[Federal Register: March 16, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 50)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 12597-12656]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr16mr10-19]
[[Page 12597]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Commerce
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Parts 17, 223, and 224
Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Listing of Nine Distinct
Population Segments of Loggerhead Sea Turtles as Endangered or
Threatened; Proposed Rule
[[Page 12598]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Parts 223 and 224
[Docket No. 100104003-0004-01]
RIN 0648-AY49
Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Listing of Nine
Distinct Population Segments of Loggerhead Sea Turtles as Endangered or
Threatened
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce; United States Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rules; 12-month petition findings; request for
comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We (NMFS and USFWS; also collectively referred to as the
Services) have determined that the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta
caretta) is composed of nine distinct population segments (DPSs) that
qualify as ``species'' for listing as endangered or threatened under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and we propose to list two as
threatened and seven as endangered. This also constitutes the 12-month
findings on a petition to reclassify loggerhead turtles in the North
Pacific Ocean as a DPS with endangered status and designate critical
habitat, and a petition to reclassify loggerhead turtles in the
Northwest Atlantic as a DPS with endangered status and designate
critical habitat. We will propose to designate critical habitat, if
found to be prudent and determinable, for the two loggerhead sea turtle
DPSs occurring within the United States in a subsequent Federal
Register notice.
DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by June 14, 2010.
Public hearing requests must be received by June 1, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the RIN 0648-AY49, by
any of the following methods:
Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
Mail: NMFS National Sea Turtle Coordinator, Attn:
Loggerhead Proposed Listing Rule, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13657,
Silver Spring, MD 20910 or USFWS National Sea Turtle Coordinator, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200,
Jacksonville, FL 32256.
Fax: To the attention of NMFS National Sea Turtle
Coordinator at 301-713-0376 or USFWS National Sea Turtle Coordinator at
904-731-3045.
Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name,
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or
otherwise sensitive or protected information.
NMFS and USFWS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the
required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to
electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel,
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only. The proposed rule is
available electronically at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Schroeder, NMFS (ph. 301-713-
1401, fax 301-713-0376, e-mail barbara.schroeder@noaa.gov), Sandy
MacPherson, USFWS (ph. 904-731-3336, e-mail sandy_macpherson@fws.gov),
Marta Nammack, NMFS (ph. 301-713-1401, fax 301-713-0376, e-mail marta_
nammack@noaa.gov), or Emily Bizwell, USFWS (ph. 404-679-7149, fax 404-
679-7081, e-mail emily_bizwell@fws.gov). Persons who use a
Telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7
days a week.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Public Comments Solicited
We solicit public comment on this proposed listing determination.
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will be as
accurate and as effective as possible and informed by the best
available scientific and commercial information. Therefore, we request
comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning this proposed rule. We are seeking information and
comments on whether the nine proposed loggerhead sea turtle DPSs
qualify as DPSs and, if so, whether they should be classified as
threatened or endangered as described in the ``Listing Determinations
Under the ESA'' section provided below. Specifically, we are soliciting
information in the following areas relative to loggerhead turtles
within the nine proposed DPSs: (1) Historical and current population
status and trends, (2) historical and current distribution, (3)
migratory movements and behavior, (4) genetic population structure, (5)
current or planned activities that may adversely impact loggerhead
turtles, and (6) ongoing efforts to protect loggerhead turtles. We are
also soliciting information and comment on the status and effectiveness
of conservation efforts and the approach that should be used to weigh
the risk of extinction of each DPS. Comments and new information will
be considered in making final determinations whether listing of each
DPS is warranted and if so whether it is threatened or endangered. We
request that all data, information, and comments be accompanied by
supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or
reprints of pertinent publications.
Background
We issued a final rule listing the loggerhead sea turtle as
threatened throughout its worldwide range on July 28, 1978 (43 FR
32800). On July 12, 2007, we received a petition to list the ``North
Pacific populations of loggerhead sea turtle'' as an endangered species
under the ESA. NMFS published a notice in the Federal Register on
November 16, 2007 (72 FR 64585), concluding that the petitioners
(Center for Biological Diversity and Turtle Island Restoration Network)
presented substantial scientific information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted. Also, on November 15, 2007, we
received a petition to list the ``Western North Atlantic populations of
loggerhead sea turtle'' as an endangered species under the ESA. NMFS
published a notice in the Federal Register on March 5, 2008 (73 FR
11849), concluding that the petitioners (Center for Biological
Diversity and Oceana) presented substantial scientific information
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.
