, and that means paying more attention to the critters that live in them,” she said. “When species like the hellbender, which are reliant on free-flowing and clean water, are declining, alarms need to be going off, because we'll feel the impacts next.”The Center for Biological Diversity petitioned and won protection for the Ozark subspecies of hellbenders in 2011 and for Missouri hellbenders, another population of eastern hellbender, in 2021. The group sued, seeking protection for all eastern hellbenders. As of this week, all hellbenders in the U.S. are protected or slated for protection under the Endangered Species Act. Hill says he hopes the new federal protection will usher in “bold strategies” to help the species recover.“It’s going to take a massive effort," he said.The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Ten years after her passing, Theo Colburn's legacy continues to grow

Dr. Theo Colborn, who passed away December 14, 2014, was the founder of the endocrine disruption field, connecting the dots among the different health problems seen in wildlife with those seen in humans, tying them to the endocrine system and to chemical pollutants. She organized the first gathering of scientists in 1991, where the term “endocrine disruption” was coined, and the Wingspread Consensus Statement was written. She co-authored the groundbreaking 1996 book Our Stolen Future: Are We Threatening our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival? A Scientific Detective Story, along with Dianne Dumanoski and Pete Myers, the founder of Environmental Health Sciences (which publishes Environmental Health News). For the 10th anniversary of her passing, we reached out to people who knew her well. We and many others miss her unrelenting passion for raising the scientific curtain on endocrine disruption, for using her eclectic mind in pursuit of all its many manifestations, and not ever giving up, despite dark forces who would rather she’d been quiet.----Fred vom Saal, emeritus professor, University of MissouriOne of Theo’s major skills was her ability to integrate large amounts of information from diverse areas of science. Although her focus was on wildlife, in 1989 Theo read a just published article about findings from studies with litter-bearing laboratory rodents about the life-history reproductive consequences caused by their exquisite sensitivity to very small differences in serum estradiol and testosterone during the vulnerable period of fetal sexual differentiation. The laboratory data was based on whether an animal happened, by chance, to be located in the uterus between female or male littermates, not due to environmental chemicals. This was my work, and it convinced Theo to contact me because she realized this was a part of the puzzle on which she was working. Theo had been studying the disruption of development in wildlife in the Great Lakes region, and she was struck by the similarities in the life-long consequences of fetal exposure to toxic chemicals in the Great Lakes and the life-long consequences in laboratory animals due to their intrauterine position and exposure to very small differences in steroid hormones.This “aha Moment” led Theo to a dramatic departure from the toxicological dogma that “the dose makes the poison” and that only very high exposures to chemical “poisons” were of concern. Instead, in the field of endocrinology the focus was on the exquisite sensitivity to hormones such as estradiol as a result of binding to estrogen receptors at concentrations below a part-per-trillion, with exposure during the fetal period of sexual differentiation being of greatest concern. Her wide-range of reading of the scientific literature led Theo to predict that abnormalities being observed in wildlife could be due to exposure to environmental chemicals that disrupted endocrine function due to chronic exposure to very low doses. This prediction led to Theo organizing the 1991 Wingspread conference on environmental endocrine disrupting chemicals and creation of the new field of environmental endocrine disruption, which has transformed the fields of toxicology as well as endocrinology.----Pete Myers, Environmental Health SciencesIt didn’t take long, after meeting Theo Colborn in 1986, for me to realize she was on to something very big. She had run (yes, run) up to me from the back of a lecture hall where I had been speculating about ways that lipophilic pesticides might be interfering with long-distance migratory orientation in birds. She grabbed me by the shoulders, almost before introducing herself, and proclaimed “Pete, we have to work together.” What a wild and consequential ride that began!At the time I was Senior VP for Science at National Audubon, and I thought it would be simple to create a position for her at Audubon’s DC office where she could benefit from the political knowledge base of staff there and they could help ride the tiger that Theo was creating. Silly me. Theo’s emerging ideas were too bold and threatening for the Audubon DC staff, even with my support. Protecting one’s turf was more important than