A Critical Review of the Mediterranean Sea Turtle Rescue Network: a Web Looking for a Weaver

A peer-reviewed open-access journal Nature Conservation 10:A 45–69 critical (2015) review of the Mediterranean sea turtle rescue network... 45 doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.10.4890 REVIEW ARTICLE http://natureconservation.pensoft.net Launched to accelerate biodiversity conservation A critical review of the Mediterranean sea turtle rescue network: a web looking for a weaver Judith Ullmann1,2, Michael Stachowitsch2 1 Department of Arctic and Marine Biology, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, NO-9037 Tromsø, Norway 2 Department of Limnology & Bio-Oceanography, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria Corresponding author: Judith Ullmann ([email protected]) Academic editor: Klaus Henle | Received 14 March 2015 | Accepted 22 May 2015 | Published 16 June 2015 http://zoobank.org/98A8C762-61A3-4F7F-B2EA-37F1E2B3C51C Citation: Ullmann J, Stachowitsch M (2015) A critical review of the Mediterranean sea turtle rescue network: a web looking for a weaver. Nature Conservation 10: 45–69. doi: 10.3897/natureconservation.10.4890 Abstract A key issue in conservation biology is recognizing and bridging the gap between scientific results and specific action. We examine sea turtles—charismatic yet endangered flagship species—in the Mediter- ranean, a sea with historically high levels of exploitation and 22 coastal nations. We take sea turtle rescue facilities as a visible measure for implemented conservation action. Our study yielded 34 confirmed sea turtle rescue centers, 8 first-aid stations, and 7 informal rescue institutions currently in operation. Jux- taposing these facilities to known sea turtle distribution and threat hotspots reveals a clear disconnect. Only 14 of the 22 coastal countries had centers, with clear gaps in the Middle East and Africa. Moreover, the information flow between centers is apparently limited. The populations of the two species nesting in the Mediterranean, the loggerhead Caretta caretta and the green turtle Chelonia mydas, are far below historical levels and face a range of anthropogenic threats at sea and on land. Sea turtle rescue centers are acknowledged to reduce mortality in bycatch hotspots, provide a wealth of scientific data, and raise public awareness. The proposal for a Mediterranean-wide rescue network as published by the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected Areas a decade ago has not materialized in its envisioned scope. We discuss the efficiency, gaps, and needs for a rescue network and call for establishing additional rescue centers and an accompanying common online database to connect existing centers. This would provide better information on the number and types of rescue facilities on a Mediterranean scale, improve communica- tion between these facilities, enhance standardization of procedures, yield large-scale data on the number of treated turtles and their injuries, and thus provide valuable input for targeted conservation measures. Keywords Mediterranean Sea, marine turtles, conservation, rescue facilities, first aid, rehabilitation, information management, networking, awareness raising Copyright Judith Ullmann, Michael Stachowitsch. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. 46 Judith Ullmann & Michael Stachowitsch / Nature Conservation 10: 45–69 (2015) Introduction Conservation biology is called upon to help translate scientific knowledge into specific action. Bridging this gap has been abetted by a new era of scientific endeavor (Sta- chowitsch 2003, Rose et al. 2011) in which the focus and urgency of scientific work has changed. In marine biology, a considerable and increasing percentage of papers is being devoted to documenting deterioration and dysfunction at population, ecosystem and global levels, often suggesting amelioration strategies. This is particularly true in the case of sea turtles, well-known flagship species, which face major anthropogenic threats at sea and on their nesting beaches worldwide. The complex life-history and highly migratory nature of sea turtles (Hamann et al. 2010), combined with the many human impacts, make conservation challenging and transcend simple, contained management measures. All sea turtle species are listed on The IUCN Red List of Threat- ened Species (IUCN 2014). They are a case study of marine megafauna that are now functionally or entirely extinct in many coastal ecosystems (Jackson et al. 2001). The Mediterranean is a historically overexploited marginal sea (Morales-Muñiz and Roselló-Izquierdo 2008). It is also polluted, for example with oil and plas- tic, which are particularly pertinent with regard to sea turtles (Gramentz 1988). Its multitude