On March 12, 2009, the petitioners (Center for Biological
Diversity, Turtle Island Restoration Network, and Oceana) sent a 60-day
notice of intent to sue to the Services for failure to make 12-month
findings on the petitions. The statutory deadlines for the 12-month
findings were July 16, 2008, for the North Pacific petition and
November 16, 2008, for the Northwest Atlantic petition. On May 28,
2009, the petitioners filed a Complaint for
[[Page 12599]]
Declaratory and Injunctive Relief to compel the Services to complete
the 12-month findings. On October 8, 2009, the petitioners and the
Services reached a settlement in which the Services agreed to submit to
the Federal Register a 12-month finding on the two petitions on or
before February 19, 2010. On February 16, 2010, the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California modified the
February 19, 2010 deadline to March 8, 2010.
In early 2008, NMFS assembled a Loggerhead Biological Review Team
(BRT) to complete a status review of the loggerhead sea turtle. The BRT
was composed of biologists from NMFS, USFWS, the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission, and the North Carolina Wildlife
Resources Commission. The BRT was charged with reviewing and evaluating
all relevant scientific information relating to loggerhead population
structure globally to determine whether DPSs exist and, if so, to
assess the status of each DPS. The findings of the BRT, which are
detailed in the ``Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) 2009 Status
Review under the U.S. Endangered Species Act'' (Conant et al., 2009;
hereinafter referred to as the Status Review), addressed DPS
delineations, extinction risks to the species, and threats to the
species. The Status Review underwent independent peer review by nine
scientists with expertise in loggerhead sea turtle biology, genetics,
and modeling. The Status Review is available electronically at http://
www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/statusreviews.htm.
This Federal Register document announces 12-month findings on the
petitions to list the North Pacific populations and the Northwest
Atlantic populations of the loggerhead sea turtle as DPSs with
endangered status and includes a proposed rule to designate nine
loggerhead DPSs worldwide.
Policies for Delineating Species Under the ESA
Section 3 of the ESA defines ``species'' as including ``any
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population
segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds
when mature.'' The term ``distinct population segment'' is not
recognized in the scientific literature. Therefore, the Services
adopted a joint policy for recognizing DPSs under the ESA (DPS Policy;
61 FR 4722) on February 7, 1996. Congress has instructed the Secretary
of the Interior or of Commerce to exercise this authority with regard
to DPSs ``* * * sparingly and only when the biological evidence
indicates such action is warranted.'' The DPS Policy requires the
consideration of two elements when evaluating whether a vertebrate
population segment qualifies as a DPS under the ESA: (1) The
discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder of
the species or subspecies to which it belongs; and (2) the significance
of the population segment to the species or subspecies to which it
belongs.
A population segment of a vertebrate species may be considered
discrete if it satisfies either one of the following conditions: (1) It
is markedly separated from other populations of the same taxon (an
organism or group of organisms) as a consequence of physical,
ecological, or behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or
morphological discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation; or
(2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within
which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat,
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are
significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the ESA (i.e., inadequate
regulatory mechanisms).
If a population segment is found to be discrete under one or both
of the above conditions, its biological and ecological significance to
the taxon to which it belongs is evaluated. This consideration may
include, but is not limited to: (1) Persistence of the discrete
population segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the
taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the discrete population segment would
result in a significant gap in the range of a taxon; (3) evidence that
the discrete population segment represents the only surviving natural
occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an
introduced population outside its historic range; or (4) evidence that
the discrete population segment differs markedly from other population
segments of the species in its genetic characteristics.
Listing Determinations Under the ESA
The ESA defines an endangered species as one that is in danger of
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a
threatened species as one that is likely to become endangered in the
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range
(sections 3(6) and 3(20), respectively). The statute requires us to
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened because of
any of the following five factors: (1) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2)
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence (section 4(a)(1)(A-E)). We are to
make this determination based solely on the best available scientific
and commercial data available after conducting a review of the status
of the species and taking into account any efforts being made by States
or foreign governments to protect the species.
Biology and Life History of Loggerhead Turtles
A thorough account of loggerhead biology and life history may be
found in the Status Review, which is incorporated here by reference.
