Marine Turtle Newsletter
Number 56 January 1992
Editors: Editorial Board: Karen. L. Eckert & Scott A. Eckert Nat B. Frazer National Marine Fisheries Service Nicholas Mrosovsky Southwest Regional Office David W. Owens c/o SWFSC, Post Office Box 271 Peter C H. Pritchard La Jolla, California 92038-0271 USA James 1. Richardson
OBSERVATIONS ON FIRST BREEDING BY A LOGGERHEAD TURTLE
Regular capture of loggerhead sea turtles (Caretta caretta) living year-around on coral reef feeding areas adjacent to Heron Island (southern Great Barrier Reef, Australia) began in August 1974. The turtles are captured by leaping onto them from a speedboat -- what we call our "turtle rodeo". Effectively all the loggerhead turtles living on Heron Island Reef were tagged using this technique by 1977. Since then, almost all new, untagged turtles have been relatively small; i.e., 70-85 cm curved carapace length (CCL). Loggerheads <70 cm CCL are uncommon anywhere in the Great Barrier Reef. Each year a fresh crop of small loggerheads appears among the local turtles at Heron Island Reef. These new recruits to the feeding area typically remain on the reef over the years that follow and grow to maturity.
Let me introduce you to one such recruit, marked with tag number X2757. I first met her as an immature turtle on 19 May 1977 in the sandy lagoon area of Heron Island Reef. She measured 80 cm CCL and weighed 65.5 kg. She has now been captured 36 times on Heron Island Reef (as of April 1991) and she has never been captured feeding on any of the reefs adjacent to Heron Island Reef. In October 1982 she was examined internally by laparoscopy and identified as an immature female with an unexpanded oviduct. Her reproductive system has been examined annually by laparoscopy since 1985, when she was found to have recently completed the elongation and expansion of her oviducts and enlargement of her ovaries. Thus, based on the completion of development of her reproductive system, she first qualified to be called an adult in 1985 at 89.5 cm CCL. In March 1987 and again in March 1989, she was observed to be depositing yolk into large numbers of follicles in her ovaries. However, she did not complete vitellogenesis and therefore did not ovulate any eggs in either of these two years.
She was again in vitellogenesis in March 1990 (92.0 cm CCL, 98 kg) and later the same year she made her first successful breeding migration. She was recorded ashore on Lady Musgrave Island, 67 km from her home reef, laying eggs on 16 December 1990 and 18 days later on 3 January 1991, 13 years after she recruited to take up residence within the southern Great Barrier Reef. The number of eggs per clutch were not counted and, because the Lady Musgrave rookery was not monitored during the entire nesting season, the total number of clutches laid during the season was not recorded. During March-April 1991, at the completion of the 1990-91 breeding season, the turtles resident on Heron Island Reef were again captured
for sampling. X2757 was again caught in the lagoon area of Heron Island Reef. She still measured 92.0 cm CCL, but weighed only 92 kg. Laparoscopy showed her ovaries to contain numerous corpora albicantia (scars resulting from the ovulation of mature follicles during the breeding season) and large atretic follicles.
Because X2757's resident feeding ground at Heron Island Reef is near the center of the nesting concentration for loggerhead turtles in the south Pacific, her breeding migration to a rookery is quite short. In this she resembles other loggerhead turtles living in the area (Limpus et al. 1992). As has been previously demonstrated for other loggerhead turtles that live on these reefs (Limpus 1989), X2757 did not nest at the rookery closest to her home feeding area when she migrated to the Lady Musgrave rookery. Indeed, she by-passed several closer loggerhead rookeries. Heron Island is less than 5 km from where she had lived for the previous 13 years and Wreck Island, 12 km from Heron Island Reef, supports the largest concentration of loggerhead turtle nesting in the south Pacific. Also noteworthy is the fact that she did not commence breeding at 80 cm CCL, the smallest size recorded for breeding female loggerhead turtles in eastern Australia. Instead, she commenced breeding at 92.0 cm CCL, only slightly smaller than average breeding size for loggerhead turtles in eastern Australia (Limpus 1990). X2757 grew slowly during the 13 years preceding her first breeding season, averaging 0.92 cm/yr.
This turtle has provided us with the first opportunity to observe the choice of feeding area by a turtle after she breeds for the first time in her life. At the completion of her first breeding season and associated migrations, X2757 returned to the same feeding area as she had occupied during her adolescent years.
Limpus, C. J. 1989. Foraging area fidelity following breeding migrations in Caretta caretta, p.97-99. In: Proc. Ninth Annual Workshop on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation (S. A. Eckert, K. L. Eckert, and T. H. Richardson, Compilers). NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFC-232. U. S. Dept. Commerce.
Limpus, C. J. 1990. Puberty and first breeding in Caretta caretta, p.81-83. In: Proc. Tenth Annual Workshop on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation (T. H. Richardson, J. I. Richardson, and M. Donnelly, Compilers). NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS- SEFC-286. U. S. Dept. Commerce.
Limpus, C. J., J. D. Miller, C. J. Parmenter, D. Reimer, N. McLachlan, and R. Webb. 1992. Migration in green (Chelonia mydas) and loggerhead (Caretta caretta) turtles to and from eastern Australian rookeries. Australian Wildlife Research: in press.
COLIN J. LIMPUS and DARRYL REIMER, Queensland Turtle Research Project, Queensland Department of Environment and Heritage, P. 0. Box 155, Brisbane, 4002, AUSTRALIA.
IV WORKSHOP ON PROGRAMS OF SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION 11-13 MARCH 1991, MERIDA, YUCATAN, MEXICO
Since 1988, regional workshops have been held in Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico to review progress and problems from the past field season and to plan for the up-coming season. These workshops provide a forum where technicians, biologists, conservationists, and administrators involved in marine turtle conservation and investigation can freely exchange information, share ideas, discuss problems, and plan for the future. The workshops have progressively taken on
2 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 more responsibilities and involved a wider variety of participants. The fourth workshop was coordinated, as usual, by CINVESTAV-Mérida (Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados), a principal research institute in the region, and PRONATURA Peninsula Yucatán, one of the most active non-government organizations in Mexico. More than 80 people attended the 3-day event, which resulted in numerous articles in the local press. Invited talks were included in the agenda for the first time, and the first was by M. en C. Rene Marquez, who had just returned from Cuba where he had served as a sea turtle program adviser. He talked about problems regarding stock management and pointed out the need for basic demographic information. Size-frequency distributions of nesting females were offered as a means to understand adult survivorship, and also to serve as a basis from which to reconstruct earlier (unknown) aspects of the demographic profile.
Biol. Isabel Aguirre then summarized the advances made since the first workshop. Having compiled the results of the third workshop (Aguirre 1990), she identified previous plans and proposals which had been implemented and those which had not. Among the successes were numerous examples of inter-institutional cooperation, a regional directory of persons and institutions involved in sea turtle work, development of environmental education projects, and new protection and monitoring efforts at several nesting areas. The major obstacle, she concluded, has been a lack of coordination. Specific proposals which have yet to be implemented include: establishing a regional data bank, standardizing data and techniques, establishing a functional marking program, writing and distributing reports and research results, and reducing the exploitation of sea turtles while providing viable alternatives to fishermen and artisans.
M.V.Z. Georgita Ruíz spoke about WIDECAST (Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Recovery Team and Conservation Network), a UNEP-sponsored effort in the Caribbean, and gave examples of progress that had been made throughout the Caribbean region. She explained the structure of the WIDECAST organization, emphasizing that it depends on volunteer participation and works directly through governmental and nongovernmental coordinators in individual countries or government regions. An outline of the "sea turtle recovery action plan" produced for each country was discussed in detail, reviewing point-by-point the information which is sought to complete the plan. She concluded that a great deal of work still needed to be done before a final "action plan" for a country as large and diverse as Mexico could be considered complete. She noted that a person, or organization, was needed to coordinate WIDECAST's Yucatán activities, emphasizing the need to consolidate information from the Peninsula.
Biol. Raquel Briceño spoke on BITMAR (Banco de Información de Tortugas Marinas). She explained that it was composed of four main activities: numeric data bank, bibliographic data bank, document data bank, and a trimestral newsletter. The need to standardize information was again mentioned, and data forms were illustrated. The relationship between BITMAR and other national data banks was explained, and advances which had been made over the past year were described. It was explained that funding for BITMAR was well assured.
Biol. Elvia Rodríquez spoke on the need to standardize the taking and reporting of data, particularly measurements. The value of measurements in studies of growth, demography and population characterizations was mentioned. She explained that because of a lack of standards, it was frequently impossible to compare results among different studies. Since metric tapes are easily obtained and transported, it was proposed that every field project measure at least curved carapace dimensions. All studies should record "standard length" (greatest length along the midline, to end of supracaudals), and studies on Eretmochelys should also include "minimum length" (length along the midline to the supracaudal notch). Although there were no objections to standardizing data, it appears from comments and future plans that it will be some time before standardization is realized.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 3 Dr. Richard Byles gave an illustrated talk on biotelemetry, covering a variety of techniques from sonic to satellite systems. He discussed the pros and cons of various systems and presented results of studies on four different species from four different sites. Of special relevance to the participants were satellite transmitter studies of post-nesting movements of Lepidochelys kempi. The studies indicate that the animals disperse to the western and northern coasts of the Yucatán Peninsula. After evaluations of the workshop were scored, it was found that Richard's talk was one of the best received -- in spite (or because?) of the quaint Spanish dialect in which it was delivered.
Dr. Jack Frazier discussed the effectiveness of nest transplanting, beginning with discussions on: "Why conserve sea turtles?" It was emphasized that the national ban may not last forever and, given political, economic and social pressures, the time will come when conservationists may not be able to hold a strict "preservationist" line. At that point technicians and biologists will have to be able to provide accurate information for management plans involving exploitation. Because of a lack of resources, the phase of the sea turtle's complex life cycle that is most accessible for study, protection, and management is the egg-laying activity of adult females. Unfortunately, data available from the Peninsula are generally neither standardized nor complete enough to determine the effects of nest transplantation -- one of the most commonly used management practices. The few studies where data are available indicate that there is little benefit in transplanting eggs on the Yucatan Peninsula.
Field work in Quintana Roo was described in six talks. Lic. Arminda Villanueva, a representative of the Comité de Protección de las Tortugas Marinas en la Isla de Cozumel, explained how an inter-institutional committee had developed a very effective beach monitoring program, protecting some of the most important nesting beaches on the Peninsula for Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas. The beaches and reefs of Cozumel are State and Federal Reserves. M. en C. Julio Zurita and co-workers from the Centro de Investigación de Quintana Roo (CIQRO) gave two presentations: (i) the continuing and expanding program of monitoring beaches in the center of the state, and (ii) a strategy for protecting nesting beaches from the threat of rapid tourist development. In danger are important nesting beaches for Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas. Sr. Ivan Fuentes explained how, after years of beach protection carried out by a small coastal hotel, a multinational development project has taken over, apparently dooming the beach protection. M. en C. Reyna Gil described the work, with PRONATURA and GRIP, on Isla Holbox, which was provided fairly complete coverage for the first time. The island is an important area for both nesting and juvenile Eretmochelys imbricata; nearly 100 nests were recorded. Biol. Miguel Angel Rivero described the beach monitoring at Puerto Morelos by CRIP-Puerto Morelos. There was no representation by SEDUE from Quintana Roo.
Four presentations were given for Yucatán. Biol. Roberto Vazquez (SEDUE) explained the beach monitoring program at El Cuyo; 67 nests of both Chelonia mydas and E. imbricata were recorded. M. en C. Mauricio Garduño (CRIP-Yucalpetén) reported on a thorough investigation involving 187 nests of E. imbricata and 137 of C. mydas. In addition to 79 nesting females, 75 juvenile Eretmochelys were tagged. Both of these study sites are within the National Wildlife Refuge of Ria Lagartos, under the control of SEDUE. Biol. Juan José Durán (SEDUE) talked about the initiation of a beach protection program at Celestún, another National Wildlife Refuge, where 67 nests of E. imbricata were recorded. The detailed results show that nest transplanting in Celestún is not necessary if there is adequate beach protection. The state Secretaría de Ecología (SEECOL) began a beach monitoring program at the State Reserve of El Palmar, and Lic. Raul Miranda presented the preliminary results. Only one presentation for Campeche was given. Tec. Manuel Canúl described the program run by SEDUE, which continued to monitor 30 km of beach on which nearly 100 E. imbricata nests were recorded,
4 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 and a considerable amount of egg poaching also occurred. Unfortunately, CRIP-Ciudad del Carmen did not give a presentation, but from their 1990 report it is clear that the beaches surrounding Isla Aguada are some of the most important for E. imbricata, with over 200 nests reported. They also suffer very high egg loss to poachers.