being at the bleeding edge of a scientific revolution.Fortunately and unexpectedly, another opportunity opened. I was offered the position of director of the W. Alton Jones Foundation, and I agreed to join if I could hire a senior science fellow to work with me on new fronts in environmental science. The foundation board agreed, and I hired Theo.Theo moved down to Charlottesville half-time, commuting between there and Washington, D.C. During those six years, I often couldn’t keep up with her prodigious pace and eclectic mind. But we managed to do some crucial things. The first was to convene the 1991 Wingspread meeting, which was the founding meeting of the field that became known as endocrine disruption. The second was to write Our Stolen Future, published in 1996. We both had full-time jobs and neither of us was a gifted writer, but we solved those problems by recruiting Dianne Dumanoski to the team, and getting a royalty advance that could support Dianne’s research and writing.The subtitle of the book is “Are we threatening our fertility, intelligence and survival?” In 1996 we had more questions than answers but enough knowledge in place that we felt it necessary to confront the public with that profound question. While science never ends, now almost 30 years later we can answer that question with a resounding YES!----Tom Zoeller, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, AmherstTheo was a giant in the field and that was clear even during her short career. She once asked me to meet her in Washington, D.C. to meet with congressional staffers to talk about ways to address public health and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. She was frail at the time, so she rented a hotel room with a large living room that would be comfortable for staffers to visit away from their offices on Capitol Hill. The fact that these staffers would take the time to come and discuss endocrine-disrupting chemicals with her was testament to her position in the field. One Republican staffer made the point that even Republicans are concerned about autism and would be more active in crafting legislation if we could assure them that we could identify the cause of autism within a five-year period and for $500,000.----Terry Collins, Teresa Heinz Professor of Green Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon UniversityIn the late 1990s, I read Our Stolen Future and realized chemistry was different to anything I had assumed up to that point; endocrine disruption could not be ignored. Then, as a way to get closer to the field, I arranged a series of high profile university lectures at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) in which more than a dozen leaders of endocrine disruption science over several years shared their knowledge of the evolving scientific revolution with the CMU community. Theo gave the first lecture on Monday, April 21, 2003, and we became great friends thereafter with extensive correspondence and regular phone conversations. I became her go-to chemist for fracking and many other things and joined her in Washington, D.C. to discuss the importance of endocrine disruption with Congress-people. Theo once told me she considered me one of her two scientific sons along with Lou Guillette, Jr., which is a treasured compliment. Theo, along with other great endocrine disruption leaders, epically changed my teaching, my deep relationship with the field of chemistry that I love so much, and redirected my research passion to developing better methods for removing endocrine-disrupting chemicals from water. ----John A McLachlan, Professor Emeritus, Tulane UniversityI first met Theo when she came to the Research Triangle Park to visit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences with her concept of a conference to follow up and define the ideas of environmental perturbation of the endocrine system and development first advanced by Rachel Carlson. We discussed participants for the meeting. Her vision was far beyond what was going on in this field of environmental hormones at that time. Theo said we had to consider all animal species. In doing so and being consistent in this idea she advanced the basic sciences of evolutionary and developmental biology that opened inquiries that are still going on.----Carol Kwiatkowski, The Endocrine Disruption ExchangeI had the privilege of working with Theo on a near daily basis for the last seven years of her life — doing my best to soak up almost a century's worth of wisdom. She was sometimes despondent, afraid we had suffered too much damage to our brains and hearts to muster enough intelligence and empathy to fix the problems we had created. But she never stopped trying to do whatever she could to improve things for future generations. I think she would find hope in the work of many of us from The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX) who continue to not only raise awareness about the harms of endocrine-disrupting chemicals but provide people with concrete recommendations for how to reduce their personal exposure.As Theo would say, "Onward!"