The following is a succinct summary of that information.
The loggerhead occurs throughout the temperate and tropical regions
of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans (Dodd, 1988). However, the
majority of loggerhead nesting is at the western rims of the Atlantic
and Indian Oceans. The most recent reviews show that only two
loggerhead nesting aggregations have greater than 10,000 females
nesting per year: Peninsular Florida, United States, and Masirah
Island, Oman (Baldwin et al., 2003; Ehrhart et al., 2003; Kamezaki et
al., 2003; Limpus and Limpus, 2003; Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Nesting aggregations with 1,000 to 9,999 females nesting annually are
Georgia through North Carolina (United States), Quintana Roo and
Yucatan (Mexico), Brazil, Cape Verde Islands (Cape Verde), Western
Australia (Australia), and Japan. Smaller nesting aggregations with 100
to 999 nesting females annually occur in the Northern Gulf of Mexico
(United States), Dry Tortugas (United States), Cay Sal Bank (The
Bahamas), Tongaland (South Africa), Mozambique, Arabian Sea Coast
(Oman), Halaniyat Islands (Oman), Cyprus, Peloponnesus (Greece),
Zakynthos (Greece), Crete (Greece), Turkey, and Queensland (Australia).
In contrast to determining population size on nesting beaches,
determining population size in the marine environment has been very
localized. A summary of information on distribution and habitat by
ocean basin follows.
Pacific Ocean
Loggerheads can be found throughout tropical to temperate waters in
the Pacific; however, their breeding grounds include a restricted
number of sites in the North Pacific and South Pacific. Within the
North Pacific, loggerhead nesting has been documented only in Japan
(Kamezaki et al., 2003), although
[[Page 12600]]
low level nesting may occur outside of Japan in areas surrounding the
South China Sea (Chan et al., 2007). In the South Pacific, nesting
beaches are restricted to eastern Australia and New Caledonia and, to a
much lesser extent, Vanuatu and Tokelau (Limpus and Limpus, 2003).
Based on tag-recapture studies, the East China Sea has been
identified as the major habitat for post-nesting adult females (Iwamoto
et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997; Balazs, 2006), while satellite
tracking of juvenile loggerheads indicates the Kuroshio Extension
Bifurcation Region to be an important pelagic foraging area for
juvenile loggerheads (Polovina et al., 2006). Other important juvenile
turtle foraging areas have been identified off the coast of Baja
California Sur, Mexico (Pitman, 1990; Peckham and Nichols, 2006).
Nesting females tagged on the coast of eastern Australia have been
recorded foraging in New Caledonia; Queensland, New South Wales, and
Northern Territory, Australia; Solomon Islands; Papua New Guinea; and
Indonesia (Limpus and Limpus, 2003). Foraging Pacific loggerheads
originating from nesting beaches in Australia are known to migrate to
Chile and Peru (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004, 2008a; Donoso and Dutton,
2006; Boyle et al., 2009).
Indian Ocean
In the North Indian Ocean, Oman hosts the vast majority of
loggerhead nesting. The majority of the nesting in Oman occurs on
Masirah Island, on the Al Halaniyat Islands, and on mainland beaches
south of Masirah Island all the way to the Oman-Yemen border (IUCN--The
World Conservation Union, 1989a, 1989b; Salm, 1991; Salm and Salm,
1991). In addition, nesting probably occurs on the mainland of Yemen on
the Arabian Sea coast, and nesting has been confirmed on Socotra, an
island off the coast of Yemen (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). Limited
information exists on the foraging habitats of North Indian Ocean
loggerheads; however, foraging individuals have been reported off the
southern coastline of Oman (Salm et al., 1993). Satellite telemetry
studies of post-nesting migrations of loggerheads nesting on Masirah
Island, Oman, have revealed extensive use of the waters off the Arabian
Peninsula, with the majority of telemetered turtles traveling
southwest, following the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, and
circling well offshore in nearby oceanic waters (Environment Society of
Oman and Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished
data). A minority traveled north as far as the western Persian
(Arabian) Gulf or followed the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen as
far west as the Gulf of Aden and the Bab-el-Mandab.