In addition to scientific presentations, two environmental education programs were described. An innovative program by GEMA (Grupo Ecologista del Mayab) in Quintana Roo, presented by Margarita Alba, alerted a vast number of people in the state about sea turtles and their conservation problems, utilizing all conceivable forms of communication. Elvia Rodríguez described how PRONATURA carried out education campaigns in turtle camps at Celestún and Holbox, as well as in Merida. The responses to these activities was very encouraging, showing the value and need to develop educational programs further and carry them out on a continuing and long term basis. In several of the beach protection programs Boy Scouts and/or biology students of the Universidad Autónoma de Yucatán (UADY) provided invaluable collaboration. PRONATURA collaborated in many of the programs in all three states, especially in the dispersion of funds provided by Region 2 of the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service; GEMA worked with CIQRO on several beaches.
In discussions and plans for the 1991 season, a series of proposals were produced for each "campamento". A common problem which has plagued every season is funding -- not only is it inadequate to carry out all planned activities, but the dispersion of funds is always late and inefficient. Only a month away from the start of the nesting season, most project personnel do not know if or what funds will be available, who they can hire, what materials they can buy, how long they can stay in the field, etc. This and other basic problems were discussed at length. It was concluded that results from previous seasons must be presented much sooner, allowing sufficient time to develop realistic plans for future seasons and to obtain the funding and support necessary to do so. The publication of workshop Proceedings is planned. Each talk for which a manuscript has been presented, as well as several related studies which could not be presented at the workshop, will be reviewed by an editorial committee. The published Proceedings will be announced in a future issue of the Marine Turtle Newsletter.
Aguirre, I. (Compiler). 1990. Informe técnico: III Taller Regional Sobre Programas de Conservación de la Tortuga Marina en la Peninsula de Yucatán. 55 p.
JACK FRAZIER, Seccion de Ecología Humana, Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN - Unidad Mérida, A. P. 73 "CORDEMEX", Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico CP 97310 and ELVIA RODRIGUEZ, PRONATURA Peninsula de Yucatán, Calle 38 #21, Dpto. E-1, Col. Campestre, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico CP 97120.
TURTLE EXCLUDER DEVICE (TED) TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER TO LATIN AMERICAN SHRIMP FISHERIES
Beginning on 21 November 1989, efforts by the United States Government to protect sea turtles were formally extended beyond its national borders. On that date, federal legislation (Public Law 101-162; see MTN 48:31) was implemented which prohibits the importation of shrimp harvested by countries that do not have sea turtle conservation measures in their shrimp fishery comparable to those of the U. S.
Affected foreign nations will be allowed a three year phase-in period in which to develop and implement appropriate sea turtle conservation programs. Although not required by the new
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 5 federal regulations, the Turtle Excluder Device (TED) may be the best way for many of the countries to comply with the law. In an effort to provide the necessary training in TED technology to the affected countries, the U. S. Department of State's Agency for International Development (AID), in association with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), has provided a mechanism for countries to request in-country TED training workshops for their shrimp fishermen. Credited with the development of the TED in the U. S., the Harvesting Systems Branch of the NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Mississippi Laboratories, is providing a team of gear specialists to conduct the in-country TED training sessions.
To date, three in-country TED training sessions have been conducted in Latin America. In February 1991, government officials and industry representatives from 11 Central and South American countries participated in a four-day TED conference held in Panama City, Panama. The purpose of the conference was to present the overall strategy of the U. S. legislation, as well as to provide technical information on the use of TEDs in commercial shrimp trawl fisheries. A demonstration of TED operation at sea was conducted for conference participants aboard a Panamanian shrimp vessel. The countries represented at the Panama conference were Belize, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, and French Guiana. The workshop was conducted by sea turtle experts and TED specialists from NMFS, as well as a representative of the U. S. State Department. Workshop participants learned that in-country TED training is now available, and requests for training must be initiated by each country through their respective U. S. State Department AID mission.
In order to maximize the effectiveness of the in-country TED training sessions, foreign governments are urged to have shrimping industry representatives, vessel captains, and shrimp trawl builders attend. Training begins with a series of presentations which include the history of TED development, TED design and performance, and TED trouble-shooting. The presentations are accompanied by underwater videos which display TEDs at work. A majority of the workshop schedule is devoted to "hands-on" instruction in TED construction, installation and operation at sea. The NMFS has selected three TED designs for workshop instruction. These designs were chosen based on their proven effectiveness in excluding sea turtles (97% effective as required by U. S. regulations) and their successful use in the U. S. shrimp fishery in regard to shrimp retention and ease of operation.
Although not represented at the Panama workshop, the Mexican government has initiated a TED evaluation program through the cooperative Mexico/U. S. scientific marine research program, MEXUS-GULF. The first TED workshop in Mexico was held in Tampico, Tamaulipas, in October 1990. A second workshop was held on the west coast at Guaymas, Sonora, in April 1991. The Mexican TED workshops resulted in a total of 24 government fishery technicians and gear specialists receiving extensive training in TED technology, and a total of 43 TEDs were constructed during these workshops. Finally, at the request of the shrimping industry in Honduras, a TED workshop was held in that country in June 1991 on the Caribbean island of Roatan. Fleet owners, captains, and net builders attended presentations and observed a TED construction demonstration. During the week-long workshop, NMFS TED specialists worked with island net builders on the construction, installation, and repair of TEDs. A one day at-sea demonstration of TED operation was attended by vessel captains of the Roatan shrimp fleet. At the conclusion of the Roatan training session, fleet owners and vessel captains were less apprehensive about TEDs and felt that the TED designs demonstrated may not be as adverse to their shrimping operations as anticipated. Roatan fleet owners are expected to conduct TED evaluations during the 1991 shrimp season.
6 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
During 1992, NMFS anticipates in-country TED training sessions will be scheduled for Colombia, Venezuela, and El Salvador. These training requests, as well as the successful training completed in Mexico and Honduras, are encouraging indicators of preliminary compliance with U. S. sea turtle conservation legislation. It is hoped the positive results of these initial TED training workshops will be spread among the governments and shrimp fleets of Latin America, thereby allowing additional TED technology workshops to take place throughout the region.
JOHN F. MITCHELL, Fishery Biologist/TED Technology Transfer Coordinator, NMFS Southeast Fisheries Science Center, Mississippi Laboratories, Pascagoula Facility, P. O. Drawer 1207, Pascagoula, Mississippi 39588-1207 USA.
SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION IN LAGUNA DE TACARIGUA NATIONAL PARK, VENEZUELA
The Laguna de Tacarigua National Park was promulgated in 1972. Initially, its 18,400 hectares were constituted mainly for an impressive estuarine lagoon, circled by mangroves and with a great diversity of endangered fauna, including American crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus), flamingos (Phoenicopterus ruber), and scarlet ibises (Eudocimus ruber). At the same time, the lagoon is an economically important site for fish and shrimp production. Moreover, the National Park protects a littoral sand bar nearly 23 km in length where three species of sea turtles nest; namely, the loggerhead (Caretta caretta), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) and, to a lesser extent, the green turtle (Chelonia mydas). Threats to the nesting area include the harvest of turtle eggs by local residents, and driving on the sand bar by many double-track vehicles (mainly on weekends).
Through special zoning and use regulations (Plan de Ordenamiento y Reglamento de Uso del Parque Nacional Laguna de Tacarigua, Decreto No. 1643, Gaceta Oficial No. 34758, 18 July 1991), the most important part of the beach (about 16 km) was declared a protected zone during the nesting season (May to October). Access during this time is limited to Park personnel and scientists. However, the regulations were incomplete without some consideration to the protection of the adjacent marine area. This became even more apparent when sea turtle carcasses were found on the beach by sea turtle project workers during 1990 and 1991. These turtles had drowned in trawl nets operating near the beach. Fishermen find turtles in their trawls, and perhaps the most notable case was the I December 1990 death of an adult female leatherback (> 150 cm carapace length) adjacent to the Park.
These findings contributed to the urgency to declare a marine area as part of the Park. Thus, we are pleased that the new boundaries of the Laguna de Tacarigua National Park include five nautical miles seaward of the beach (Decreto No. 1639, Gaceta Oficial No. 34820, 15 October 1991) and the entire area now totals 39,100 hectares. The regulations protecting these important areas must be reinforced with control, monitoring, and educational programs. Advances have also been made in this respect, including a new building for Park rangers under construction. During July and August 1991, a sea turtle biology and monitoring short course was given to the Park rangers and other personnel of the National Parks Authority (DGSPN). In addition, a sea turtle monitoring guide was produced for Park personnel (or anyone interested in sea turtle conservation in Venezuela). The course will be repeated next year in Laguna de Tacarigua, and will be offered in other coastal and marine National Park areas as well, as part of a National Parks system-wide wildlife monitoring program.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 7 Acknowledgements: The field work had the logistic cooperation of S. Garcia and F. Gomez, Superintendent and Coordinator (respectively) of the National Park, and the technical personnel J. G. Campos, P. Rivas, and O. Rodriguez. V. J. Vera (DGSPN) cooperated during a part of the 1990 and all of the 1991 work. Concern on the part of the National Parks Authority (DGSPN) for the endangered status of sea turtles in the Park made these important regulatory advances possible.
HEDELVY J. GUADA and PEDRO VERNET P., Programa de Fauna, Direccion General Secretorial de Parques Nacionales, Apdo. 76471, Caracas 1071-A, VENEZUELA.
ONCE THRIVING COLONY OF LEATHERBACK SEA TURTLES DECLINING AT IRIAN JAYA, INDONESIA
We recently visited the Jamursba-Medi turtle nesting beaches (132°30'E, 0°22'S) on the north coast of the Bird's Head Peninsula, Irian Jaya, Indonesia as tourists. In the short time that we were there (9-14 August 1991), we became concerned about the uncontrolled exploitation of sea turtle eggs on these beaches. We wish to submit this short report based on our observations and our conversations with local people and with our guides.
The number of leatherback sea turtle nests observed during three consecutive nights in the height of the nesting season on Medi River Beach (4 km between the Cagroki River and Point Warman) ranged from 9 to 17, with an average of 12 per night. We saw no evidence of hatchlings returning to the sea. On the first night, we observed that each nest was either marked by a stick placed upright in the sand or there was someone waiting for the turtle to finish laying her eggs. There were no people waiting by the nests on the following nights, however, perhaps because they did not want us to see them taking the eggs. When a nest is dug up, all the eggs are taken. They are then reburied near the campsites for later sale to passing traders, most of whom come from Sorong. The eggs are sold for 100 Rupiah [US$ 0.05] each; the traders later sell them for 5-10 times this price. The adult leatherbacks themselves are not being killed, but green sea turtles are. We saw several shells on the beach, and witnessed two green turtles being butchered and smoked. Other turtle nesting beaches in the area are reportedly exploited in a similar manner.
Everyone we met is in agreement that the number of nesting leatherbacks has declined since the mid-1980's. Yopi Bakarbessy (KSDA [=Directorate of Nature Conservation], Manokwari) told us that the recent nesting levels he observed were about 25 % of those reported by Satish Bhaskar (1985, 1987). At least 13,000 leatherback nests were reported in 1984 on 17.8 km of coast extending eastward from Cape Jamursba on the crown of Bird's Head (Bhaskar 1985). The local people are concerned about the drop as well, but still take as many eggs as they can. They fail to see the connection between their actions and the decline in the nesting population. Furthermore, they have made Bhaskar their scapegoat, claiming that his tagging program scared the turtles away or that the tags were designed to make the turtles follow him back to India! They claim that none of the tagged turtles have returned since, but in fact we observed two tagged turtles during our short stay on the beach.