Dr. Theo Colborn, who passed away December 14, 2014, was the founder of the endocrine disruption field, connecting the dots among the different health problems seen in wildlife with those seen in humans, tying them to the endocrine system and to chemical pollutants. She organized the first gathering of scientists in 1991, where the term “endocrine disruption” was coined, and the Wingspread Consensus Statement was written. She co-authored the groundbreaking 1996 book Our Stolen Future: Are We Threatening our Fertility, Intelligence, and Survival? A Scientific Detective Story, along with Dianne Dumanoski and Pete Myers, the founder of Environmental Health Sciences (which publishes Environmental Health News). For the 10th anniversary of her passing, we reached out to people who knew her well. We and many others miss her unrelenting passion for raising the scientific curtain on endocrine disruption, for using her eclectic mind in pursuit of all its many manifestations, and not ever giving up, despite dark forces who would rather she’d been quiet.----Fred vom Saal, emeritus professor, University of MissouriOne of Theo’s major skills was her ability to integrate large amounts of information from diverse areas of science. Although her focus was on wildlife, in 1989 Theo read a just published article about findings from studies with litter-bearing laboratory rodents about the life-history reproductive consequences caused by their exquisite sensitivity to very small differences in serum estradiol and testosterone during the vulnerable period of fetal sexual differentiation. The laboratory data was based on whether an animal happened, by chance, to be located in the uterus between female or male littermates, not due to environmental chemicals. This was my work, and it convinced Theo to contact me because she realized this was a part of the puzzle on which she was working. Theo had been studying the disruption of development in wildlife in the Great Lakes region, and she was struck by the similarities in the life-long consequences of fetal exposure to toxic chemicals in the Great Lakes and the life-long consequences in laboratory animals due to their intrauterine position and exposure to very small differences in steroid hormones.This “aha Moment” led Theo to a dramatic departure from the toxicological dogma that “the dose makes the poison” and that only very high exposures to chemical “poisons” were of concern. Instead, in the field of endocrinology the focus was on the exquisite sensitivity to hormones such as estradiol as a result of binding to estrogen receptors at concentrations below a part-per-trillion, with exposure during the fetal period of sexual differentiation being of greatest concern. Her wide-range of reading of the scientific literature led Theo to predict that abnormalities being observed in wildlife could be due to exposure to environmental chemicals that disrupted endocrine function due to chronic exposure to very low doses. This prediction led to Theo organizing the 1991 Wingspread conference on environmental endocrine disrupting chemicals and creation of the new field of environmental endocrine disruption, which has transformed the fields of toxicology as well as endocrinology.----Pete Myers, Environmental Health SciencesIt didn’t take long, after meeting Theo Colborn in 1986, for me to realize she was on to something very big. She had run (yes, run) up to me from the back of a lecture hall where I had been speculating about ways that lipophilic pesticides might be interfering with long-distance migratory orientation in birds. She grabbed me by the shoulders, almost before introducing herself, and proclaimed “Pete, we have to work together.” What a wild and consequential ride that began!At the time I was Senior VP for Science at National Audubon, and I thought it would be simple to create a position for her at Audubon’s DC office where she could benefit from the political knowledge base of staff there and they could help ride the tiger that Theo was creating. Silly me. Theo’s emerging ideas were too bold and threatening for the Audubon DC staff, even with my support. Protecting one’s turf was more important than being at the bleeding edge of a scientific revolution.Fortunately and unexpectedly, another opportunity opened. I was offered the position of director of the W. Alton Jones Foundation, and I agreed to join if I could hire a senior science fellow to work with me on new fronts in environmental science. The foundation board agreed, and I hired Theo.Theo moved down to Charlottesville half-time, commuting between there and