DOCSLIB.ORG

Cultural Conservation of Freshwater Turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cultural Conservation of Freshwater Turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest Cultural Conservation of Freshwater Turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest L.S. Beesley, K.M. Howard, L. Joachim, and A.J. King 2010 Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 203 Cultural conservation of freshwater turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Series No. 203 Cultural conservation of freshwater turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest Leah Beesley 1, Katie Howard 1, Lee Joachim 2 and Alison King 1 1Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research 123 Brown Street, Heidelberg, Victoria 3084 April 2010 In partnership with: 2 The Living Murray, Indigenous Facilitator Department of Sustainability and Environment, Yorta Yorta Aboriginal Corporation cnr Schier and Maloney Streets, Barmah, Victoria 3639 Funded by: The Murray–Darling Basin Authorities’ Living Murray Program Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Sustainability and Environment Heidelberg, Victoria Report produced by: Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Department of Sustainability and Environment PO Box 137 Heidelberg, Victoria 3084 Phone (03) 9450 8600 Website: www.dse.vic.gov.au/ari © State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment 2010 This publication is copyright. Apart from fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, criticism or review as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968 , no part may be reproduced, copied, transmitted in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical or graphic) without the prior written permission of the State of Victoria, Department of Sustainability and Environment. All requests and enquiries should be directed to the Customer Service Centre, 136 186 or email [email protected] Citation: Beesley, L., Howard, K., Joachim, L., and King, A. (2010) Cultural conservation of freshwater turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Technical Report Series No. 203. Department of Sustainability and Environment, Heidelberg, Victoria ISSN 1835-3827 (print) ISSN 1835-3835 (online) ISBN 978-1-74242-631-0 (print) ISBN 978-1-74242-632-7 (online) Disclaimer: This publication may be of assistance to you but the State of Victoria and its employees do not guarantee that the publication is without flaw of any kind or is wholly appropriate for your particular purposes and therefore disclaims all liability for any error, loss or other consequence which may arise from you relying on any information in this publication. Front cover photo: The Broad-shelled Turtle (photograph by Katie Howard). Authorised by: Victorian Government, Melbourne Printed by: NMIT Printroom, 77–91 St Georges Road, Preston 3072 Contents List of tables, figures and plates..................................................................................................... iv Acknowledgments .............................................................................................................................v Summary............................................................................................................................................1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................3 Section 1: Documenting the current health and status of turtle populations at Barmah– Millewa Forest ...................................................................................................................................7 1 Methods.................................................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Study areas................................................................................................................................7 1.2 Collection and processing of live turtles.................................................................................11 1.3 Surveys for dead turtles ..........................................................................................................12 1.4 Analyses..................................................................................................................................15 2 Results....................................................................................................................................16 2.1 Live turtle survey ....................................................................................................................16 2.2 Dead turtle survey...................................................................................................................22 3 Discussion ..............................................................................................................................24 3.1 Conclusions and recommendations.........................................................................................27 Section 2: Knowledge sharing and community involvement.......................................................29 References........................................................................................................................................30 Appendix 1. Water quality measurements....................................................................................33 Appendix 2. Live turtle data ..........................................................................................................35 Appendix 3. Dead turtle data .........................................................................................................40 Appendix 4. Dead turtle survey flyer ............................................................................................41 Appendix 5. Turtle identification flyer..........................................................................................45 