The local people do not exploit only sea turtles. They also take Megapode bird eggs, hunt marsupials (dorcopsis, cuscus, tree kangaroos), and trap deer. The deer are held alive in a wooden pen to be sold to traders for US$ 10-20 each. Five were caught while we were there. The birdlife, including the Lesser Bird-of-Paradise, is still abundant, with no evidence of bird trapping. In the past, people would leave the beach before the onset of the north-west monsoon,
8 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 but recently a few people from the village of Warmandi have begun to live at Jamursba-Medi year around. They have built two houses and made three gardens, 0.5 hectares each, in the forest behind the beach. They have brought their animals with them, including dogs, goats and pigs. This is an illegal settlement because the entire area is a Nature Reserve, and if allowed to continue will make conservation efforts more difficult.
We believe that the current exploitation of the leatherback turtles is unsustainable, and we greatly fear that the population will decline further unless immediate action is taken. We are aware that the unrestricted collection of eggs has resulted in a dramatic decline in leatherbacks nesting in western Malaysia. The data for the state of Terengganu show a steady drop in nesting activity from nearly 11,000 landings in 1956 to 6,721 landings in 1968 to 280 in 1990 (Hendrickson and Alfred 1961; Chua 1988; Karen Eckert, pers. comm.). The impetus for the 97%-plus decline is widely known to be the persistent collection of eggs over the last 40 years. It is difficult to believe that a population can ever recover from such abuse, yet the once thriving leatherback colony in Irian Jaya appears headed for the same fate.
Acknowledgements: We are grateful for the assistance of Yopi Bakarbessy (KSDA, Manokwari), Duncan Neville (WWF, Manokwari), J. Paiki (Camat, Kec. Amberbaken), Onesimus Sawor (Dep. Kehutanan, Saokorem), and Marthinus Yesnath (Kepala Desa Waibeem, Kec. Amberbaken).
Bhaskar, S. 1987. Management and research of marine turtle nesting sites on the North Vogelkop coast of Irian Jaya, Indonesia. WWF Publication.
Bhaskar, S. 1985. Mass nesting by leatherbacks in Irian Jaya. WWF Monthly Report, January 1985, pp. 15-16.
Chua, T. H. 1988. On the road to local extinction: the leatherback turtle (Dermochelvs coriacea) in Terengganu, Malaysia, p.153-158. In: Proc. 11th Annual Seminar Malay. Soc. Marine Sci. (A. Sasekumar, R. D'Cruz, and S. Lim Lee Hong, Editors). Univ. Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
Hendrickson, J. R. and E. R. Alfred. 1961. Nesting population of sea turtles on the east coast of Malaya. Bull. Raffles Mus. Singapore 26:190-196.
WILLIAM BETZ and MARY WELCH, 5818 NE 70th Street, #A-307, Seattle, Washington 98115 USA.
NEWS FROM THE MADRAS CROCODILE BANK, INDIA
The Madras Crocodile Bank, pioneer of sea turtle conservation work in India, has recently started a sea turtle programme in the Southern Nicobar Islands, southeast of India. The 22 islands, many of them unexplored, that form the Nicobar archipelago (6°-10° N, 92°-94° E) are a unique group of islands that not only support the Nicobarese and Shompen tribal populations, but consist of three valuable ecosystems; namely, rain forests, mangroves and coral reefs. In addition, four species of sea turtle use these island beaches as nesting grounds; namely, the leatherback (Dermochelvs coriacea), green turtle (Chelonia mydas), olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) and hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata). The last two surveys conducted by Satish Bhaskar in 1979 and 1981 showed leatherbacks and ridleys to be most common, while green turtles and hawksbills nested in smaller numbers. Last year, after a lapse of 10 years,
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 9 Crocodile Bank researcher Ms. Manjula Tiwari conducted a three-month survey covering six of these islands, including the two islands surveyed by Bhaskar. The remaining islands could not be covered due to a delay in funding, the remote location of the islands, our lack of a good boat to withstand the monsoonal rough seas, and the logistics involved in inter-island travel.
Tiwari's findings indicate that these islands are still very important leatherback rookeries (leatherbacks nest in larger numbers compared to the other three species) and that the ridleys and hawksbills are under pressure, as they form an important source of protein for tribal peoples and local migrants who spear them offshore. The nests of all species are plundered by tribal people, as well as by their dogs and pigs. Almost 3001eatherback nests were counted on Great Nicobar Island and about 50 on Little Nicobar. Leatherbacks peak in their nesting activity during November-March, although sporadic nesting continues through July. Similarly, peak olive ridley season extends December-March. Green turtle nesting peaks May-September, but nests have been reported almost year around. Hawksbills nest all through the year. All four species can be found to use the same nesting beach in any given year. A detailed report of Tiwari's findings will be published in the next issue of Hamadryad, biannual journal of the Crocodile Bank.
Meanwhile, Bhaskar and Tiwari have embarked on a six-month survey of the Andaman and Nicobar islands which began in November 1991. Their protocol of work includes covering the unsurveyed areas, recording rates of nest depredation, determining the numbers of females nesting (all four species), locating feeding grounds, and marking and collecting morphological data on some of the nesting turtles. They will also monitor the nesting closely and collect information on egg and clutch sizes, incubation (nest) temperatures, and hatch rates. This study and survey is a pilot project to accumulate baseline data for initiating a longer term (five year) study programme for the conservation and management of sea turtles that use these islands for nesting. The project will include three additional researchers, and possibly form the basis for a doctorate study.
The survey work is funded by the Madras Crocodile Bank. However, due to financial constraints in maintaining more than 9000 crocodiles and supporting the other developmental activities underway at the Bank, it is becoming more and more difficult for the Crocodile Bank to extend its support beyond seed money grants for survey work. The Crocodile Bank once again appeals for tags (or the funds to purchase same) urgently required for tagging nesting turtles [see also MTN 53:27]. At present we have 200 tags available to us, which Bhaskar and Tiwari will use to tag green turtles and hawksbills. They are simple Dalton Henley plastic tags (England Pattern No. 894143) marked "AN", numbering 1-200. Should any turtles be sighted bearing the above numbered tags, we would appreciate information regarding its specific location, tag number, date of sighting, and measurements if possible.
Finally, the work of the Crocodile Bank during the last three years has also included provided logistic support to the Students Sea Turtle Conservation Network (SSTCN), Madras, who are actively involved in sea turtle conservation activities here on the Madras coast.
HARRY ANDREWS, Deputy Director, Madras Crocodile Bank, Post Bag 4, Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu 603 104 INDIA.
10 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
CARIBBEAN CONSERVATION CORPORATION OFFERS TRAINING, INTERNSHIPS AT TORTUGUERO, COSTA RICA
INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSES IN SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION -- The Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC) is seeking participants in and sponsors for its 1992 training program in marine turtle biology and conservation. Two courses, a three-week program in Spanish (6-26 September) and a two-week course in English (20 September - 3 October), will be held at CCC's research station at Tortuguero, Costa Rica. The participants should be somehow involved in sea turtle conservation, coastal resource management, or a related field ... and preferably have no previous formal training in sea turtle biology. Most participants come from governmental agencies and non-governmental organizations involved in coastal and marine resource protection. Course fees are US$ 1650 for the Spanish course (3 weeks) and US$ 1250 for the English course (2 weeks). These fees include all in-country (Costa Rica) expenses related to the course, but do not include international transportation to Costa Rica. The CCC has trained 32 individuals from 18 countries during the three-year program. There is currently no support available through CCC for course participants, so attendance can only be guaranteed if the participant pays his/her own way or if sponsors can be identified. To make recommendations, offer sponsorship or other support, or to receive more information, please contact the CCC at the address below.
RESEARCH ASSISTANTSHIPS / INTERNSHIPS AT GREEN SEA TURTLE RESEARCH STATION -- The Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC) is offering a limited number of Research Assistantships (RA's) at its Green Sea Turtle Research Station in Tortuguero, Costa Rica, during July- September 1992. We are seeking responsible and enthusiastic individuals who are willing to devote a minimum of two months to green turtle research at Tortuguero, and who will work with the director of research on turtle tagging and related research activities. RA's are available to students of biology, the marine sciences, wildlife management, or related fields. Internships can also be arranged and are encouraged through existing university programs. The CCC will serve to coordinate field activities if the student selects an academic advisor at his/her institution. Credit must be arranged through the student's college or university. The Research Station provides nearly unlimited opportunity for research on sea turtles, tropical freshwater ecology, lowland rainforest and fauna, and related subjects. RA/Interns must be 20 years of age or older, able to demonstrate conversational Spanish, and have an educational background in the biological or marine sciences, wildlife management, resource conservation, environmental education, or a related field. RA/Interns will be responsible for the cost of transportation to and from Tortuguero; food and lodging will be provided by CCC at the Research Station. Applications must be received by 28 February 1992, so let us know quickly if you would like to receive application materials!
CHARLES LUTHIN, Director of Programs, Caribbean Conservation Corporation, P. O. Box 2866, Gainesville, Florida 32602 USA. Tel: (904) 373-6441; FAX: (904) 375-2449.
SEA TURTLE ARRIBADAS: FOR MASSACRE OR CONSERVATION?
The fishermen around the entire coastline of India are ignorant of the need to conserve and protect sea turtles. Apart from their ignorance, they, their families, and almost all inhabitants of coastal villages in India indulge in the wanton killing of turtles -- just for the fun of it! The killing of these turtles is normally done by crushing the turtle's head with a big stone or by turning it on its back and repeatedly striking the plastron with a large, inwardly curved knife. These turtles are not killed for their calipee or calipash, but rather for their meat and
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 11 blood which the local people believe cures paralysis, rheumatism, and impotency (I do not know how far these theories are true, since I am not a medical man). Turtle eggs are sold in local markets, with prices ranging from 2-5 Indian Rupees per egg. The eggs are then boiled, cooked, and eaten. Occasionally olive ridleys and hawksbill turtles get caught in fishing nets set in coastal waters. These turtles are killed with a knife and thrown back into the sea, or brought home for dinner. When I ask the people why they engage in wanton killing, the reply is, "What else to be done with this useless creature?" This is the consciousness of the ignorant.
In addition to the above, a depressing scenario is unfolding in India, specifically in the tourist area of Digha Beach in West Bengal and the protected area of Gahirmata at the mouth of the River Mahanadi (Ekakula Beach). Every year thousands of sea turtles are systematically slaughtered for their flesh and their eggs are dug up and sold to the insatiable Calcutta market where both are in high demand for the delicious calipee/calipash soup and for the nutritional value of the meat. The brutal way in which the turtles are killed goes unchecked, despite the fact that the sea turtles are protected species under Schedule I of the Indian Wildlife Act 1972 (no commercial usage permitted). In January 1991 on Digha Beach alone, two days catch netted over 500 sea turtles, while in Gahirmata over 100,000 eggs were harvested by local "contractors" for the Calcutta market.
The commercial value and the fact that turtles are relatively simple to catch during the mating season has currently attracted hordes of fishermen (and others seeking quick money while the season lasts) to the beaches of the Konkan, Coromandel, Orissa, and West Bengal, where each season's harvest is growing alarmingly. The fishermen merely wait for the turtles to start copulating offshore, when they become virtually defenseless. They do not even require nets, they just flip them into their boats where the flippers are wired together to prevent them from wriggling back into the sea. In any case, once a turtle is put on its back on the beach, it is virtually impossible for it to crawl back into the sea.
The female turtles, tragically, are heavy-laden with eggs when they are caught. Once the catch is over, the fishermen lay them out on their backs in helpless rows while professional cutters go down the line literally ripping the plastrons open while the turtles are still alive. In some cases, live turtles are loaded into waiting carts and trailers and rushed to the nearest railhead for shipment to Calcutta or Bombay. It is not just the illegality of the process that is repugnant, but the completely inhumane manner in which the turtles are killed. With thousands being slaughtered every breeding season, there is no way that the respective state governments cannot be aware of what is going on. But they are just not bothered. In some cases, money even changes hands.
There was a time when the Orissa and Karnataka governments allowed contractors to sell one million turtle eggs to Calcutta, Madras, and Bombay per season, in return for a royalty. This has now been banned with the indiscriminate killing having reached immeasurable heights. Today, sea turtles have been added to the ever lengthening list of endangered species. I have started educating and interacting with the fishermen all along the beaches of Nizampatnam, Chirala, Nellore (all on the Coromandel coast in Andhra Pradesh), Gangavali, Bhatkal, Kasargod (all on the Konkan coast in Karnataka), Digha on the West Bengal coast, and Gahirmata-Ekakula on the Orissa coast. I had to start from the basics; i.e., telling them that it is wrong to kill sea turtles because as it is there is a tremendous shortage of these animals in the sea. During noon and evenings I discuss the issues with the elders of the fishermen's village, who give me a very patient hearing. However, my main target is the teenagers who are just on the threshold of their forefather's profession and the children in the coastal villages.