Washington, D.C. During those six years, I often couldn’t keep up with her prodigious pace and eclectic mind. But we managed to do some crucial things. The first was to convene the 1991 Wingspread meeting, which was the founding meeting of the field that became known as endocrine disruption. The second was to write Our Stolen Future, published in 1996. We both had full-time jobs and neither of us was a gifted writer, but we solved those problems by recruiting Dianne Dumanoski to the team, and getting a royalty advance that could support Dianne’s research and writing.The subtitle of the book is “Are we threatening our fertility, intelligence and survival?” In 1996 we had more questions than answers but enough knowledge in place that we felt it necessary to confront the public with that profound question. While science never ends, now almost 30 years later we can answer that question with a resounding YES!----Tom Zoeller, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts, AmherstTheo was a giant in the field and that was clear even during her short career. She once asked me to meet her in Washington, D.C. to meet with congressional staffers to talk about ways to address public health and endocrine-disrupting chemicals. She was frail at the time, so she rented a hotel room with a large living room that would be comfortable for staffers to visit away from their offices on Capitol Hill. The fact that these staffers would take the time to come and discuss endocrine-disrupting chemicals with her was testament to her position in the field. One Republican staffer made the point that even Republicans are concerned about autism and would be more active in crafting legislation if we could assure them that we could identify the cause of autism within a five-year period and for $500,000.----Terry Collins, Teresa Heinz Professor of Green Chemistry, Carnegie Mellon UniversityIn the late 1990s, I read Our Stolen Future and realized chemistry was different to anything I had assumed up to that point; endocrine disruption could not be ignored. Then, as a way to get closer to the field, I arranged a series of high profile university lectures at Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) in which more than a dozen leaders of endocrine disruption science over several years shared their knowledge of the evolving scientific revolution with the CMU community. Theo gave the first lecture on Monday, April 21, 2003, and we became great friends thereafter with extensive correspondence and regular phone conversations. I became her go-to chemist for fracking and many other things and joined her in Washington, D.C. to discuss the importance of endocrine disruption with Congress-people. Theo once told me she considered me one of her two scientific sons along with Lou Guillette, Jr., which is a treasured compliment. Theo, along with other great endocrine disruption leaders, epically changed my teaching, my deep relationship with the field of chemistry that I love so much, and redirected my research passion to developing better methods for removing endocrine-disrupting chemicals from water. ----John A McLachlan, Professor Emeritus, Tulane UniversityI first met Theo when she came to the Research Triangle Park to visit the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences with her concept of a conference to follow up and define the ideas of environmental perturbation of the endocrine system and development first advanced by Rachel Carlson. We discussed participants for the meeting. Her vision was far beyond what was going on in this field of environmental hormones at that time. Theo said we had to consider all animal species. In doing so and being consistent in this idea she advanced the basic sciences of evolutionary and developmental biology that opened inquiries that are still going on.----Carol Kwiatkowski, The Endocrine Disruption ExchangeI had the privilege of working with Theo on a near daily basis for the last seven years of her life — doing my best to soak up almost a century's worth of wisdom. She was sometimes despondent, afraid we had suffered too much damage to our brains and hearts to muster enough intelligence and empathy to fix the problems we had created. But she never stopped trying to do whatever she could to improve things for future generations. I think she would find hope in the work of many of us from The Endocrine Disruption Exchange (TEDX) who continue to not only raise awareness about the harms of endocrine-disrupting chemicals but provide people with concrete recommendations for how to reduce their personal exposure.As Theo would say, "Onward!"