iii List of tables, figures and plates List of tables Table 1. Study sites, their descriptors, water permanence, and habitat grouping. ............................10 Table 2. Effort (hours traps were set) for at each site, and the number of each species of turtles caught......................................................................................................................................17 List of figures Figure 1. Average daily discharge downstream of Yarrawonga on the Murray River (upstream of Barmah–Millewa). ....................................................................................................................4 Figure 2. Photos and corresponding distribution maps of (a) Broad-shelled Turtle, (b) Murray River Turtle, and (c) Common Long-necked Turtle.................................................................5 Figure 3. Sites surveyed for live turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest.................................................13 Figure 4. Sites surveyed for dead turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest...............................................14 Figure 5. Size frequency distributions of; (a) Broad-shelled Turtle, (b) Murray River Turtle, and (c) Common Long-necked Turtle.. .........................................................................................18 Figure 6. Locations of turtle species captured during the live turtle survey. ....................................19 Figure 7. Average (± se) turtle abundance / trap / hour / site of the Broad-shelled, Murray River, and Common Long-necked Turtle..........................................................................................20 Figure 8. Average (± se) turtle abundance (per hour of trapping effort) for each site, grouped by water permanence; (a) Broad-shelled Turtle, (b) Murray River Turtle, (c) Common Long- necked Turtle. .........................................................................................................................20 Figure 9. Average (± se) body condition ( K) for turtles at each site, ordered by water permanence; (a) Broad-shelled Turtle, (b) Murray River Turtle, (c) Common Long-necked Turtle...........21 Figure 10. Average (± se) body condition of Common Long-necked Turtles in Barmah–Millewa Forest through time in relation to watering events. ................................................................22 Figure 11. Relative percent damage to the shells of live turtles in boat trafficked and non-boat trafficked sites.........................................................................................................................22 Figure 12: The number of dead turtle shells observed per kilometre of walking effort per person at each site...................................................................................................................................23 List of plates Plate 1. A selection of the habitat types included in the study: (a) river, showing netting habitat, (b) river, Yielima Bend, (c) permanent wetland, Millewa River Road, (d) large lake, Barmah Lake, (e) regulated creek, Edwards – Gulpa Junction, (f) ephemeral creek, Smiths Creek......9 Plate 2. The cathedral trap, (a) out of water, and (b) set in Tongalong Creek. .................................10 Plate 3. Turtle tagging: (a) tag placed between the fourth and fifth digit of the hind foot, (b) notch made in a marginal scute, and (c) notch made in marginal scute F, giving the turtle the unique notch code ‘F’. ............................................................................................................12 Plate 4. (a) searching for dead turtles in Millewa River Road Wetland #2, (b) remains of a shell...12 Plate 5. Common Long-necked Turtles
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Movement and Habitat Use of Australias Largest Snakenecked Turtle
    bs_bs_bannerJournal of Zoology Journal of Zoology. Print ISSN 0952-8369 Movement and habitat use of Australia’s largest snake-necked turtle: implications for water management D. S. Bower1*, M. Hutchinson2 & A. Georges1 1 Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia 2 South Australian Museum, Adelaide, SA, Australia Keywords Abstract freshwater; radio-telemetry; home range; weir; tortoise; river; sex differences. Hydrological regimes strongly influence ecological processes in river basins. Yet, the impacts of management regimes are unknown for many freshwater taxa in Correspondence highly regulated rivers. We used radio-telemetry to monitor the movement and Deborah S. Bower, School of Environmental activity of broad-shelled river turtles Chelodina expansa to infer the impact of and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, current water management practices on turtles in Australia’s most regulated river Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. – the Murray River. We radio-tracked C. expansa to (1) measure the range span Tel: +61 02 49212045; and examine the effect of sex, size and habitat type on turtle movement, and (2) Fax: +61 02 49 216923 examine habitat use within the river channel and its associated backwaters. C. Email: [email protected] expansa occupied all macro habitats in the river (main channel, backwater, swamp and connecting inlets). Within these habitats, females occupied discrete home *Present address: School of Environmental ranges, whereas males moved up to 25 km. The extensive movement of male and Life Sciences, University of Newcastle, turtles suggests that weirs and other aquatic barriers may interfere with movement Callaghan, NSW, 2308, Australia. and dispersal. Turtles regularly move between backwaters and the main river channel, which highlights the likely disturbance from backwater detachment, a Editor: Virginia Hayssen water saving practice in the lower Murray River.