12 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
The next generations need to be trained in the conservation and protection of sea turtles since, sooner or later, they would take up the profession of fishing and this concept of sea turtle conservation will by then be deeply embedded in their minds. I have requested two primary and one middle school to spare one period in their weekly curriculum to enable me to conduct education classes on sea turtle conservation. Initially, though the response was poor, I was able to muster the full strength of the school including the teachers for discussions. To my good luck, this process is slowly but surely succeeding.
Today I am proud to state that the Trinity Public School, Hyderabad (a higher secondary school with classes through to the tenth standard) is the first of its kind in Andhra Pradesh, and in this part of India, to very kindly allot to me the last two periods on every Saturday to hold environmental protection and conservation classes and group discussions. Indeed, the response is overwhelming, keeping in mind that I do not have any kind of educational material, aid, or films -- only my word of mouth. Today, by my single-handed effort, I am happy to state that the turtle slaughter has been completely minimized in the coastal villages of Nizampatnam, Chirala, Nellore, and Kasargod ... and I enthusiastically look forward to the day when not a single turtle is killed on any beach or in the waters of India. It is an Herculean effort, and it sincerely requires your good-will, best wishes, and strong support.
B. PRADEEP KUMAR, No. M3/281-3RT, "The Cottage", Sanjeevareddy Nagar, Hyderabad 500 038, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA.
TWELFTH ANNUAL SYMPOSIUM ON SEA TURTLE CONSERVATION AND BIOLOGY
The Twelfth Annual Symposium (formerly the annual "Workshop") on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation is scheduled for the last week in February 1992. Registration will begin on the evening of 25 February and Symposium sessions will be scheduled on 26, 27 and 28 February. Accommodations will be available for groups to meet on 24-25 February prior to the opening of the Symposium, and special events and working group meetings can be scheduled on 29 February. The location will be Villas By The Sea, Jekyll Island, Georgia, the same as last year. Room rates for 1992 will be the same as 1991 and you can make your reservations at any time by calling the Villas (in Georgia 1-800-342-6872, elsewhere in USA 1-800-841-6262, outside USA 912-635-2521). We will meet airline travelers at Brunswick (Georgia) and Jacksonville (Florida). If you have not made your reservations, please do so immediately!
International participants: We strongly suggest that you arrive Sunday, 23 February, and depart Sunday, 1 March, to participate in international working group meetings of great value to the Symposium. Also, each international participant must provide us with a FAX number by which we can correspond with you during January and February when so many plans are changing day to day. Last year the Eleventh Annual Workshop brought together some 500 registered participants from 17 countries. The event was a great success, featuring a wide variety of oral and poster presentations on sea turtle research and conservation efforts around the world. The 1992 meeting promises to be the best one yet! Hope to see you all next February!
JAMES I. RICHARDSON, 1992 Sea Turtle Symposium Coordinator, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 USA. Tel: 404-548-9046 (home), 404-542-6036 (office); FAX 404-542-6040; Telex 414190.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 13 RECENT PAPERS
BOWEN, B. W., A. B. MEYLAN, J. C. AVISE. 1991. Evolutionary distinctness of the endangered Kemp's ridley sea turtle. Nature (London) 352(6337):709-711. B. Bowen, Dept. Genetics, Univ. Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602 USA.
CAILLOUET, C. W., Jr., M. J. DURONSLET, A. M. LANDRY, Jr., D. B. REVERA, D. J. SHAVER, K. M. STANLEY, R. W. HEINLY, and E. K. STABENAU. 1991. Sea turtle strandings and shrimp fishing effort in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 1986- 1989. Fish. Bull. 89(4):712-718. C. Caillouet, NOAA NMFS Galveston Lab, 4700 Ave. U., Galveston, Texas, 77551-5997 USA.
CARR, T. and N. CARR. 1991. Surveys of the sea turtles of Angola. Biol Cons. 58(1):19-30. T. Carr, Route 2, Box 905, Micanopy, Florida 32667 USA.
FRAZIER, J. 1991. Some notes on sea turtles. Herp. Rev. 22(2):42. J. Frazier, Seccion de Ecol. Humana, CINVESTAV del IPN - Unidad Mérida, A. P. 73 "Cordemex", Mérida, Yucatán, MEXICO CP 97310.
FRAZIER, J. G., I. GOODBODY, and C. A. RUCKDESCHEL. 1991. Epizoan communities on marine turtles: II. Tunicates. Bull. Mar. Sci. 48(3):763-765. J. Frazier (as above).
GRAMENTZ, D. 1991. Migrationen von Caretta caretta im Mittelmeer. Herpetofauna 13(72): 20-25. D. Gramentz, Földerichstr. 7, D-(W) 1000 Berlin 20, GERMANY.
NILSSON, G. E., P. L. LUTZ, and T. L. JACKSON. 1991. Neurotransmitters and anoxic survival of the brain: a comparison of anoxia-tolerant and anoxia-intolerant vertebrates. Physiol. Zool. 64(3):638-652. G. Nilsson, Dept. Zoolphysiol., Uppsala Univ., Box 560, S-751 22 Uppsala, SWEDEN.
RENOUS, S. and V. BELS. 1991. Cinematic analysis of the forelimb of the leatherback turtle, Dermochelvs coriacea (Vandelli, 1761) during terrestrial locomotion. Can. J. Zool. 69(2):495-503. S. Renous, Museum Natl. Hist. Natur., Anat. Comparee Lab., C. N. R. S . , UA 04 1137, 55 Rue Buffon/F-75231, Paris 05 FRANCE. (in French)
RENOUS, S. and V. BELS. 1991. Kinetic study of the anterior swimming paddle in the leatherback turtle, Dermochelvs coriacea Vandelli 1761, during terrestrial locomotion. Can. J. Zool. 69(2):495-503. S. Renous (as above). (in French)
SAINT-GIRONS, H. 1991. Comparative histological studies on the nasal cavity of four turtle species: Dermochelvs coriacea, Chelonia mydas, Emys orbicularis, and Pseudemvs scripta (Reptilia Dermochelyidae Cheloniidae Emydidae). Bijdr. Dierkd. 61(1):51-62. H. Saint-Girons, Univ. Pierre et Marie Curie, Lab. d'Evol. des Etres Organises, 105 Boulevard Raspail, 75006 Paris, FRANCE.
SCHWARTZ, F. J. and C. JENSEN. 1991. Breathing and swimming activities and behaviors exhibited by two species of captive sea turtles, Chelonia mydas and Caretta caretta in North Carolina. J. Elisha Mitchell Sci. Soc. 107(1):21-33. F. Schwartz, Univ. North Carolina, Inst. Marine Sci., 3407 Arendell St., Morehead City, N. Carolina 28557 USA.
14 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
SEGURA, A. and J. A. CAMPO M. 1990 (1991). Post-capture losses of the artisanal fisheries of Golfo Dulce and their extrapolation to the Pacific of Costa Rica. Rev. Biol. Trop. 38 (2 Part B):425-430. A. Segura, Centro Investigación Ciencias del Mar y Limnologie CIMAR, Universidad, COSTA RICA. (in Spanish).
WIBBELS, T., D. W. OWENS, and D. ROSTAL. 1991. Soft plastra of adult male sea turtles: an apparent secondary sexual characteristic. Herp. Rev. 22(2):47-49. T. Wibbels, Inst. Reproductive Biol., Dept. Zool., Univ. of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712 USA.
TECHNICAL REPORTS
CAILLOUET, C. W. Jr. 1991. Kempy, The Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Marionette. HEART, Houston, Texas. Avaiable from: HEART, P. O. Box 68123, Houston, Texas 77268- 1231 USA. Please include US$ 11.95 for a signature edition, US$ 6.95 for an unsigned edition. [N.B. This delightful little book explains how to construct a Kemp's ridley sea turtle marionette, "a first for wood workers, hobbyists, conservationists, and educators!" All proceeds go to support HEART -- Help Endangered Animals: Ridley Turtles.]
DURONSLET, M. J., D. B. REVERA, and K. M. STANLEY. 1991. Man-made Marine Debris and Sea Turtle Strandings on Beaches of the Upper Texas and Southwestern Louisiana Coasts, June 1987 through September 1989. NOAH Tech. Memo. NMFS- SEFC-279. U. S. Dept. Commerce. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service, Galveston Laboratory, 4700 Avenue U, Galveston, Texas 77551 USA.
GROOMBRIDGE, B. 1990. Marine Turtles in the Mediterranean: Distribution, Population Status, Conservation. A Report to the Council of Europe, Environment Conservation and Management Division, Nature and Environment Series No. 48. 98 p. Available from: Eladio Fernandez-Galiano, Conseil de 1'Europe, F 67000 Strasbourg, FRANCE.
MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE. 1990. The Offshore Environmental Program (1973-1989): A Summary of Minerals Management Service Research Conducted on the Outer Continental Shelf. OCS Report MMS 91-0028. Available from: Minerals Management Service, Environmental Studies Branch (MS 4310), 381 Elden Street, Herndon, Virginia 22070 USA.
NICHOLS, D. G., K. S. FULLER, E. McSHANE-CALUZI, and E. KLERNER- ECKENRODE. 1991. Wildlife Trade Laws of Asian and Oceania. World Wildlife Fund, Washington D. C. Available from: World Wildlife Fund Publications, P. O. Box 4866, Hampden Post Office, Baltimore, Maryland 21211 USA. Price: US$ 50.00, plus $2.00 shipping for the first book and $1.00 for each additional book.
RENAUD, M., G. GITSCHLAG, E. KLIMA, A. SHAH, D. KOI, and J. NANCE. 1991. Evaluation of the Impacts of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) on Shrimp Catch Rates in Coastal Waters of the United States Along the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic, September 1989 through August 1990. 80 p. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-228. U. S. Dept. Commerce. Available from: National Marine Fisheries Service Galveston Laboratory, 4700 Avenue U, Galveston, Texas 77551 USA.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 15 SANCHEZ PEREZ, R. (Compilation). 1989. Memorias del V Encuentro Interuniversitario Sobre Tortugas Marinas en México. Morelia, Michoacán, 8-11 Junio 1988. Limited copies available from: R. Sánchez P., Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de Hidalgo, Escuela de Biologia, Morelia, Michoacan, MEXICO. (in Spanish)
SECRETARIA DE DESARROLLO URBANO Y ECOLOGIA. 1991. Manual de técnicas de manejo y conservación para la operación de campamentos tortugueros. Inst. Nacional de la Pesca, México. 103 p. Available from: R. Marquez M., Inst. Nac. Pesca, Centro de Invest. Pesquera, A. P. 591, Manzanillo, Colima, MEXICO 28200. (in Spanish)
SECRETARIA DE DESARROLLO URBANO Y ECOLOGIA. 1991. Programa Nacional de Protección y Conservation de Tortugas Marinas (Propuesta). Inst. Nacional de la Pesca, Mexico. 116 p. Available from: R. Márquez M. (as above). (in Spanish)
THOMAS, P. E. J. (Compiler). 1989. Report of the Northern Marshall Islands Natural Diversity and Protected Areas Survey, 7-24 September 1988. South Pacific Regional Environmental Program, Noumea, New Caledonia. East-West Center, Honolulu, Hawaii. 133 p. Limited copies available from: East-West Center, 1777 East-West Road, Honolulu, Hawaii 96848 USA. There may be a document charge. [N.B. This report includes a discussion of sea turtle nest density on six atolls (Taongi, Bikar, Paka, Wotho, Rongerik, Erikub) and Jemo Island.]
TUCKER AND ASSOCIATES, INC. 1990. Sea Turtles and Marine Mammals of the Gulf of Mexico. Proceedings of a Workshop held in New Orleans, 1-3 August 1989. OCS Study MMS 90-0009. 211 p. Available from: Minerals Management Service, Gulf of Mexico OCS Regional Office, Public Info. Unit (MS 5034), 1201 Elmwood Park Blvd., New Orleans, Louisiana 70123-2394 USA.