Costa Rica Installs Wildlife Crossings to Prevent Electrocutions

Costa Rica has taken a significant step in wildlife conservation by addressing the growing issue of wildlife electrocutions in Santa Fe de Cóbano, Guanacaste. Officials from the Tempisque Conservation Area (ACT), responding to a citizen alert, intervened after an insulated power line used by animals to cross the street was removed during the installation of […] The post Costa Rica Installs Wildlife Crossings to Prevent Electrocutions appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Costa Rica has taken a significant step in wildlife conservation by addressing the growing issue of wildlife electrocutions in Santa Fe de Cóbano, Guanacaste. Officials from the Tempisque Conservation Area (ACT), responding to a citizen alert, intervened after an insulated power line used by animals to cross the street was removed during the installation of new electrical infrastructure for water wells. The removal led to several wildlife fatalities. At the site, personnel from the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC) assessed the situation and installed a 13.5-meter-long overhead wildlife crossing made of durable nylon rope. This crossing provides safe passage for animals such as monkeys, sloths, squirrels, birds, and other species, restoring connectivity and mitigating the risk of future electrocutions. A second wildlife crossing is planned to strengthen safety measures in one of the area’s busiest wildlife corridors. SINAC is collaborating with the Sustainable Electrification Group, a coalition of electricity companies, to implement similar solutions across Costa Rica. “The goal of this group is to enhance Costa Rica’s electrical network while safeguarding wildlife and preventing fatalities caused by power lines,” stated David Chavarría, executive director of SINAC. In January 2024, the Government of Costa Rica signed a decree to ensure public electricity services respect the lives of all species. This regulation outlines measures for reducing, preventing, and mitigating wildlife electrocutions. The decree also establishes a monitoring system for electrocution incidents and mandates urgent interventions in critical areas, such as environmentally fragile ecosystems and wildlife migration routes. The “Sustainable Electrification” working group (GES), composed of SINAC, the National Environmental Technical Secretariat (SETENA), and multiple electricity providers—including ICE, CNFL, ESPH, and COOPEGUANACASTE—oversees the implementation of these measures. As Costa Rica advances its infrastructure, efforts like these highlight the country’s commitment to balancing development with biodiversity conservation, reinforcing its reputation as a global leader in sustainability. The post Costa Rica Installs Wildlife Crossings to Prevent Electrocutions appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

We're Pandemic Experts. Here's What Worries Us Most About Bird Flu.

Infectious disease experts reveal what does and doesn't alarm them when it comes to the H5N1 virus.

Jonathan R. Beckerman via Getty ImagesExperts are concerned for farm workers who are most likely to get sick from bird flu.It’s hard to turn on the news or look online without seeing something related to bird flu. Also known as H5N1, the virus is spreading in a few states across the country and sickening animals and farm workers.Given the circumstances, it’s only natural to worry about the virus, so we asked experts to share their thoughts. Below are the societal and health-based concerns they have about bird flu right now:They’re worried about farm workers who make up most bird flu cases.Experts told HuffPost the average person doesn’t need to panic at this point in time.“Today, the greatest fear I have is for people that we know are being exposed to this virus directly ― so that’s the farm workers,” said Dr. Jennifer Nuzzo, a professor of epidemiology and the director of the Pandemic Center at Brown University School of Public Health in Rhode Island.Farm workers who are in close contact with poultry and cows are currently at risk and are largely becoming infected; 56 of the 58 reported bird flu cases in the U.S. this year can be traced back to cattle or poultry exposure, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.“We already know that they’re getting infected, and we know that they’re getting sick, and fortunately, they haven’t gotten very sick,” Nuzzo said. “They haven’t gotten severely ill, they haven’t died, but we literally don’t know why that’s happening.”They are paying attention to non-farm worker cases as well.A Canadian teenager with no underlying health conditions was also infected with bird flu and ended up in the hospital.“That just shows you how much of a gamble the whole thing is, because you literally can’t predict it. Are you going to be like the farm worker who gets a frankly hideous case of conjunctivitis and some respiratory symptoms, or are you going to be like the teenager in British Columbia? You don’t know,” Nuzzo said.“I want to be clear. I’m not talking about the general public. I am talking about people that we know are being exposed to this virus,” she added. “This virus is not yet capable of spreading between people, and although we’re also seeing increasing cases occurring with an unknown exposure — meaning we don’t know where they got it from ― that also is concerning to me, but those events are still quite rare.”They’re concerned that it could swap genes with the seasonal flu, making it able to spread more easily.