The only verified nesting beaches for loggerheads on the Indian
subcontinent are found in Sri Lanka. A small number of nesting females
use the beaches of Sri Lanka every year (Deraniyagala, 1939; Kar and
Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, 1988); however, there are no records indicating
that Sri Lanka has ever been a major nesting area for loggerheads
(Kapurusinghe, 2006). No confirmed nesting occurs on the mainland of
India (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006). The Gulf of Mannar provides
foraging habitat for juvenile and post-nesting adult turtles (Tripathy,
2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006).
In the East Indian Ocean, western Australia hosts all known
loggerhead nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting distributions in western
Australia span from the Shark Bay World Heritage Area northward through
the Ningaloo Marine Park coast to the North West Cape and to the nearby
Muiron Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from Dirk
Hartog Island have been recorded foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth
Gulf, while other adults range much farther (Baldwin et al., 2003).
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, loggerhead nesting occurs on the
southeastern coast of Africa, from the Paradise Islands in Mozambique
southward to St. Lucia in South Africa, and on the south and
southwestern coasts of Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003). Foraging
habitats are only known for post-nesting females from Tongaland, South
Africa; tagging data show these loggerheads migrating eastward to
Madagascar, northward to Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya, and southward
to Cape Agulhas at the southernmost point of Africa (Baldwin et al.,
2003; Luschi et al., 2006).
Atlantic Ocean
In the Northwest Atlantic, the majority of loggerhead nesting is
concentrated along the coasts of the United States from southern
Virginia through Alabama. Additional nesting beaches are found along
the northern and western Gulf of Mexico, eastern Yucatan Peninsula, at
Cay Sal Bank in the eastern Bahamas (Addison and Morford, 1996;
Addison, 1997), on the southwestern coast of Cuba (F. Moncada-Gavilan,
personal communication, cited in Ehrhart et al., 2003), and along the
coasts of Central America, Colombia, Venezuela, and the eastern
Caribbean Islands. In the Southwest Atlantic, loggerheads nest in
significant numbers only in Brazil. In the eastern Atlantic, the
largest nesting population of loggerheads is in the Cape Verde Islands
(L.F. Lopez-Jurado, personal communication, cited in Ehrhart et al.,
2003), and some nesting occurs along the West African coast (Fretey,
2001).
As post-hatchlings, Northwest Atlantic loggerheads use the North
Atlantic Gyre and enter Northeast Atlantic waters (Carr, 1987). They
are also found in the Mediterranean Sea (Carreras et al., 2006; Eckert
et al., 2008). In these areas, they overlap with animals originating
from the Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea (Laurent et al.,
1993, 1998; Bolten et al., 1998; LaCasella et al., 2005; Carreras et
al., 2006; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert
et al., 2008). The oceanic juvenile stage in the North Atlantic has
been primarily studied in the waters around the Azores and Madeira
(Bolten, 2003). In Azorean waters, satellite telemetry data and flipper
tag returns suggest a long period of residency (Bolten, 2003), whereas
turtles appear to be moving through Madeiran waters (Dellinger and
Freitas, 2000). Preliminary genetic analyses indicate that juvenile
loggerheads found in Moroccan waters are of western Atlantic origin (M.
Tiwari, NMFS, and A. Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data).
Other concentrations of oceanic juvenile turtles exist in the Atlantic
(e.g., in the region of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland). Genetic
information indicates the Grand Banks are foraging grounds for a
mixture of loggerheads from all the North Atlantic rookeries (LaCasella
et al., 2005; Bowen et al., 2005), and a large size range is
represented (Watson et al., 2004, 2005).
After departing the oceanic zone, neritic juvenile loggerheads in
the Northwest Atlantic inhabit continental shelf waters from Cape Cod
Bay, Massachusetts, south through Florida, The Bahamas, Cuba, and the
Gulf of Mexico (neritic refers to the inshore marine environment from
the surface to the sea floor where water depths do not exceed 200
meters).
Habitat preferences of Northwest Atlantic non-nesting adult
loggerheads in the neritic zone differ from the juvenile stage in that
relatively enclosed, shallow water estuarine habitats with limited
ocean access are less frequently used. Areas such as Pamlico Sound and
the Indian River Lagoon in the United States, regularly used by
juvenile loggerheads, are only rarely frequented by adults. In
comparison, estuarine areas with more open ocean access, such as
Chesapeake Bay in the U.S. mid-Atlantic, are also regularly used by
juvenile loggerheads, as well as by adults primarily during
[[Page 12601]]
warmer seasons. Shallow water habitats with large expanses of open
ocean access, such as Florida Bay, provide year-round resident foraging
areas for significant numbers of male and female adult loggerheads.