VAN DAM, R., L. SARTI M., and D. PARES J. 1991. The hawksbills of Mona Island, Puerto Rico: Report for 1990. Project supported by Sociedad Chelonia and Depto. Recursos Naturales, Puerto Rico. 16 p. Limited copies available from: R. Van Dam, Physiol. Res. Lab (0204), Scripps Institute of Oceanography-UCSD, La Jolla, California 92093-0204 USA.
THESES AND DISSERTATIONS
ROSTAL, DAVID CARL. 1991. The Reproductive Behavior and Physiology of the Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle, Lepidochelys kempi (Garman, 1880). Doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas USA. UMI Order No. GAX91-33993 (Univ. Microfilms Inc., 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, MI 48106-1346).
LEGAL BRIEFS
NESTING TURTLES PROTECTED IN MOZAMBIQUE -- Nesting leatherback and loggerhead turtles, Dermochelvs coriacea and Caretta caretta, have been totally protected on Bazaruto and Benguera islands in Mozambique as a result of an Endangered Wildlife Trust/ Southern African Nature Foundation project, which started in 1989. Loggerhead hatchlings were collected at emergence in 1990 to protect them from predators, reared, and released into
16 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 the Mozambique current in February 1991 when that year's hatchlings would be heading south. Islanders are supporting the protect and in 1991 not one nest was disturbed; in previous years all nesting females and eggs were eaten. Source: Endangered Wildlife, March 1991 [as reported in Oryx 25(4):1891.
* * *
TURTLE HARVEST BANNED IN SOLOMON ISLANDS -- With effect from August 1990, the exploitation of turtles has been banned for a period of five years and the exploitation of crocodiles prohibited for a period of ten years in Temotu Province in the Solomon Islands. This ban has been effected under The Temotu Province Environmental Protection Ordinance. Source: TRAFFIC Bulletin, 1991, 12(1/2):23.
* * *
MARINE BIODIVERSITY NEGLECTED -- In the last decade, the worldwide loss of biological diversity went from the concern of a handful of scientists to an item on the agendas of world leaders. A new science, "conservation biology", arose to provide the scientific understanding needed to prevent further loss of genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity. But conservation biologists have focused mainly on terrestrial species and ecosystems, particularly those of tropical moist forests; there has been little attention to marine species and ecosystems. Perhaps this bias is understandable, as people are terrestrial animals and can more readily see the destruction of our terrestrial surroundings. But it neglects the 71 % of the Earth's surface that is covered by oceanic and coastal marine ecosystems, a huge realm having high biological diversity. The entire marine realm, from the coasts to the open ocean and the deep sea, is at risk. Five main classes of activities threaten marine populations, species and ecosystems, including: over-exploitation, physical alteration, pollution, introduction of alien species, and global atmospheric change. Source: excerpted from IUCN/SSC Species, 1991, 16:16-18.
* * *
TOURIST AWARENESS NEEDED -- Indonesia's mass slaughter of endangered sea turtles would be greatly reduced if Western tourists stopped buying souvenir shells and jewelry. Two million tourists, mostly from Australia, Japan, North America, Britain and Germany, visit Indonesia every year and spend millions of dollars on turtle products, Greenpeace's Trevor Daly said. An estimated 50,000 green and hawksbill turtles are slaughtered every year for their meat, shells and eggs, about half of them on the resort island of Bali, according to Greenpeace. Australian customs officials confiscated more than 1,000 turtle shells and items of jewelry in 1990, many taken from tourists who did not know they were breaking the law. Source: excerpted from The Times (London), 2 August 1991.
* * *
TORTUGUERO NATIONAL PARK TO BE EXPANDED -- Costan Rican President Rafael Calderon is expected to sign two decrees in 1992 which greatly increase the size of Tortuguero National Park, part of the largest lowland rainforest on the Caribbean rim and home to one of the world's most significant green sea turtle nesting beaches. Tortuguero National Park currently covers 19,700 hectares (nearly 50,000 acres) of lowland rainforest. The first phase of Park expansion will include nearly 10,000 hectares of forested land (comprising a corridor linking Tortuguero National Park to the Barra del Colorado Wildlife Refuge to the north), the inclusion of additional sea turtle nesting beach habitat, Tortuguero Mountain (Cerro Tortuguero), and a strip of land along the San Juan River on the border with Nicaragua. The
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 17 second phase will begin in 1992 and will encompass lands north and south of the existing Park, including upgrading about half of the Barra del Colorado Wildlife Refuge to National Park status. Source: Caribbean Conservation Corporation Press Releases, 29 October and 22 November 1991.
* * *
TEDs AND TURTLES -- 1990 and 1991 are the best years on record for loggerhead turtles in Florida, where 90% of U. S. sea turtle nests are laid. The news is equally good for the Kemp's ridley, the world's most endangered sea turtle, which produced 1,012 nests this year [1991] at the main nesting beach at Rancho Nuevo -- an increase of nearly 5% over last year, which also was a good year. In 1990 there were 967 Kemp's ridley nests, more than any year since 1978. About 130 Kemp's ridley nests were also found south of Rancho Nuevo in 1991. While biologists caution that sea turtle nesting cycles fluctuate from year to year, and one cannot read too much into the figures, this increase in nesting happens to coincide with two years of TED use. 1990 compliance with the federal regulations requiring TEDs on shrimp trawls was about 95 %, a significant increase over 1990's rate of 76 %. In light of these figures, it will be very difficult for TED opponents to argue that TED regulations are simply a burden to shrimpers and not effective for turtle conservation. Source: excerpted from the Center for Marine Conservation's Marine Conservation News, 1991, 3(4):8.
* * *
INCIDENTAL CATCH OF MEDITERRANEAN LOGGERHEAD TURTLES -- A preliminary report (June 1991) of a three year study (1989-1991) of the incidental catch of loggerhead sea turtles in swordfish longlines in the Ionian Sea, Greece, indicates that 10%-40% (depending on the fishing zone) of fishing trips in 1990 ensnared 1-3 turtles. Most of the turtles captured were juveniles, with only a few larger than 70 cm shell length. Source: excepted from MEDASSET Press Release, September 1991.
* * *
CORAL COLLECTION IN THE PHILIPPINES -- The Marine Conservation Society had been investigating the retail side of the marine curio trade and suspected that illegally imported Philippine corals were still in circulation. Their fears were confirmed recently when a random search of a Russian freighter at Tilbury followed by a raid on a warehouse in Boston, Lincolnshire [U.K.], uncovered 17 tonnes of Philippine coral. All hard corals are listed in Appendix II of CITES, which allows trade only if consignments are accompanied by export permits. In addition, European Community regulations require import permits. The Philippines was -- and it seems still is -- a major exporter of reef coral. Yet collection and export have been banned since 1977, apart from a lapse between 1 May and 22 November 1986 "to clear stocks". Since November 1986 (CITES came into force for corals in 1985), no export licences should have been issued. Unscrupulous dealers are still getting round the regulations; either with false documentation, or no documents at all. The material seized had been described as "driftwood and rock".
* * *
Reefs in many parts of the world are under severe stress, but those in the Philippines have been particularly badly damaged as a result of siltation, pollution, over-fishing and dynamite fishing. Coral collection is an added problem and increased vigilance is required in importing countries in order to intercept illegal shipments. Less than 5 percent of Philippine reefs are in good condition and about one-third are assessed as being poor. Damaged reefs are unproductive and may take years to recover. ` Source: excerpted from Oryx 25(4):183. [N.B.
18 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
The degradation and destruction of coral reefs around the world by collection, indiscriminate anchoring, mining for construction materials, pollution, and destructive fishing methods (such as fishing using chemicals and explosives) is of concern to all sea turtle biologists. Coral reefs provide essential forage and refugia to tropical sea turtles. All efforts to protect remaining stocks will be for naught if the marine environment can no longer sustain an appropriate diversity of life.]
* * *
RESTAURANTS URGED TO REFUSE TURTLES -- The offering of sea turtle on the menus of local hotels is a serious concern. Sea turtle species are endangered throughout the world, and Nevis is no exception. Concerned groups throughout the [Caribbean] region are suggesting a ten year moratorium on sea turtles -- this means a period of ten years when no sea turtles will be taken for any reason. Even without the harvesting of sea turtles and sea turtle eggs, these species will have a hard time surviving. Encroaching civilization, populated beaches, lighted beaches, and the loss of sea grass as a result of clearing, garbage dumping, and siltation make it hard for sea turtles to survive. Fishermen only harvest what they can sell, and when everyone refuses to buy sea turtles, the fishermen will quit taking them. Repeated refusals from prospective buyers will get the message across. Source: excerpted from a letter sent to local restaurants by the Nevis Historical and Conservation Society, St. Kitts and Nevis, West Indies.
* * *
CITES GAINS 112th PARTY -- The newest CITES Party is Uganda, effective 16 October 1991. Source: U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Department of the Interior) CITES UPDATE No. 10, September 1991.
* * *
MEXICO EXPANDS TURTLE PROTECTION PROGRAM -- The Secretaria de Pesca (SEPESCA) had previously conducted limited experiments with Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs), but is now significantly expanding its TED trials in preparation for a major effort to reduce the incidental turtle mortalities resulting from shrimp trawling in the Caribbean. In 1990-1991, SEPESCA conducted 234 TED trials in the Gulf of Mexico using 54 NMFS and 26 soft TEDs. Approximately 1,500 experimental TED-trawling hours were logged. SEPESCA encountered few turtles. In the 1990 trials (August to November), no turtles were caught; during subsequent 1991 trials (March to June) only four turtles were caught by the control trawlers. SEPESCA reported, however, significant reductions in the shrimp catch (29% using rigid NMFS TEDs, 10-30% using soft TEDs). While overall shrimp loss was disappointing, SEPESCA indicates that the TEDs with 'super shooters' [see MTN 52:23] installed had an almost negligible impact on the shrimp catch, reducing it only by about 1 %. No information is available as yet on the Pacific coast trials. Source: U. S. National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of International Afffairs, Weekly Highlights 21-25 October 1991.
* * *
TURTLES IN TROUBLE IN BALI -- Indonesia should take into account the protest launched by a group of environmentalists against the mass slaughter of Balinese turtles, as the country has an interest in the preservation of all kinds of species, especially those categorized as endangered species, an official said. "The number of Balinese turtles has indeed shown a decline, but it has not as yet become extinct, therefore, the species still cannot be classified as endangered," Director General of Forest Protection and Nature Preservation, Sutisna
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 19 Wartaputra, said here Thursday. Sutisna was responding to the protest launched by Greenpeace that there is a need for the Indonesian government to prevent the mass slaughter of Balinese turtles both for ritual and other purposes. The mass slaughter of Balinese turtles has become the target of criticism from the environmentalists ... [who believe] the number of Balinese turtles is now on the brink of extinction. Source: The Indonesia Times, 19 July 1991.
* * *
SUPER SHOOTER TED IS LEGAL -- There has been some confusion over the legality of the "Super Shooter TED". The confusion involved measurement of the turtle exit hole and installation of the webbing flap over the exit hole. The Super Shooter TED is manufactured by Saunder's Machine Shop of Biloxi, Mississippi, and is considered a Georgia- type TED as defined in the TED regulations 50 CFR Part 117. A Georgia TED must have a turtle exit opening of at least 32 inches for use in the Gulf of Mexico to be legal. This measurement is measured by enforcement officers by passing a 32-inch stick laterally through the opening. Webbing flaps can cover the exit hole but should not extend more than 24 inches past the rear edge of the TED and should not be sewn along the sides more than 6 inches past the rear edge of the TED. A Super Shooter TED that meets these criteria for an opening and flap is considered a legal TED. Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Region Newsbreaker No. 91-04, 10 October 1991.
* * *
SEA TURTLES PROTECTED DURING SUMMER FLOUNDER SEASON -- The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is cooperating with North Carolina to protect sea turtles taken as incidental catch in the founder fishery [see also MTN 53:12]. North Carolina requires that vessels restrict tow times to 60 minutes bottom time in state waters. Federal regulations have the same requirement in federal waters. Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Region Newsbreaker No. 91-05, 13 November 1991.