    [Show full text]
  • Demographic Consequences of Superabundance in Krefft's River
    i The comparative ecology of Krefft’s River Turtle Emydura krefftii in Tropical North Queensland. By Dane F. Trembath B.Sc. (Zoology) Applied Ecology Research Group University of Canberra ACT, 2601 Australia A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Masters of Applied Science (Resource Management). August 2005. ii Abstract An ecological study was undertaken on four populations of Krefft’s River Turtle Emydura krefftii inhabiting the Townsville Area of Tropical North Queensland. Two sites were located in the Ross River, which runs through the urban areas of Townsville, and two sites were in rural areas at Alligator Creek and Stuart Creek (known as the Townsville Creeks). Earlier studies of the populations in Ross River had determined that the turtles existed at an exceptionally high density, that is, they were superabundant, and so the Townsville Creek sites were chosen as low abundance sites for comparison. The first aim of this study was to determine if there had been any demographic consequences caused by the abundance of turtle populations of the Ross River. Secondly, the project aimed to determine if the impoundments in the Ross River had affected the freshwater turtle fauna. Specifically this study aimed to determine if there were any difference between the growth, size at maturity, sexual dimorphism, size distribution, and diet of Emydura krefftii inhabiting two very different populations. A mark-recapture program estimated the turtle population sizes at between 490 and 5350 turtles per hectare. Most populations exhibited a predominant female sex-bias over the sampling period. Growth rates were rapid in juveniles but slowed once sexual maturity was attained; in males, growth basically stopped at maturity, but in females, growth continued post-maturity, although at a slower rate.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Snake-Necked Turtle
    Husbandry Manual for Eastern Snake-Necked Turtle Chelodina longicollis Reptilia: Chelidae Image Courtesy of Jacki Salkeld Author: Brendan Mark Host Date of Preparation: 04/06/06 Western Sydney Institute of TAFE - Richmond Course Name and Number: 1068 Certificate 3 - Captive Animals Lecturers: Graeme Phipps/Andrew Titmuss/ Jacki Salkeld CONTENTS 1. Introduction 4 2. Taxonomy 5 2.1 Nomenclature 5 2.2 Subspecies 5 2.3 Synonyms 5 2.4 Other Common Names 5 3. Natural History 6 3.1 Morphometrics 6 3.1.1 Mass and Basic Body Measurements 6 3.1.2 Sexual Dimorphism 6 3.1.3 Distinguishing Features 7 3.2 Distribution and Habitat 7 3.3 Conservation Status 8 3.4 Diet in the Wild 8 3.5 Longevity 8 3.5.1 In the Wild 8 3.5.2 In Captivity 8 3.5.3 Techniques Used to Determine Age in Adults 9 4. Housing Requirements 10 4.1 Exhibit/Enclosure Design 10 4.2 Holding Area Design 10 4.3 Spatial Requirements 11 4.4 Position of Enclosures 11 4.5 Weather Protection 11 4.6 Temperature Requirements 12 4.7 Substrate 12 4.8 Nestboxes and/or Bedding Material 12 4.9 Enclosure Furnishings 12 5. General Husbandry 13 5.1 Hygiene and Cleaning 13 5.2 Record Keeping 13 5.3 Methods of Identification 13 5.4 Routine Data Collection 13 6. Feeding Requirements 14 6.1 Captive Diet 14 6.2 Supplements 15 6.3 Presentation of Food 15 1 7. Handling and Transport 16 7.1 Timing of Capture and Handling 16 7.2 Capture and Restraint Techniques 16 7.3 Weighing and Examination 17 7.4 Release 17 7.5 Transport Requirements 18 7.5.1 Box Design 18 7.5.2 Furnishings 19 7.5.3 Water and Food 19 7.5.4 Animals Per Box 19 7.5.5 Timing of Transportation 19 7.5.6 Release from Box 19 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Testudines: Chelidae) of Australia, New Guinea and Indonesia
    Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, 2002, 134, 401–421. With 7 figures Electrophoretic delineation of species boundaries within the genus Chelodina (Testudines: Chelidae) of Australia, New Guinea and Indonesia ARTHUR GEORGES1*, MARK ADAMS2 and WILLIAM McCORD3 1Applied Ecology Research Group, University of Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia 2Evolutionary Biology Unit, South Australian Museum, North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 5001, Australia 3East Fishkill Animal Hospital, 285 Rt 82, Hopewell Junction NY 12533, USA Received February 2001; revised and accepted for publication June 2001 A total of 281 specimens of long-necked chelid turtles (Chelodina) were obtained from drainages of Australia, Papua New Guinea and the island of Roti in Indonesia. Ten diagnosable taxa were identified using allozyme profiles at 45 presumptive loci. Chelodina expansa, C. parkeri, C. rugosa and C. burrungandjii are in a Group A clade, C. longi- collis, C. novaeguineae, C. steindachneri, C. pritchardi and C. mccordi are in a Group B clade, and C. oblonga is in a monotypic Group C clade, with each clade thought to represent a distinct subgenus. Chelodina siebenrocki is syn- onymised with C. rugosa. An eleventh taxon, C. reimanni, could not be distinguished from C. novaeguineae on the basis of allozyme profiles, but it is morphologically distinct. Its status is therefore worthy of further investigation. Three instances of natural hybridization were detected. Chelodina rugosa and C. novaeguineae hybridize in the Gulf country of Queensland, with evidence of backcrossing to C. novaeguineae. Chelodina longicollis and C. novaeguineae hybridize in central coastal Queensland, and C. rugosa and C. burrungandjii hybridize along their zone of contact in the plateau escarpment streams and pools.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Evolutionary History of the Australian Freshwater Turtles Chelodina Expansa and Chelodina Longicollis