Offshore, adults primarily inhabit continental shelf waters, from New
York south through Florida, The Bahamas, Cuba, and the Gulf of Mexico.
The southern edge of the Grand Bahama Bank is important habitat for
loggerheads nesting on the Cay Sal Bank in The Bahamas, but nesting
females are also resident in the bights of Eleuthera, Long Island, and
Ragged Islands as well as Florida Bay in the United States, and the
north coast of Cuba (A. Bolten and K. Bjorndal, University of Florida,
unpublished data). Moncada et al. (in press) reported the recapture in
Cuban waters of five adult female loggerheads originally flipper tagged
in Quintana Roo, Mexico, indicating that Cuban shelf waters likely also
provide foraging habitat for adult females that nest in Mexico.
In the Northeast Atlantic, satellite telemetry studies of post-
nesting females from Cape Verde identified two distinct dispersal
patterns; larger individuals migrated to benthic foraging areas off the
northwest Africa coast and smaller individuals foraged primarily
oceanically off the northwest Africa coast (Hawkes et al., 2006).
Monzon-Arguello et al. (2009) conducted a mixed stock analysis of
juvenile loggerheads sampled from foraging areas in the Canary Islands,
Madeira, Azores, and Andalusia and concluded that while juvenile
loggerheads from the Cape Verde population were distributed among these
four sites, a large proportion of Cape Verde juvenile turtles appear to
inhabit as yet unidentified foraging areas.
In the South Atlantic, relatively little is known about the at-sea
behavior of loggerheads originating from nesting beaches in Brazil.
Recaptures of tagged juvenile turtles and nesting females have shown
movement of animals up and down the coast of South America (Almeida et
al., 2000; Marcovaldi et al., 2000; Laporta and Lopez, 2003; Almeida et
al., 2007). Juvenile loggerheads, presumably of Brazilian origin, have
also been captured on the high seas of the South Atlantic (Kotas et
al., 2004; Pinedo and Polacheck, 2004) and off the coast of Atlantic
Africa (Bal et al., 2007; Petersen, 2005; Petersen et al., 2007)
suggesting that loggerheads of the South Atlantic may undertake
transoceanic developmental migrations (Bolten et al., 1998; Peckham et
al., 2007).
Mediterranean Sea
Loggerhead turtles are widely distributed in the Mediterranean Sea.
However, nesting is almost entirely confined to the eastern
Mediterranean basin, with the main nesting concentrations in Cyprus,
Greece, and Turkey (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Preliminary surveys in
Libya suggested nesting activity comparable to Greece and Turkey,
although a better quantification is needed (Laurent et al., 1999).
Minimal to moderate nesting also occurs in other countries throughout
the Mediterranean including Egypt, Israel, Italy (southern coasts and
islands), Lebanon, Syria, and Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Recently, isolated nesting events have been recorded in the western
Mediterranean basin, namely in Spain, Corsica (France), and in the
Tyrrhenian Sea (Italy) (Tomas et al., 2002; Delaugerre and Cesarini,
2004; Bentivegna et al., 2005).
Important neritic habitats have been suggested for the large
continental shelves of: (1) Tunisia-Libya, (2) northern Adriatic Sea,
(3) Egypt, and (4) Spain (Margaritoulis, 1988; Argano et al., 1992;
Laurent and Lescure, 1994; Lazar et al., 2000; Gomez de Segura et al.,
2006; Broderick et al., 2007; Casale et al., 2007b; Nada and Casale,
2008). At least the first three constitute shallow benthic habitats for
adults (including post-nesting females). Some other neritic foraging
areas include Amvrakikos Bay in western Greece, Lakonikos Bay in
southern Greece, and southern Turkey. Oceanic foraging areas for small
juvenile loggerheads have been identified in the south Adriatic Sea
(Casale et al., 2005b), Ionian Sea (Deflorio et al., 2005), Sicily
Strait (Casale et al., 2007b), and western Mediterranean (Spain) (e.g.,
Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2006). In addition, tagged juvenile loggerheads
have been recorded crossing the Mediterranean from the eastern to the
western basin and vice versa, as well as in the Eastern Atlantic
(Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al., 2007b).