* * *
SEA TURTLE MOVEMENTS MONITORED -- Three loggerhead and two subadult Kemp's ridley sea turtles were captured during pre-dredging trawling surveys by the University of Georgia's RV Georgia Bulldog. The turtles were fitted with radio and sonic transmitters and released in the Brunswick [Georgia USA] ship channel near their capture site on 5 and 6 October 1991. As of 30 October one ridley had moved 24 nautical miles to St. Mary's Passage (Florida/Georgia border), and one ridley and one loggerhead had moved 80 nm south to locations offshore St. Augustine, Florida. The course of the other two loggerheads was not determined. In another study, an adult Kemp's ridley was captured during pre-dredging trawling surveys by the RV Georgia Bulldog, fitted with a satellite transmitter, and released in the St. Mary's Passage near its capture site on 13 October 1991. As of 30 October the turtle had moved about 38 nm to the south; its movements will be monitored for 12-15 months. Source: National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Center, Galveston Laboratory.
ERRATUM
Some folks received copies of the October 1991 issue of the Marine Turtle Newsletter (MTN 55) that were missing pages, or contained duplicate pages. If you have received a defective Newsletter, please don't hesitate to request a clean copy from the Editors. KLE/SAE
20 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
IT'S TIME TO GIVE KEMP'S RIDLEY HEAD-STARTING A FAIR AND SCIENTIFIC EVALUATION!
Woody (1991) has proclaimed himself judge, prosecutor and jury for all Kemp's ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempi) research and management, without applying the same principals of professional and moral ethics, proven techniques, and biologically sound rationale that he expects of head-starting. Help Endangered Animals-Ridley Turtles (HEART) believes that the head-start experiment in Galveston, Texas, should be continued. This opinion is supported by the recommendations of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) Blue Ribbon Panel (Wibbels et al., 1989a), the National Academy of Science's Committee on Sea Turtle Conservation (Magnuson et al., 1990) and, to a lesser extent, the NMFS-FWS [Fish and Wildlife Service] team of scientists who prepared the draft "U. S. Recovery Plan for the Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle", although we are opposed to the Recovery Plan's low priority ranking and suggested cutbacks regarding head-starting. Some of the scientists who served on these committees are world-renowned, including Karen Bjorndal, Nat Frazer, Mark Grassman, John Henrickson, Rene Marquez, David Owens, Peter Pritchard, James Richardson, and Thane Wibbels.
The head-start experiment began in 1978, but a majority of males were released by the program through 1984 (Shaver et al., 1988; Wibbels et al., 1989b). By 1985, enough data on the relationship between incubation temperature and sex ratio were available to understand that elevated temperatures would produce mostly females. In an attempt to balance past ratios, mostly females were produced beginning in 1985. The Kemp's Ridley Recovery Team estimates age at sexual maturity to be 15 years for this species. Consequently, not many head- started ridleys would be expected to nest before the year 2000. Nonetheless, some head-started ridleys may already be reproductively active. Woody (1990, 1991) offered no proof that head- started ridleys are not currently nesting at Rancho Nuevo (Mexico) or Padre Island (Texas). Nesting takes less than an hour (Pritchard and Marquez, 1973), and neither Rancho Nuevo nor Padre Island is patrolled well enough to observe every turtle. If they were, the number of nesters would not have to be estimated from the number of nests (Pritchard, 1990). If a head- started female loses her tag, how is she to be identified as head-started? Some of the turtles with only tag scars at Rancho Nuevo may, in fact, be head-started individuals.
Woody (1991) cited altered behavior in mentioning the head-started Kemp's ridley caught offshore Nicaragua (Manzella et al., 1991). Maybe if as many wild juvenile ridleys as head-started juvenile ridleys (in the latter case, about 18,500) had been tagged and released since 1978, some would have been found in places Woody thinks Kemp's ridleys should not occur. Bolten and Martins (1990) reported wild Kemp's ridleys near Madeira and the Azores, but Woody (1991) overlooked these, choosing instead to base his conclusions about altered behavior in head-started turtles from a few tag returns and rare sightings, ignoring the hundreds of head-started ridleys found in the Gulf of Mexico and east coast [USA] habitats where wild ridleys also occur (Manzella et al., 1988; Fontaine et al., 1989). Meylan et al. (1990a) didn't speculate that the Kemp's ridley nesting in Florida had been head-started, but Woody (1991) did, and went on to make a point about its possible altered behavior. However, green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas) sometimes make the same "mistake" due to imperfect homing (Meylan et al., 1990b). Sweat (1968) found an adult Kemp's ridley from Rancho Nuevo in south Florida waters, so why shouldn't Kemp's ridleys nest in Florida and other areas? How else do sea turtles colonize new nesting beaches?
Based on tag returns, NMFS monitors the head-started turtles for growth, survival and movement (Manzella et al., 1988; Fontaine et al., 1989). Most of the tag returns are from live and dead strandings and shrimp trawling. Caillouet et al. (1991) reported that sea turtle
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 21 strandings are directly correlated with shrimp fishing effort, so we all should know by now what is killing our turtles, be they wild or head-started. Twenty five years of Rancho Nuevo beach protection has not measurably increased the number of nesters, so Woody (and other detractors; e.g., Mortimer, 1988) should suspect some common cause preventing both wild and head- started turtles from surviving long enough to nest at Rancho Nuevo or anywhere else . . . and that cause is shrimping (Magnuson et al., 1990; Wibbels et al., 1989a). It makes sense that we allow the head-starting experiment to continue until we can fairly evaluate it under the conditions of full implementation of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) in all trawls in the Gulf of Mexico and U. S. eastern seaboard. Finally, Woody's (1991) comparison of "per hatchling" costs is incorrect. The Rancho Nuevo hatchlings estimated to cost US$ 0.65 each don't all live through their first year. The cost of producing yearlings from eggs laid at Rancho Nuevo cannot reasonably be compared with the cost of releasing hatchlings directly from the nesting beach.
The Mexican and U. S. governments would not have initiated head-starting if removing 25 clutches from the beach each year jeopardized the intended recovery of the species. The take was then, and is now, considered by program officials to be insignificant. Crouse et al. (1987) concluded that eggs and hatchlings are not nearly as valuable to sea turtle populations as large juveniles and adults. This is not to say that eggs do not have value, but removing 3 % of annual egg production has not been shown to be detrimental to the population at large. We can only assume that Jack Woody and others who initially planned and implemented the head-start experiment did not do so just because of public appeal or political motivations, but rather based their program on the premise that 2,000 eggs per year was an acceptable experimental take. Today the experimental head-start program generates tremendous public support for sea turtle conservation, as well as for the increasingly beleaguered Endangered Species Act (ESA). This support contributed heavily to TED regulations and to the reauthorization of the ESA in 1988.
Head-starting was planned as a ten year trial, but, in August 1989, the NMFS Blue Ribbon Panel recommended a ten year extension after TEDs were fully implemented on shrimp boats (Wibbels et al., 1989a). While the Panel's recommendations may not have been peer- reviewed, they were certainly not kept secret. Anyone interested, including Jack Woody, could have requested a copy of the report from the NMFS office in St. Petersburg, Florida. In closing, I am very disappointed by Woody's (1991) biased interpretation of the results of head- starting endangered Kemp's ridley sea turtles. The Federal Register announced that the draft Recovery Plan for the Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle was available about the same time Woody circulated his critical review of head-starting (Woody, 1991). He was promoting the burial was head-starting before giving the public a chance to comment on the NMFS-FWS Recovery Plan. Supporters of sea turtle conservation, HEART, and those involved in the head-start experiment have made their voices heard. I hope the readers of the MTN will also make their support for Kemp's ridley head-starting known.
Bolten, A. B. and H. R. Martins. 1990. Kemp's ridley captured in the Azores. Marine Turtle Newsletter 48:23.
Caillouet, C. W. Jr., M. J. Duronslet, A. M. Landry, Jr., D. B. Revera, D. J. Shaver, K. M. Stanley, R. W. Heinley, and E. K. Stabenau. 1991. Sea turtle strandings and shrimp fishing effort in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico, 1986-89. Fish. Bull. 89(4):712-718.
Crouse, D. T., L. B. Crowder, and H. Caswell. 1987. A stage-based population model for loggerhead sea turtles and implications for conservation. Ecology 68(5):1412-1423.
22 - Marine. Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
Fontaine, C. T., S. A. Manzella, T. D. Williams, R. M. Harris, and W. J. Browning. 1989. Distribution, growth and survival of head-started, tagged and released Kemp's ridley sea turtles (Lepidochelys kempi) from year-classes 1978-1983, p.124-144. In: Proc. First International Symposium on Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Biology, Conservation and Management (C. W. Caillouet, Jr. and A. M. Landry, Jr., Editors). Texas A&M Univ., Sea Grant College Program, TAMU-SG-89-105.
Magnuson, J. J., K. A. Bjorndal, W. D. DuPaul, G. L. Graham, D. W. Owens, C. H. Peterson, P. C. H. Pritchard, J. I. Richardson, G. E. Saul, and C. W. West. 1990. Decline of the Sea Turtles: Causes and Prevention. National Academy Press, Washington D. C. 259 p.
Manzella, S., K. Bjorndal, and C. Lagueux. 1991. Head-started Kemp's ridley recaptured in Caribbean. Marine Turtle Newsletter 54:13-14.
Manzella, S. A., C. W. Caillouet, Jr., and C. T. Fontaine. 1988. Kemp's ridley, Lepidochelys kemvi, sea turtle head-start tag recoveries: distribution, habitat, and method of recovery. Marine Fisheries Review 50(3):24-32.
Meylan, A., P. Castaneda, and C. Coogan. 1990a. First recorded nesting of Kemp's ridley in Florida, USA. Marine Turtle Newsletter 48:8-9.
Meylan, A. B., B. W. Bowen, and J. C. Avise. 1990b. A genetic test of the natal homing versus social facilitation models for green turtle migration. Science 248:724-727.
Mortimer, J. A. 1988. Management options for sea turtles: re-evaluating priorities. Florida Defenders of the Environment Bull. 25:1-4.
Pritchard, P. C. H. and R. Marquez M. 1973. Kemp's ridley turtle or Atlantic ridley, Lepidochelys kempi. IUCN Monograph No. 2, Marine Turtle Series. Morges, Switzerland. 30 p.
Pritchard, P. C. H. 1990. Kemp's ridleys are rarer than we thought. Marine Turtle Newsletter 49:1-3.
Shaver, D. J., D. W. Owens, A. H. Chaney, C. W. Caillouet, Jr., P. Burchfield, and R. Marquez M. 1988. Styrofoam box and beach temperatures in relation to incubation sex ratios of Kemp's ridley sea turtles, p.103-108. In: Proc. Eighth Annual Workshop on Sea Turtle Conservation and Biology (B. A. Schroeder, Compiler). NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-214. U. S. Dept. Commerce.
Sweat, D. 1968. Capture of a tagged ridley turtle. Florida Scientist 31(1):47-48.
Wibbels, T., N. Frazer, M. Grassman, J. Hendrickson, P. Pritchard. 1989a. Report to National Marine Fisheries Service: Blue Ribbon Panel Review of the NMFS Kemp's Ridley Head- Start Program. Submitted to National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Regional Office, St. Petersburg, Florida. 11 p.
Wibbels, T. R., Y. A. Morris, D. W. Owens, G. A. Dienberg, J. Noell, J. K. Leong, R. E. King, and R. Marquez M. 1989b. Predicted sex ratios from the international Kemp's ridley sea turtle head-start research project, p.77-81. In: Proc. First International Symposium on Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle Biology, Conservation and Management (C. W.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 23 Caillouet, Jr. and A. M. Landry, Jr., Editors). Texas A&M Univ., Sea Grant College Program, TAMU-SG-89-105.
Woody, J. B. 1990. Guest Editorial: Is head-starting a reasonable conservation measure? "On the surface, yes; In reality, no". Marine Turtle Newsletter 50:8-11.
Woody, J. B. 1991. Guest Editorial: It's time to stop head-starting Kemp's ridley. Marine Turtle Newsletter 54:7-8.
CAROLE H. ALLEN, HEART, P. O. Box 681231, Houston, Texas 77268-1231 USA.
GUEST EDITORIAL: JAPAN HAWKSBILL IMPORT BAN -- TOO EARLY TO REST ON OUR LAURELS!