    Recent evolutionary history of the Australian freshwater turtles Chelodina expansa and Chelodina longicollis. by Kate Meredith Hodges B.Sc. (Hons) ANU, 2004 A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Biological Sciences Department of Genetics and Evolution The University of Adelaide December, 2015 Kate Hodges with Chelodina (Macrochelodina) expansa from upper River Murray. Photo by David Thorpe, Border Mail. i Declaration I certify that this work contains no material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution and, to the best of my knowledge and belief, contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference has been made in the text. In addition, I certify that no part of this work will, in the future, be used in a submission for any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution without the prior approval of the University of Adelaide and where applicable, any partner institution responsible for the joint-award of this degree. I give consent to this copy of my thesis when deposited in the University Library, being made available for loan and photocopying, subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968. The author acknowledges that copyright of published works contained within this thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of those works. I also give permission for the digital version of my thesis to be made available on the web, via the University’s digital research repository, the Library catalogue and also through web search engines, unless permission has been granted by the University to restrict access for a period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for The
    Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle (Myuchelys georgesi) December, 2016 1 Workshop participants. Back row (l to r): Ricky Spencer, Bruce Chessman, Kristen Petrov, Caroline Lees, Gerald Kuchling, Jane Hall, Gerry McGilvray, Shane Ruming, Karrie Rose, Larry Vogelnest, Arthur Georges; Front row (l to r) Michael McFadden, Adam Skidmore, Sam Gilchrist, Bruno Ferronato, Richard Jakob-Hoff © Copyright 2017 CBSG IUCN encourages meetings, workshops and other fora for the consideration and analysis of issues related to conservation, and believes that reports of these meetings are most useful when broadly disseminated. The opinions and views expressed by the authors may not necessarily reflect the formal policies of IUCN, its Commissions, its Secretariat or its members. The designation of geographical entities in this book, and the presentation of the material, do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of IUCN concerning the legal status of any country, territory, or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Jakob-Hoff, R. Lees C. M., McGilvray G, Ruming S, Chessman B, Gilchrist S, Rose K, Spencer R, Hall J (Eds) (2017). Status Review, Disease Risk Analysis and Conservation Action Plan for the Bellinger River Snapping Turtle. IUCN SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group: Apple Valley, MN. Cover photo: Juvenile Bellinger River Snapping Turtle © 2016 Brett Vercoe This report can be downloaded from the CBSG website: www.cbsg.org. 2 Executive Summary The Bellinger River Snapping Turtle (BRST) (Myuchelys georgesi) is a freshwater turtle endemic to a 60 km stretch of the Bellinger River, and possibly a portion of the nearby Kalang River in coastal north eastern New South Wales (NSW).
    [Show full text]
  • Latitudinal Variation in Egg and Clutch Size in Turtles
    Latitudinal variation in egg and clutch size in turtles JOHNB. IVERSON,CHRISTINE P. BALGOOYEN,KATHY K. BYRD,AND KELLYK. LYDDAN Department of Biology, Earlham College, Richmond, IN 473 74, U.S. A. Received February 23, 1993 Accepted September 16, 1993 IVERSON,J.B., BALGOOYEN,C.P., BYRD,K.K., and LYDDAN,K.K. 1993. Latitudinal variation in egg and clutch size in turtles. Can. J. Zool. 71: 2448-2461. Reproductive and body size data from 169 populations of 146 species (56% of those recognized), 65 genera (75%), and 11 families (92%)of turtles were tabulated to test for latitudinal variation in egg and clutch size. Body-size-adjusted correla- tion analysis of all populations (as well as within most families) revealed (i) a significant negative relationship (r2 = 0.26) between latitude and egg size, (ii) a significant positive relationship (r2 = 0.2 1) between latitude and clutch size, and (iii) no relationship between latitude and clutch mass. Phylogenetic contrast analyses corroborated these patterns. Clutch size was also negatively correlated with egg size across all populations as well as within most families. We evaluate the applicability to turtles of hypotheses postulated to explain such latitudinal patterns for other vertebrate groups. The observed pattern may be the result of latitudinal variation in selection on egg size and (or) clutch size, as well as on the optimal trade-off between these two traits. IVERSON,J.B., BALGOOYEN,C.P., BYRD,K.K., et LYDDAN,K.K. 1993. Latitudinal variation in egg and clutch size in turtles. Can. J. Zool. 71 : 2448-2461. Les donnCes relatives h la reproduction et h la taille ont CtC enregistrkes chez 169 populations de 146 espkces (56% des espkces actuelles), 65 genres (75 %) et 11 familles (92%) de tomes; ces donnCes ont CtC organiskes en tableau afin d'Ctudier la variation latitudinale de la taille des oeufs et du nombre d'oeufs par couvCe.