“The concern is that H5N1 is an avian influenza. Influenza viruses are notorious for changing. They can shift over time, they can reassort with each other and make much bigger shifts quite quickly,” said Meghan Davis, an associate professor in the department of environmental health and engineering at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Maryland.“The reason this is important is that if you would have a person who is infected with both H5N1 and a seasonal flu, you now could have one of those bigger reassortment events,” Davis continued. “So, some swapping of the genes ... you might be able to give the H5N1 virus genes that make it more virulent in people or that make it possible to transmit more easily from person to person, and that’s definitely something we want to prevent.”Experts say you should stop drinking raw milk to protect yourself from bird flu.They’re worried about infections in household pets.“For me, as an animal health specialist, I’m very worried about the amount of disease we’re seeing in animals, which is extraordinary,” Davis said. “We’re talking about millions of birds lost. We’ve got many dairy cows affected — I think we’re now up to over 700 herds in the country that have been impacted by it. It’s also a virus that can be lethal in some species, not just the marine mammals we heard about in prior years, but also cats.”This goes for cats on farms that drink raw milk in addition to domestic cats, where the contamination source is unclear, she said. Cats could have had contact with a dead bird that’s infected with the virus, raw milk, or other infected animals, with Davis noting that “we’ve been finding that the virus can infect mice, and so that’s a huge concern as well.”“I’m really trying to get it out there about the cats, because I think that it’s just so possible for an infection to occur,” she said. “And I worry ... because if you have a pet infected in a home, that’s a very different kind of exposure than even drinking the raw milk or having occupational contact as a worker on a farm.”These infections could happen in folks who avoid potential contamination sources like raw milk and farms because they’re immunosuppressed or pregnant, Davis explained.“We just don’t know what we might see in terms of the kind of infection that could come out of that kind of exposure,” she said.Davis also noted that the same concerns extend to other household pets like dogs, who could also come in contact with birds, mice or other infection sources.They’re worried about the consumption of raw milk.In recent months, raw milk has grown in popularity as people like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Gwyneth Paltrow promote drinking it. However, raw milk is known to carry harmful bacteria and does not have proven health benefits when compared to pasteurized milk. Moreover, raw milk is directly tied to bird flu.“If you’re someone who is drinking raw milk ... here’s what I’m worried about: The virus is spreading to more and more dairy farms. We know that when cows are infected, the amount of virus that’s in their milk is very high. We also know from animal studies that consuming H5N1-infected milk can make these animals that consume it very sick, including hideous neurologic symptoms,” Nuzzo said. “So when I connect those dots, that tells me I don’t think I would drink raw milk.” However, you don’t need to be concerned if you drink pasteurized milk.“Commercial pasteurization, which brings milk to a certain temperature for a certain duration of time, sometimes under pressure, is effective at inactivating the virus,” Davis said.She also noted the importance of the USDA ordering raw and unpasteurized to be tested for bird flu, explaining that testing will help officials determine infected farms.They’re concerned that the conditions that cause pandemics are only getting worse.“I think it is really important for people to understand that the conditions that give rise to pandemics are only getting more pronounced,” Nuzzo said. “There are going to be more pandemics in the future. We should try to prevent them ... sounding the alarms right now with H5N1 is an attempt to just do that.”She also explained how climate and environmental change plays a major role in the spread of new pathogens.“The new pathogens that have the ability to infect people and then spread between people, they have to be things that we don’t have immunity to, and the majority of those come from wildlife,” Nuzzo said. “So, anything that shakes up our interaction with wildlife is what potentially creates risk.”This includes things like deforestation, reforestation and land use changes, she said, in addition to “wild animals having more contact with humans, either directly or through domesticated animals, like cows and pigs.”“Ultimately, it’s about creating more opportunities for people to become exposed to wildlife pathogens [and] allowing those wildlife pathogens to become adapted for infecting and spreading between humans,” Nuzzo said.They’re worried that society isn’t doing enough to prepare for future pandemics.Plenty of people are talking about bird flu right now for good reason.