In a recent Marine Turtle Newsletter article, Donnelly (1991) may have painted too rosy a picture of Japan's recent concessions on hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) trade. A number of concerns held by the international environmental community still exist, and were included in a letter to former Prime Minister Kaifu signed by 19 national and international environmental, ecological, and animal protection groups[l]. Our major concerns are as follows:
1. The 7,500 kg of turtle parts that Japan plans to import before 1 January 1993 represents at least 7,000 sea turtles which are an internationally recognized endangered species. Their destruction for the manufacture of trinkets is unacceptable. Our experience with gradual phase- outs, such as occurred with elephant ivory, indicates that thousands of animals above the quota will be killed as international traders stockpile the product before the ban goes into effect. We fear that the same will happen with the sea turtles. It is noteworthy that more than 7,500 kg of hawksbill shell inventory already exists, but since most nations with stockpiled shell (such as Indonesia) cannot legally sell it to Japan because they are signatories to CITES, in all likelihood thousands more sea turtles will be taken, probably largely from the waters of Cuba, since that country maintains a "reservation" on hawksbills under CITES. Most importantly, in the real world local turtle hunters will continue to catch turtles as long as they think there is a possibility someone will buy them in the future. Only an immediate halt will end the slaughter.
2. There has been no accounting system established that will prevent future sea turtle products from entering the Japanese market under the claim that they were "pre-ban" products; as a result, sea turtle products may continue to be sold indefinitely. In the case of Mexico, the national ban on sea turtle harvest and trade included an immediate halt of all such trade and an elaborate accounting system of pre-ban products. Why is it that we are content to hold Mexico, a struggling, developing nation, to stricter standards than Japan, one of the richest, most employed nations in the world? We recognize the unique tradition of 'bekko' products in Japan, but we insist that their continued circulation (soon to consist of pre-ban items only) be accompanied by stringent accounting and regulation.
3. We have no real assurances that as July 1994 approaches, a new Japanese administration will not renege on the pledge to stop the trade and once again refuse to withdraw Japanese sea turtle reservations under CITES. The New York Times (18 May 1991) quoted Japan's deputy director of imports to say the ban would be lifted if the turtles showed sufficient recovery. What population parameters will be used to determine "sufficient recovery"? Up to now, Japan has largely refused to accept the scientific recommendations of the World Conservation Union (IUCN), the IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
24 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 In the case of cetaceans, Japan has not yet accepted the decisions of the International Whaling Commission's Scientific Committee. Japan continues to export whale products under the guise of so-called "scientific whaling". Let's hope "scientific turtling" is not next.
4. Despite recent reports that "Japan has announced its intention to drop its [CITES] reservation on the olive ridley turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea" (TRAFFIC 1991), the Sea Turtle Restoration Project of Earth Island Institute has not been able to confirm in any written documents that Japan has committed to dropping its CITES reservation on the endangered olive ridley turtle. It should be noted that Japan stopped importing ridley turtle skins in April 1991 [see MTN 55:5-6] only after Mexico closed down the slaughterhouses that were providing them [see MTN 50:1-3]. Donnelly (1991) and others have documented that much, perhaps more than half, of all hawksbill shell imported into Japan in recent years has been obtained illegally. Japan has historically failed to enforce international wildlife protection laws, and we believe there is a real possibility that Japan will not honor its recent commitments to drop its CITES reservation on the hawksbill in July 1994. We fear that the recent flurry of media exposure, which resulted from the U. S. government's threat to implement trade sanctions against Japan [see MTN 54:1-3; MTN 55:5-6, 14] and Japan's announcement of a phase-out in the import of hawksbill shell, will now dissipate, leaving people believing that the problems have been solved. We must demand a clean break, an immediate end to all sea turtle trade. Even Asahi Shimbun, one of Japan's leading newspapers, in a recent (and rare, in that it openly criticized the government) editorial accused the Japanese government of foot-dragging on the issue of dropping its CITES reservations on species the rest of the world recognizes as threatened with extinction.
The strength of international pressure has compelled and will continue to compel concessions from the Japanese government. This is not the time for our acceptance of half- hearted compromises. We should make it clear that we congratulate the Japanese government for long-awaited concessions, but we should also make it clear that, from our point of view, the only actions acceptable are:
(a) an immediate end to the importation of all sea turtle products, (b) an accounting system to ensure that the items remaining in circulation for traditional purposes are made from pre-ban materials only, and (c) an immediate end to CITES reservations on both hawksbill and olive ridley sea turtles.
The next international CITES meeting will be held in March 1992 in Kyoto, Japan. It is too early to pat ourselves on the back and rest on our laurels. Now is the time to write again and encourage Japan to end its sea turtle exploitation immediately and forever. Please write:
Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa 2-3-1 Nagatu-Cho Chiyoda-Ku, Tokyo 100 JAPAN
[1] American Cetacean Society, American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Animal Protection Institute, Animal Welfare Institute, Earth First!, Earth Island Institute, Friends of Animals, Friends of the Earth- Japan, Friends of the Earth-USA, Fund for Animals, Grupo de Los Cien-Mexico, Humane Society of the United States, International Rivers Network, International Wildlife Coalition, In Defense of Animals, Marine Mammal Fund, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Rainforest Action Network, Sea Shepherd Society. Greenpeace sent a similar letter outlining most of the same points.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 25 Donnelly, M. 1991. Japan bans import of hawksbill shell effective December 1992. Marine Turtle Newsletter 54:1-3.
TRAFFIC. 1991. Japan withdraws reservations on sea turtles and monitor lizards. TRAFFIC Bulletin 12(1/2):24.
TODD STEINER, Sea Turtle Restoration Project, Earth Island Institute, 300 Broadway, San Francisco, California 94133 USA.
FLORIDA SEEKS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST / SEA TURTLES
The Office of Protected Species Management, Marine Resources Division of the Florida Department of Natural Resources (Tallahassee, Florida) seeks to fill two Environmental Specialist positions in the field of sea turtle conservation and management. State funding for at least one of these positions is not immediately available; however, applicants are asked to submit their applications to FL DNR (c/o David Arnold, address below) before 15 January 1992 so that a current file of qualified persons can be maintained for future notice. Both positions, one scheduled to begin in February 1992, will involve the following duties and responsibilities.
1. Reviews and prepares comments on development projects requiring permits and/or leases within sea turtle habitat or which may affect sea turtles or their habitat.(25 % time)
2. Responsible for providing assistance in the development of area-specific sea turtle protection programs and implementation of these programs for east coast Florida counties and interior counties as assigned. (20% time)
3. Assists sea turtle research efforts as approved by supervisor. (20% time)
4. Works with various regional planning councils, state and federal agencies, and local governments to provide sea turtle mortality and distribution information and evaluate proposed sea turtle protection measures incorporated in comprehensive growth management plans, as well as other management plans that would include sea turtle concerns, such as aquatic preserve management plans, SWIM plans, beach lighting, and other related planning activities. (15% time)
5. Assists in the evaluation of programs that cross divisional, departmental, and governmental lines to identify overlap, need for coordination, gaps of coverage, and failures to respond to the needs of sea turtles in Florida. (10% time)
6. Prepares and maintains accurate reports and records describing permitting, planning, and evaluation activities and attends meetings as necessary. (5% time)
7. Assists with other Departmental programs and activities as requested by supervisory personnel. (5% time)
Applicants should have a college degree in biology, environmental science, or a related field. Position level and salary are flexible, depending on the credentials of the applicant. Please submit a personal resume and a State of Florida Job Application Form (available at any Florida State office) to David Arnold, Department of Natural Resources, 3900 Commonwealth Blvd., Mail Station No. 245, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 USA. Tel: (904) 922-4330.
26 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
DREDGING FATALITIES LEAD TO POSITIVE ACTION
Dredging incidents this past spring and summer [1991] killed as many as 60 sea turtles in the Southeast [USA]. In the end, however, they may lead to a solution to the problem. When channel dredging in Georgia killed more than 17 turtles in one month, people were outraged. Then, in August, the Army Corps of Engineers began dredging Charleston Harbor in South Carolina, even though they had told the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) they would only dredge in the winter, when turtles are least likely to be present. So, on 12 August 1991, the Center for Marine Conservation and other groups filed a notice of intent to sue the Corps for violating the Endangered Species Act. At least two more loggerhead turtles were killed before the Corps stopped dredging later in August. Then on 1 September, NMFS drafted a new biological opinion for dredging activities in the Southeast, restricting the use of hopper dredges to December through March only. Pipeline and bucket dredges, not known to harm turtles, will still be allowed year around. Although the action is not yet final, we commend NMFS for their action, demonstrating that environmental problems can be solved without hurting endangered species or restricting human activity. Source: Center for Marine Conservation Marine Conservation News, 1991, 3(4):5.
CUBA OPENS DOORS TO SEA TURTLE BIOLOGISTS
In a move that could greatly assist international efforts at sea turtle conservation, Cuba recently allowed a team of biologists and conservationists to observe the country's sea turtle management programs. Funding from the Center for Marine Conservation enabled biologists Perran Ross and Jose Ottenwalder to travel to Havana in June 1991 with a delegation from the CITES Secretariat. Cuba is the largest island in the Caribbean, with significant areas of sea turtle foraging (and probably nesting) habitat. The large, closely monitored state turtle fishery takes green turtles, loggerheads and hawksbills for use inside the country and for export, primarily to Japan. Cuba's heretofore political isolation has prevented the easy exchange of data with other biologists, which has hindered the development of Cuba's sea turtle programs.
Fortunately, Dr. Ross reports that Cuban biologists are open, frank, and eager to share information. It is hoped the information will travel both ways; gaps in our current sea turtle knowledge could be filled if scientists have greater access to Cuba's fisheries and turtle habitat. In addition, international efforts to conserve sea turtle populations could be enhanced. For more than two decades Cuba has been a major source of hawksbill shell to Japan, supplying the shell of about 3,800 adult hawksbills annually. Earlier this year [1991] when Japan decided to accept the CITES ban on hawksbill trade, Cuba announced its intention to submit a proposal to allow legal trade in its hawksbill population. Although it is highly unlikely that CITES would support this proposal, many biologists are alarmed by Cuba's interest in continuing the hawksbill trade.
Sea turtles are migratory, and [therefore it is logical to assume that] Cuba's harvest undermines sea turtle conservation programs in neighboring countries. Cuba, however, counters that turtles found in Cuban waters do not migrate out of Cuba and, therefore, Cuba's take does not harm other sea turtle populations. Fortunately, research will soon be underway to determine whether Cuba's hawksbill population is isolated or not. Funded by CITES, outside researchers will review the status of the population. Source: Center for Marine Conservation Marine Conservation News, 1991, 3(4):7.
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 27
JAPAN TO COMPENSATE HAWKSBILL SHELL INDUSTRY
In the wake of the planned ban on imports of hawksbill sea turtle shells beginning 1993, the Government of Japan has implemented two financial compensation measures: subsidies from the Ministry of Labor (MOL) to 692 craftsmen, and long-term low-interest loans from the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) to 207 employers (companies) mainly located at Nagasaki, Osaka, and Tokyo.
Subsidies from MOL are available for up to two years from 4 October 1991 to 3 October 1993; craftsmen who have lost their jobs are eligible to receive an additional 60-90 days (depending on age) of unemployment insurance; craftsmen are entitled to receive vocational training at MOL expense; craftsmen, when moving to another location for the purpose of securing employment, can receive reimbursement for transportation costs, depending on mileage; an employer having laid off craftsmen can receive a subsidy equivalent of from one- half to two-thirds of wage per craftsmen in order to pay wages; a company other than the hawksbill sea turtle shell industry, when employing laid-off craftsmen, can receive a subsidy equivalent of one-fourth to two-thirds (depending on age) of that company's salary per employee for one year. Loans from MITI to employers (companies) of hawksbill sea turtle shell craftsmen who wish to change their business can receive a low-interest (4 % per year), long-term (repayment period 3-7 years) loan of up to 20 million yen (US$ 149,000) per employer. MITI and prefectural governments will pay the difference between the commercial rate and the subsidized rate. Source: excerpted from an unclassified telegram, U. S. Department of Commerce, October 1991.