    [Show full text]
  • Chelodina Expansa Gray 1857 – Broad-Shelled Turtle, Giant Snake-Necked Turtle
    Conservation Biology of Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises: A Compilation Project ofChelidae the IUCN/SSC — ChelodinaTortoise and Freshwaterexpansa Turtle Specialist Group 071.1 A.G.J. Rhodin, P.C.H. Pritchard, P.P. van Dijk, R.A. Saumure, K.A. Buhlmann, J.B. Iverson, and R.A. Mittermeier, Eds. Chelonian Research Monographs (ISSN 1088-7105) No. 5, doi:10.3854/crm.5.071.expansa.v1.2014 © 2014 by Chelonian Research Foundation • Published 6 January 2014 Chelodina expansa Gray 1857 – Broad-Shelled Turtle, Giant Snake-Necked Turtle DEBORAH S. BOWER 1 AN D KATE M. HO D GE S 2 1Univeristy of Newcastle, Callaghan, 2300, Australia [[email protected]]; 2Institute of Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia [[email protected]] SU mm ARY . – Australia’s largest snake-necked turtle, Chelodina (Macrochelodina) expansa (Family Chelidae), occurs broadly through the inland rivers and billabongs of eastern and southeastern Australia. The species is cryptic in habit, yet occupies waters heavily exploited and regulated by humans. Traditionally considered a riverine species, recent studies demonstrate that it is more frequently represented in permanent lakes and billabongs connected to main river channels. Typical of many freshwater turtles, C. expansa displays delayed maturity and high adult survivorship. It is carnivorous and feeds primarily on fast-moving prey such as crustaceans and fish, but will also consume carrion. The reproductive biology of C. expansa sets it apart from most other turtles; in response to low temperatures, embryos enter a diapause, which enable them to survive over winter in nests, resulting in a year-long incubation period.
    [Show full text]
  • Nathan Dam Fitzroy River Turtle Distribution, Reproductive
    Nathan Dam Fitzroy River Turtle Distribution, Reproductive Condition and Nesting Survey, 2010. Prepared for: SunWater frc environmental PO Box 2363 Wellington Point Qld 4160 Telephone: + 61 7 3820 4900 Facsimile: + 61 7 3207 5640 frc Ref: 100814 frc environmental Document Control Summary Project No.: 100814 Status: Report Project Director: John Thorogood Project Manager: Nirvana Searle Title: Nathan Dam – Fitzroy River Turtle Distribution, Reproductive Condition and Nesting Survey, 2010 Project Team: Rebecca King, Brad Moore, Nirvana Searle, John Thorogood Client: SunWater Client Contact: Dr Lee Benson Date: November 2010 Edition: 100814Ri Checked by: Carol Conacher ________________ Issued by: John Thorogood ________________ Distribution Record SunWater: pdf via e-mail, 1 hard copy. This work is copyright. A person using frc environmental documents or data accepts the risk of: a) Using the documents or data in electronic form without requesting and checking them for accuracy against the original signed hard copy version; and b) Using the documents or data for any purpose not agreed to in writing by frc environmental. Nathan Dam – Fitzroy River Turtle Survey, October / November 2010 FRC_Home_Folders:melissahovell:.Trash:100814_10-11-22_MH.doc frc environmental Contents 1 Introduction and Survey Description 1 2 Results 7 2.1 Habitat 7 2.2 Fitzroy River Turtle (Rheodytes leukops) 7 2.3 Carapace, Eggs and Eggshell 8 2.4 Other Turtles 10 Appendix A: Habitat Description for Individual Survey Sites Connors River Dam – Fitzroy River Turtle Survey, August / September 2010 frc environmental List of Tables Table 1.1 Summary of sampling effort, October / November 2010 4 Table 2.1 Eggs, eggshell and nests observed at survey sites, October / November 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bellinger Emydura Ecology, Population Status and Management
    The Bellinger Emydura Ecology, Population Status and Management Final report prepared by the Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, for the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Sydney July 2007 1 Copyright © 2007 R-J Spencer All rights reserved. No part of this report or the information contained therein may be used, referenced or reproduced in any form as part of another document, whether it be printed, electronic, mechanical, photographic, or magnetic, without appropriately acknowledgment. Such acknowledgment must include full reference details as follows. Spencer, R-J., Georges, A., and Welsh, M. (2007). The Bellinger Emydura. Ecology, Population Status and Management. Report to NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service, Sydney, by the Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra. July 2007. This document may be freely copied provided it is under its current cover without addition, deletion or alteration of any content. It must include this copyright statement and the logo of the Institute of Applied Ecology. It may not be sold nor may it be distributed for a fee. Variations of these conditions and all other uses require the prior written permission of the senior author. Acknowledgements We would like to than the many people who assisted us in the field, but especially Josh Faulkner, Bryony Bailey, Carla Eisemberg and Maria de la Cueva. We also thank the Bellingen Shire community for their hospitality and assistance with locating sites and providing access to those sites. Brad Nesbitt and his team assisted greatly with local knowledge, companionship and assistance in the field. Author for Correspondence: Ricky-J Spencer, Institute for Applied Ecology, University of Canberra, ACT 2616, Australia.
