Those who have read Jared Diamond’s Collapse are familiar with his analysis of the disaster on Easter Island. Diamond’s explanation focuses on over-exploitation of resources (especially deforestation) driven by the desire to build moai as the explanation for why by 1870, native culture had essentially disappeared. Now comes Terry Hunt to tell us that the scenario laid out in Collapse may not be accurate. His research indicates that deforestation started almost as soon as people colonised the island and that a major factor in the deforestation was the Polynesian rat. Rats ate the seeds of the now-extinct Jubaea palm, preventing reforestation. Prof. Hunt does not believe that the number of Polynesian colonists ever reached the 15,000 – 20,000 level, rather it hit an equilibrium of approximately 3,000 early on. The people that Europeans first encountered in 1722 were not a remnant population – they were it – the Rapanui culture. Where did the culture go? Disease, conflict with the Europeans and enslavement.

I believe that the world faces today an unprecedented global environmental crisis, and I see the usefulness of historical examples of the pitfalls of environmental destruction. So it was with some unease that I concluded that Rapa Nui does not provide such a model. But as a scientist I cannot ignore the problems with the accepted narrative of the island’s prehistory. Mistakes or exaggerations in arguments for protecting the environment only lead to oversimplified answers and hurt the cause of environmentalism. We will end up wondering why our simple answers were not enough to make a difference in confronting today’s problems.

See this for a timeline – popular perception vs. what Hunt’s work suggests.