SOUTHEAST USA STRANDING UPDATE
Fifteen stranded sea turtles were reported in Georgia in August 1991, the same total as the record low for August 1990, the only previous August with [shrimp] industry-wide Turtle Excluder Device (TED) use. Two carcasses were those of the Kemp's ridley, the rest were loggerheads. Five carcasses exhibited signs of negative interaction with power-boats. An extension of Federal TED regulations will require the use of TEDs from 1 September to 30 April [N.B. earlier regulations required TED use from 1 May to 31 August; thus TED use is now mandatory year around], so we may avoid the capture and stranding of many sea turtles this autumn and winter. In 1990, 53 turtles stranded in Georgia in September and 50 in October. In 1991, 10 turtles (all loggerheads) stranded in September, whereas the 1980-1989 average for September was 22.4 turtles. In October there were three strandings (two Kemp's ridleys, one loggerhead), a 94% decline from 1990 and the lowest number of stranded turtles for October since the stranding network was initiated. Source: adapted from STSSN August- October Update, Georgia Department of Natural Resources, 19 November 1991.
Sea turtle strandings continued at a low, steady level during August and September 1991 in South Carolina. The August level of nine was similar to 1990's total of eight for August. Since the TED regulations were extended into the fall months, the September total of seven is well below the 1990 September total of 24. Three of the total number of strandings for these two months were not true strandings, but turtles killed by the dredges working in the Charleston Harbor entrance channel. The dredges stopped working as of 1 October and will resume on 1 December. If the 1991 stranding levels continue through year's end, they will constitute the lowest number of dead turtles since we started keeping records in 1980. Source: adapted from Loggerheadlines, Sea Turtle News from South Carolina, S. C. Wildlife and Marine Resources Department, August-September issue.
28 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
SEA TURTLE CENTER SEEKS TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE
The Sea Turtle Center is an international non-profit conservation and education organization. We are dedicated to the continued survival of sea turtles and other endangered species through environmental education and hands-on experience. Our efforts are primarily with sea turtle preservation in Mexico, home to one of the world's most diverse and numerous sea turtle fauna. Our long term goal is to promote public awareness. Our educational efforts are aimed at "students" of all ages and include slide presentations to public schools, universities, and other organizations. We are in the process of developing printed materials such as coloring books and brochures to distribute to school children and the general public in both the USA and Mexico. We seek to instill an awareness of environmental issues and present ways that each individual can make a difference.
The Center also participates in research field projects, gathering data, and monitoring environmental changes and their impact on wildlife. Volunteer study groups work directly with biologists, learning as they provide their support. This experience creates a resource of responsible and informed citizens who can share their knowledge within their own communities. In addition, we endeavor to be a communication link for sea turtle scientists around the world through our publication, "Keeping it Wild" and by participating in scientific symposiums. In addition to our own publications, the Center distributes educational material generated by other environmental organizations such as the Center for Marine Conservation, World Wildlife Fund, the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, etc. This material is distributed to our conservation projects and to other research projects throughout the world.
All of our efforts are on a volunteer basis. We offer direct support with our labor and love. Your contribution is an important part of our fund-raising and is essential for our continuing efforts. We visit more than 3,000 people every year. We feel very fortunate to meet all these students, educators, and interested people who want to work together in building a better world for us and our "Daughters of the Sea", the sea turtles. We invite you to join us! For more information on how you can become involved in our domestic and foreign programs, please write to us at the address below. Thank you!
MICHAEL RUGGE, Executive Director, Sea Turtle Center, 11276 East Lime Kiln Road, Grass Valley, California 95949. Tel: (916) 274-2427.
Editor's note: There are many small, but very important organizations striving to create a more hospitable world for depleted and declining sea turtle stocks. The efforts of these dedicated people often go unheralded. The Marine Turtle Newsletter invites local groups working to promote the continued survival of sea turtles to submit a brief program summary suitable for publication in an upcoming issue of the Newsletter. Keep up the great work!
REMEMBER . . .
The printing and distribution of the Marine Turtle Newsletter is supported entirely by donations from readers around the world. Your donation, no matter how modest, would be most welcome! Please make your check payable to "Conservation International, ref MTN" and mail it either to that organization (Conservation International, 1015 18th Street NW, Suite 1000, Washington D. C. 20036; Attn: Roderic B. Mast) or to the MTN Editors. All donations are tax-exempt to the extent allowed by law in accord with I.R.S. section 501(c). KLE/SAE
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 29 U. S. STAMPS COMMEMORATING SEA TURTLES?
Since 1957, as a young boy, I have been interested in both herpetology and stamp collecting. I am still involved in these hobbies today. Every year I write to the Postal Service's Citizen's Stamp Advisory Committee (CSAC) pleading for stamps of reptiles, especially turtles and tortoises. Wildlife stamps are very popular with the general public, and the "block of four" format would be perfect for a wildlife conservation issue honoring sea turtles. The Advisory Committee always sends me the same reply: "The CSAC has considered this proposal in the past, but it did not recommend a stamp be issued. However, policy requires a topic to be considered again if renewed interest is demonstrated. We will see that this proposal is brought back before the Committee at its next scheduled meeting . . ."
I feel confident that some action might be taken if the CSAC was flooded with letters asking for an endangered turtle stamp issue. The sea turtles need our help and what better way to widely "advertise" their plight than with postage stamps. Please take a moment to write to:
Citizen's Stamp Advisory Council JoElaine McKinney-Anderson, Manager U. S. Postal Service Headquarters Washington D. C. 20260-6352 USA
GARY A. MILLER, Port Hueneme, California USA. Source: Excerpted from California Turtle and Tortoise Society Tortuga Gazette, 1991, 27(9):10.
Editor's note: We know that many of you are turtle stamp collectors, and thus we thought that this brief appeal was worth sharing. If each U. S. reader of the MTN were to send a letter to the CSAC, the office would receive many hundreds of letters! Go for it!
"THE GREEN TURTLE WAS A HUMAN BEING"
The green turtle was a human being. People went to swim and they pushed the turtle into the ocean where it sank, becoming something belonging to the ocean. It just stayed and lived in the ocean and became a fish, but originally it was a human being. When it was pregnant it came back ashore here. It dug a hole, laid its eggs into it, and went back to the ocean. The turtle is like this; a person which went and fell into the ocean and became a fish; but it thinks about returning to the seashore to find an island home. When pregnant it comes ashore, lays its eggs and returns to the sea. This is the ending (Kuschel 1975, cited in Vaughan 1981).
Kuschel, K. 1975. Animal Stories from Bellona Island (Mungiki). National Museum, Denmark.
Vaughan, P. W. 1981. Marine turtles: a review of their status and management in the Solomon Islands. Prepared for World Wildlife Fund (WWF Project No. 1452), Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific, and Ministry of Natural Resources, Honiara, Solomon Islands. 70 p.
Editor's note: Have you come across any interesting sea turtle mythology or folklore lately? Please consider sharing excerpts with the Marine Turtle Newsletter. Cultures around the world have intriguing and often unique beliefs about sea turtles. These beliefs and traditions are a significant part of our global heritage, yet they are often as endangered as the turtles themselves.
30 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56
WHO READS THE MTN ?
When an author takes the time and energy to draft an article for the Marine Turtle Newsletter (MTN), who reads it? You may be surprised to hear that the MTN has more than 1200 subscribers, including scientists, Fisheries Officers and other government administrators, conservationists, media groups, funding agencies, libraries, and interested persons in more than 100 nations and territories around the globe (Table 1). So, let us know what happening in your part of the world -- the rest of the world is curious! See MTN 55:28 for "Instructions for Contributors". We look forward to an article from you soon ! ______
Table 1. The Marine Turtle Newsletter (with its Spanish translation, Noticiero de Tortugas Marinas) is read in more than 100 nations and territories around the globe. ------AMERICAN SAMOA GILBERT ISLANDS POLAND ANGOLA GREECE PORTUGAL ANTIGUA GRENADA PUERTO RICO ARGENTINA GUADELOUPE REPUBLIC OF MALDIVES ARUBA GUAM REPUBLIC OF PALAU(=BELAU) AUSTRALIA GUATEMALA REPUBLIC OF PANAMA BAHAMAS GUYANA REPUBLIC OF THE BARBADOS HOLLAND SEYCHELLES BELGIUM HONDURAS ST. KITTS & NEVIS BELIZE INDIA ST. LUCIA BERMUDA INDONESIA ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES BRAZIL IRELAND SCOTLAND BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS ISRAEL SENEGAL BRUNEI DARUSSALAM ITALY SOLOMON ISLANDS BURMA(=MYANMAR) JAMAICA SOUTH AFRICA CANADA JAPAN SPAIN CAYMAN ISLANDS KENYA SRILANKA CHINA KINGDOM OF TONGA SUDAN COLOMBIA KUWAIT SULTANATE OF OMAN COOK ISLANDS LIBYA SURINAME COSTA RICA MADAGASCAR SWEDEN CUBA MALAYSIA SWITZERLAND CYPRUS MARIANA ISLANDS TANZANIA DENMARK MARTINIQUE THAILAND DOMINICA MAURITIUS TRINIDAD & TOBAGO DOMINICAN REPUBLIC MEXICO TURKEY ECUADOR MONACO TURKS& CAICOS ISLANDS EL SALVADOR NETHERLANDS ANTILLES TUVALU ENGLAND NEVIS UNITED ARAB EMIRATES FEDERAL ISLAMIC NEW CALEDONIA U.S.A. REPUBLIC OF COMORO NEW ZEALAND U. S. VIRGIN ISLANDS FEDERATED STATES OF NICARAGUA URUGUAY MICRONESIA NORFOLKISLAND VANUATU FIJI NORWAY VENEZUELA FRANCE PAKISTAN WESTERN SAMOA FRENCH GUIANA PAPUA NEW GUINEA ZIMBABWE FRENCH POLYNESIA PERU GERMANY PHILIPPINES
Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56 - 31
* * FRIENDS OF THE MARINE TURTLE NEWSLETTER * *
The cost of printing and mailing quarterly issues of the Marine Turtle Newsletter (MTN) has soared in recent years. Printing, envelopes, mailing labels and postage requires some US$ 15,000 per annum. Bulk mailing, initiated in October 1990 for domestic delivery, has offered some relief ... but overseas mailing consumes by far the largest share of the annual budget and cannot be reduced without compromising delivery service to many hundreds of overseas readers. At this time we would like to offer our heartfelt gratitude to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which provides about 30% of the MTN's budget, and to four other organizations (listed below in alphabetical order) for their generous support in 1991. These are the same organizations credited as "Friends of the MTN" in 1990, and we are confident that we speak for our entire global readership when we emphasize how much their continuing sponsorship means to us all.
Cayman Turtle Farm, Ltd. (Cayman Islands, British West Indies) Greenpeace-Southeast USA (New Smyrna, Florida) The Chelonia Institute (Arlington, Virginia) U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Albuquerque, New Mexico) World Wildlife Fund-USA (Washington D.C.)
These organizations, in concert with smaller donations from the Center for Marine Conservation, Aquarium of the Americas, and about two dozen readers, provided the financial resources needed to publish the MTN in 1991. We extend our appreciation to Conservation International for acting as fiscal accountant for the MTN, making it possible for U. S. residents to deduct donations from their income taxes [see MTN 54:40]. The Spanish language edition of the Newsletter (Noticiero de Tortugas Marinas) is produced by Susana Salas in Costa Rica and is supported by the Confederación Universitaria Centroamericana, World Wildlife Fund-USA, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Our gratitude is also extended to these organizations, and to Susana Salas who is doing a splendid job of significantly expanding the Newsletter's readership and influence in the Western Hemisphere. Thank you all! KLE/SAE
------Publication of this issue was made possible by donations from Jean Beasley (Surf City, NC), Robert Lockhart (London, U.K.), Keith Rittmaster (Beaufort, NC), Aquarium of the Americas (New Orleans, LA), Gilbert Grant (Sneads Ferry, NC), Cayman Turtle Farm Ltd., The Chelonia Institute, Greenpeace-USA, World Wildlife Fund- USA, and the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). The Spanish edition is supported by Confederación Universitaria Centroamericana, World Wildlife Fund-USA, and USFWS, and is produced by Susana Salas, Coordinadora, Noticiero de Tortugas Marinas, CSUCA, Programa de Tortugas Marinas-UCR, Apdo. 271-2050, San Pedro, Costa Rica. The opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily shared by the Editors, the Editorial Board, the National Marine Fisheries Service, Conservation International, or any individuals or organizations providing financial support.
32 - Marine Turtle Newsletter, No. 56