    [Show full text]
  • TCF Summary Activity Report 2002–2018
    Turtle Conservation Fund • Summary Activity Report 2002–2018 Turtle Conservation Fund A Partnership Coalition of Leading Turtle Conservation Organizations and Individuals Summary Activity Report 2002–2018 1 Turtle Conservation Fund • Summary Activity Report 2002–2018 Recommended Citation: Turtle Conservation Fund [Rhodin, A.G.J., Quinn, H.R., Goode, E.V., Hudson, R., Mittermeier, R.A., and van Dijk, P.P.]. 2019. Turtle Conservation Fund: A Partnership Coalition of Leading Turtle Conservation Organi- zations and Individuals—Summary Activity Report 2002–2018. Lunenburg, MA and Ojai, CA: Chelonian Research Foundation and Turtle Conservancy, 54 pp. Front Cover Photo: Radiated Tortoise, Astrochelys radiata, Cap Sainte Marie Special Reserve, southern Madagascar. Photo by Anders G.J. Rhodin. Back Cover Photo: Yangtze Giant Softshell Turtle, Rafetus swinhoei, Dong Mo Lake, Hanoi, Vietnam. Photo by Timothy E.M. McCormack. Printed by Inkspot Press, Bennington, VT 05201 USA. Hardcopy available from Chelonian Research Foundation, 564 Chittenden Dr., Arlington, VT 05250 USA. Downloadable pdf copy available at www.turtleconservationfund.org 2 Turtle Conservation Fund • Summary Activity Report 2002–2018 Turtle Conservation Fund A Partnership Coalition of Leading Turtle Conservation Organizations and Individuals Summary Activity Report 2002–2018 by Anders G.J. Rhodin, Hugh R. Quinn, Eric V. Goode, Rick Hudson, Russell A. Mittermeier, and Peter Paul van Dijk Strategic Action Planning and Funding Support for Conservation of Threatened Tortoises and Freshwater
    [Show full text]
  • Proposed Amendment to 21CFR124021
    Richard Fife 8195 S. Valley Vista Drive Hereford, AZ 85615 December 07, 2015 Division of Dockets Management Food and Drug Administration 5630 Fishers Lane, rm. 1061 Rockville, MD 20852 Reference: Docket Number FDA-2013-S-0610 Proposed Amendment to Code of Federal Regulations Title 21, Volume 8 Revised as of April 1, 2015 21CFR Sec.1240.62 Dear Dr. Stephen Ostroff, M.D., Acting Commissioner: Per discussion with the Division of Dockets Management staff on November 10, 2015 Environmental and Economic impact statements are not required for petitions submitted under 21CFR Sec.1240.62 CITIZEN PETITION December 07, 2015 ACTION REQUESTED: I propose an amendment to 21CFR Sec.1240.62 (see exhibit 1) as allowed by Section (d) Petitions as follows: Amend section (c) Exceptions. The provisions of this section are not applicable to: By adding the following two (2) exceptions: (5) The sale, holding for sale, and distribution of live turtles and viable turtle eggs, which are sold for a retail value of $75 or more (not to include any additional turtle related apparatuses, supplies, cages, food, or other turtle related paraphernalia). This dollar amount should be reviewed every 5 years or more often, as deemed necessary by the department in order to make adjustments for inflation using the US Department of Labor, Bureau of labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index. (6) The sale, holding for sale, and distribution of live turtles and viable turtle eggs, which are listed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) Red List as Extinct In Wild, Critically Endangered, Endangered, or Vulnerable (IUCN threatened categorizes).
    [Show full text]