Reproductive migrations have been confirmed by flipper tagging and
satellite telemetry. Female loggerheads, after nesting in Greece,
migrate primarily to the Gulf of Gab[egrave]s and the northern Adriatic
(Margaritoulis, 1988; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004;
Zbinden et al., 2008). Loggerheads nesting in Cyprus migrate to Egypt
and Libya, exhibiting fidelity in following the same migration route
during subsequent nesting seasons (Broderick et al., 2007). In
addition, directed movements of juvenile loggerheads have been
confirmed through flipper tagging (Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al.,
2007b) and satellite tracking (Rees and Margaritoulis, 2009).
Overview of Information Used To Identify DPSs
In the Status Review, the BRT considered a vast array of
information to assess whether there are any loggerhead population
segments that satisfy the DPS criteria of both discreteness and
significance. First, the BRT examined whether there were any loggerhead
population segments that were discrete. Data relevant to the
discreteness question included physical, ecological, behavioral, and
genetic data. Given the physical separation of ocean basins by
continents, the BRT evaluated these data by ocean basin (Pacific Ocean,
Indian Ocean, and Atlantic Ocean). This was not to preclude any larger
or smaller DPS delineation, but to aid in data organization and
assessment. The BRT then evaluated genetic information by ocean basin.
The genetic data consisted of results from studies using maternally
inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and biparentally inherited nuclear
DNA microsatellite markers. Next, tagging data (both flipper and PIT
tags) and telemetry data were reviewed. Additional information, such as
potential differences in morphology, was also evaluated. Finally, the
BRT considered whether the available information on loggerhead
population segments was bounded by any oceanographic features (e.g.,
current systems) or geographic features (e.g., land masses).
In accordance with the DPS policy, the BRT also reviewed whether
the population segments identified in the discreteness analysis were
significant. If a population segment is considered discrete, its
biological and ecological significance must then be considered. NMFS
and USFWS must consider available scientific evidence of the discrete
segment's importance to the taxon to which it belongs. Data relevant to
the significance question include morphological, ecological,
behavioral, and genetic data, as described above. The BRT considered
the following factors, listed in the DPS policy, in determining whether
the discrete population segments were significant: (a) Persistence of
the discrete segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the
taxon; (b) evidence that loss of the discrete segment would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon; (c) evidence that the
discrete segment represents the only surviving natural occurrence of a
taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced
[[Page 12602]]
population outside its historical range; and (d) evidence that the
discrete segment differs markedly from other populations of the species
in its genetic characteristics.
A discrete population segment needs to satisfy only one of these
criteria to be considered significant. The DPS policy also allows for
consideration of other factors if they are appropriate to the biology
or ecology of the species. As described below, the BRT evaluated the
available information and considered items (a), (b) and (d), as noted
above, to be most applicable to loggerheads.
Discreteness Determination
As described in the Status Review, the loggerhead sea turtle is
present in all tropical and temperate ocean basins, and has a life
history that involves nesting on coastal beaches and foraging in
neritic and oceanic habitats, as well as long-distance migrations
between and within these areas. As with other globally distributed
marine species, today's global loggerhead population has been shaped by
a sequence of isolation events created by tectonic and oceanographic
shifts over geologic time scales, the result of which is population
substructuring in many areas (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003).
Globally, loggerhead turtles comprise a mosaic of populations, each
with unique nesting sites and in many cases possessing disparate
demographic features (e.g., mean body size, age at first reproduction)
(Dodd, 1988). However, despite these differences, loggerheads from
different nesting populations often mix in common foraging areas during
certain life stages (Bolten and Witherington, 2003), thus creating
unique challenges when attempting to delineate distinct population
segments for management or listing purposes.
Bowen et al. (1994) examined the mtDNA sequence diversity of
loggerheads across their global distribution and found a separation of
loggerheads in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from those in the
Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene period. The divergence
between these two primary lineages corresponds to approximately three
million years (2 percent per million years; Dutton et al., 1996;
Encalada et al., 1996). Geography and climate appear to have shaped the
evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial
cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier
between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water
off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier between the
Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003). Recent warm temperatures
during interglacial periods allowed bi-directional invasion by the
temperate-adapted loggerheads into the respective basins (Bowen et al.,
1994; J.S. Reece, Washington University, personal communication, 2008).