of coastal nations with different socio-economic and cultural back- grounds—not to mention linguistic barriers—stymies the concerted protection and conservation of its sea turtle populations (Amano and Sutherland 2013). The loggerhead Caretta caretta (Linnaeus, 1758) is the most common species in the Mediterranean (Broderick et al. 2002, Margaritoulis et al. 2003). Like the green turtle Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758), it nests in the eastern regions (Kasparek et al. 2001, Margaritoulis et al. 2003), but also frequents different habitats during different life stages in the western sector (Garofalo et al. 2013), where it co-occurs with individuals from the Atlantic (Carreras et al. 2006, Casale et al. 2008a, Wal- lace et al. 2010). Leatherbacks Dermochelys coriacea (Vandelli, 1761) are observed regularly at sea (Casale et al. 2003), whereas the hawksbill turtle Eretmochelys im- bricata (Linnaeus, 1766) and Kemp’s ridley Lepidochelys kempii (Garman, 1880) are recorded here only occasionally (Laurent and Lescure 1994, Camiñas 2003). Sea turtles have been afforded protection under a number of treaties and laws (Suppl. material 1). The EU Habitats Directive lists all five species in Annex IV as being of community interest and in need of strict protection (European Community 1992). It also protects the loggerhead and green turtle as priority species with the need for special conservation areas (Annex II). Accordingly, these two species are subject to wide-ranging scientific research, monitoring, and conservation efforts by dozens of universities and institutions, along with numerous dedicated associations and socie- ties, e.g., ARCHELON, EuroTurtle, MEDASSET. Fisheries bycatch, boat strikes, intentional killing, and entanglement in marine debris including ghost gear have been identified as the main threats at sea (Tomás et al. 2008, Casale and Margaritoulis 2010, Casale et al. 2010, Casale 2011). On land, degradation and reduction of nesting habitat caused by touristic and recreational A critical review of the Mediterranean sea turtle rescue network... 47 activities, light pollution, noise, construction, sand extraction, and traffic (Camiñas 2004) are taking their toll. Turkey, for example, holds the largest green turtle nesting population in the Mediterranean with about 230 females nesting annually (Seminoff 2004). Only three generations back, from 1879–1919, about 3,500 individuals still nested there (Seminoff 2004). The Turkish population has experienced a 93% -de cline over the last 95 years. Green turtles face a measurable risk of extinction worldwide and therefore qualify for the IUCN Endangered status under Criteria A2bd (Seminoff 2004). The Mediterranean population is genetically distinct from Atlantic populations and belongs to a separate regional management unit (RMU) (Wallace et al. 2010), which is recognized to face high threats and a high risk of extinction (Wal- lace et al. 2011). A total of 339–369 females are nesting in the entire Mediterranean (Broderick et al. 2002). The resident Mediterranean loggerhead population is genetically isolated (Carreras et al. 2011) from individuals of the two Atlantic RMUs migrating to Mediterranean foraging grounds and is considered to face high threats (Wallace et al. 2011). Bycatch rates are estimated at up to 200,000 loggerheads per year, leading to more than 50,000 deaths annually through direct interaction alone (Casale 2008, Lucchetti and Sala 2010, Casale 2011). Considerable declines on specific nesting beaches have been recorded (Ilgaz et al. 2007). Overall, no significant population trend could be observed on nesting beaches over the last decades, but survival probabilities are somewhat lower than would be expected from a healthy population (Casale et al. 2014). Anecdotal information suggests a decline over decadal scales (Casale and Margaritoulis 2010). The latest IUCN assessment classified the loggerhead as vulnerable (Marine Turtle Special- ist Group 1996) but did not specifically deal with the Mediterranean population and needs updating (IUCN 2014). Total population estimates are not available, neither are total stock mortality estimates (Camiñas 2004). The importance of dedicated rescue facilities for sea turtles was recognized during the 1980s (RAC/SPA 2004). One of the first rescue centers in the Mediterranean was established by ARCHELON in Greece in 1994 (Suppl. material 1). Others followed, but not all of them provided full facilities and treatment (Bentivegna 2005). After two decades of ill-concerted development, the need for regulating and improving sea turtle rescue was generally acknowledged, and guidelines for the standardization of rescue activities were established. The Regional Activity Centre for Specially

Load more