“We’re trying to get government to do more to get ahead of this virus so that it doesn’t become a problem for general members of the public. Nobody wants to go through another pandemic, nobody wants a farm worker to lose his or her life just for putting milk in our fridges,” Nuzzo said. “So, we are kind of sounding the alarm for the purposes of policy and practice changes that could make everyone safer.”We Need Your SupportOther news outlets have retreated behind paywalls. At HuffPost, we believe journalism should be free for everyone.Would you help us provide essential information to our readers during this critical time? We can't do it without you.Can't afford to contribute? Support HuffPost by creating a free account and log in while you read.You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again. We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you.Whether you give once or many more times, we appreciate your contribution to keeping our journalism free for all.You've supported HuffPost before, and we'll be honest — we could use your help again. We view our mission to provide free, fair news as critically important in this crucial moment, and we can't do it without you.Whether you give just one more time or sign up again to contribute regularly, we appreciate you playing a part in keeping our journalism free for all.Support HuffPostAlready contributed? Log in to hide these messages.Nuzzo noted that, because of how horrible COVID-19 was, people have a hard time grasping the idea that more pandemics will happen, hoping that they never have to go through something like that again. And it doesn’t help that society is often quick to say disease emergencies are over — a problem that Nuzzo argued stops us from planning more effectively against pandemics.“And I think that is getting in the way of our doing the kinds of things that would just make us more ready for these events. ... It may come, it may not. But if we’re generally ready for it, then we don’t have to sit there and work ourselves up about it,” she said.Shutting down everything, as was the case with the COVID pandemic, is not how society should have to respond to a pandemic, with Nuzzo saying, “That is not what responding to a pandemic is supposed to be.” Instead, she explained that, to curtail a potential bird flu pandemic — or any pandemic, for that matter — the government should focus on preventing the virus from infecting more farm workers and killing people, getting ahead of it so it can’t mutate and become more contagious, developing medications, and improving indoor air quality.“So that when these things happen, they don’t just wash over us and upend our lives,” Nuzzo said.

Monarch Butterfly May Gain Threatened Species Status in US

(Reuters) - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed listing the monarch butterfly as a threatened species on Tuesday, citing a significant...

(Reuters) - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposed listing the monarch butterfly as a threatened species on Tuesday, citing a significant decline in the iconic black and orange insects that has pushed them toward extinction.Monarch butterflies, known for migrating thousands of miles (km) across North America, have experienced a decades-long U.S. population decline due to habitat loss caused by human activities such as farming and urban development, widespread use of pesticides and climate change.Environmental groups have been pushing for U.S. protection of the winged pollinators for a decade."The iconic monarch butterfly is cherished across North America, captivating children and adults throughout its fascinating lifecycle," U.S. FWS Director Martha Williams said in a statement."Despite its fragility, it is remarkably resilient, like many things in nature when we just give them a chance. Science shows that the monarch needs that chance, and this proposed listing invites and builds on unprecedented public participation in shaping monarch conservation efforts," she addedDespite being recognized as needing federal protection under the Endangered Species Act four years ago, the monarch butterfly waited behind dozens of other species facing more immediate threats.The ESA, signed into law in 1973, is credited with helping to save the bald eagle, California condor and numerous other animals and plants from extinction. ESA protection makes it illegal to kill or harm species classified as threatened or endangered without a special permit.The eastern migratory monarch population has declined by about 80% since the 1980s, while the western migratory population has dropped by more than 95%. The declines put the western populations at greater than 99% chance of extinction by 2080, according to the FWS.The agency is proposing to designate 4,395 acres (1,780 hectares) in California as "critical habitat" for the butterflies. Federal agencies are prohibited from destroying or modifying areas with that designation.The public will have until March 12, 2025 to comment on the proposal to list the monarch butterfly. The service will then evaluate the comments and any additional information on the species to determine whether to list the monarch butterfly.(Reporting by Nichola Groom; Editing by Sandra Maler)Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.