Today, it appears that loggerheads within a basin are effectively
isolated from populations in the other basin, but some dispersal from
the Tongaland rookery in the Indian Ocean into feeding and
developmental habitat in the South Atlantic is possible via the Agulhas
Current (G.R. Hughes, unpublished data, cited in Bowen et al., 1994).
In the Pacific, extensive mtDNA studies show that the northern
loggerhead populations are isolated from the southern Pacific
populations, and that juvenile loggerheads from these distinct genetic
populations do not disperse across the equator (Hatase et al., 2002a;
Dutton, 2007, unpublished data).
Mitochondrial DNA data indicate that regional turtle rookeries
within an ocean basin have been strongly isolated from one another over
ecological timescales (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen and Karl, 2007). These
same data indicate strong female natal homing and suggest that each
regional nesting population is an independent demographic unit (Bowen
and Karl, 2007). It is difficult to determine the precise boundaries of
these demographically independent populations in regions, such as the
eastern U.S. coast, where rookeries are close to each other and range
along large areas of a continental coastline. There appear to be
varying levels of connectivity between proximate rookeries facilitated
by imprecise natal homing and male mediated gene flow (Pearce, 2001;
Bowen, 2003; Bowen et al., 2005). Regional genetic populations often
are characterized by allelic frequency differences rather than fixed
genetic differences.
Through the evaluation of genetic data, tagging data, telemetry,
and demography, the BRT determined that there are at least nine
discrete population segments of loggerhead sea turtles globally. These
discrete population segments are markedly separated from each other as
a consequence of physical, ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic
factors, and given the genetic evidence, the BRT concluded that each
regional population identified is discrete from other populations of
loggerheads. Information considered by the BRT in its delineation of
discrete population segments is presented below by ocean basin.
Pacific Ocean
In the North Pacific Ocean, the primary loggerhead nesting areas
are found along the southern Japanese coastline and Ryukyu Archipelago
(Kamezaki et al., 2003), although low level nesting may occur outside
Japan in areas surrounding the South China Sea (Chan et al., 2007).
Loggerhead turtles hatching on Japanese beaches undertake extensive
developmental migrations using the Kuroshio and North Pacific Currents
(Balazs, 2006; Kobayashi et al., 2008), and some turtles reach the
vicinity of Baja California in the eastern Pacific (Uchida and Teruya,
1988; Bowen et al., 1995; Peckham et al., 2007). After spending years
foraging in the central and eastern Pacific, loggerheads return to
their natal beaches for reproduction (Resendiz et al., 1998; Nichols et
al., 2000) and remain in the western Pacific for the remainder of their
life cycle (Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997; Sakamoto et
al., 1997; Hatase et al., 2002c).
Despite the long-distance developmental movements of loggerheads in
the North Pacific, current scientific evidence, based on genetic
analysis, flipper tag recoveries, and satellite telemetry, indicates
that individuals originating from Japan remain in the North Pacific for
their entire life cycle, never crossing the equator or mixing with
individuals from the South Pacific (Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and
Dutton, 2006; Dutton, 2007, unpublished data). This apparent, almost
complete separation of two adjacent populations most likely results
from: (1) The presence of two distinct Northern and Southern Gyre
(current flow) systems in the Pacific (Briggs, 1974), (2) near-passive
movements of post-hatchlings in these gyres that initially move them
farther away from areas of potential mixing among the two populations
along the equator, and (3) the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles that
prevents turtles from returning to non-natal nesting areas.
Pacific loggerheads are further partitioned evolutionarily from
other loggerheads throughout the world based on additional analyses of
mtDNA. The haplotypes (a haplotype refers to the genetic signature,
coded in mtDNA, of an individual) from both North and South Pacific
loggerheads are distinguished by a minimum genetic distance (d) equal
to 0.017 from other conspecifics, which indicates isolation of
approximately one million years (Bowen, 2003).
Within the Pacific, Bowen et al. (1995) used mtDNA to identify two
genetically distinct nesting populations in the Pacific--a northern
hemisphere population nesting in Japan and a southern hemisphere
population nesting primarily in Australia. This study also
[[Page 12603]]
suggested that some loggerheads sampled as bycatch in the North Pacific
might be from the Australian nesting population (Bowen et al., 1995).
However, more extensive mtDNA rookery data from Japan (Hatase et al.,
2002a) taken together with preliminary results from microsatellite
(nuclear) analysis confirms that loggerheads inhabiting the North
Pacific actually originate from nesting beaches in Japan (P. Dutton,
NMFS, unpublished data). LeRoux et al. (2008) reported additional
genetic variation in North Pacific loggerheads based on analyses using
new mtDNA primers designed to target longer mtDNA sequences, and
suggested finer scale population structure in North Pacific loggerheads
may be present.
Although these studies indicate genetic distinctness between
loggerheads nesting in Japan versus those nesting in Australia, Bowen
et al. (1995) did identify individuals with the common Australian
haplotype at foraging areas in the North Pacific, based on a few
individuals sampled as bycatch in the North Pacific. More recently,
Hatase et al. (2002a) detected this common haplotype at very low
frequency at Japanese nesting beaches. However, the presence of the
common Australian haplotype does not preclude the genetic
distinctiveness of Japanese and Australian nesting populations, and is
likely the result of rare gene flow events occurring over geologic time
scales.
The discrete status of loggerheads in the North Pacific is further
supported by results from flipper tagging in the North Pacific. Flipper
tagging of loggerheads has been widespread throughout this region,
occurring on adults nesting in Japan and bycaught in the coastal pound
net fishery (Y. Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle Association of Japan, personal
communication, 2006), juvenile turtles reared and released in Japan
(Uchida and Teruya, 1988; Hatase et al., 2002a), juvenile turtles
foraging near Baja California, Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Seminoff et al.,
2004), and juvenile and adult loggerheads captured in and tagged from
commercial fisheries platforms in the North Pacific high seas (NMFS,
unpublished data). To date, there have been at least three transPacific
tag recoveries showing east-west and west-east movements (Uchida and
Teruya, 1988; Resendiz et al., 1998; W.J. Nichols, Ocean Conservancy,
and H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula, unpublished data) and several recoveries
of adults in the western Pacific (Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et
al., 1997). However, despite the more than 30,000 marked individuals,
not a single tag recovery has been reported outside the North Pacific.
A lack of movements by loggerheads south across the equator has
also been supported by extensive satellite telemetry. As with flipper
tagging, satellite telemetry has been conducted widely in the North
Pacific, with satellite transmitters being placed on adult turtles
departing nesting beaches (Sakamoto et al., 1997; Japan Fisheries
Resource Conservation Association, 1999; Hatase et al., 2002b, 2002c),
on adult and juvenile turtles bycaught in pound nets off the coast of
Japan (Sea Turtle Association of Japan, unpublished data), on
headstarted juvenile turtles released in Japan (Balazs, 2006), on
juvenile and adult turtles bycaught in the eastern and central North
Pacific (e.g., Kobayashi et al., 2008), and on juvenile turtles
foraging in the eastern Pacific (Nichols, 2003; Peckham et al., 2007;
J. Seminoff, NMFS, unpublished data). Of the nearly 200 loggerheads
tracked using satellite telemetry in the North Pacific, none have moved
south of the equator. These studies have demonstrated the strong
association loggerheads show with oceanographic mesoscale features such
as the Transition Zone Chlorophyll Front or the Kuroshio Current
Bifurcation Region (Polovina et al., 2000, 2001, 2004, 2006; Etnoyer et
al., 2006; Kobayashi et al., 2008). Kobayashi et al. (2008)
demonstrated that loggerheads strongly track these zones even as they
shift in location, suggesting that strong habitat specificity during
the oceanic stage also contributes to the lack of mixing. Telemetry
studies in foraging areas of the eastern Pacific, near Baja California,
Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Peckham et al., 2007; H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula,
unpublished data) and Peru (J. Mangel, Pro Delphinus, unpublished data)
similarly showed a complete lack of long distance north or south
movements.
The North Pacific population of loggerheads appears to occupy an
ecological setting distinct from other loggerheads, including those of
the South Pacific population. This is the only known population of
loggerheads to be found north of the equator in the Pacific Ocean,
foraging in the eastern Pacific as far south as Baja California Sur,
Mexico (Seminoff et al., 2004; Peckham et al., 2007) and in the western
Pacific as far south as the Philippines (Limpus, 2009) and the mouth of
Mekong River, Vietnam (Sadoyama et al., 1996). Pelagic juvenile turtles
spend much of their time foraging in the central and eastern North
Pacific Ocean. The Kuroshio Extension Current, lying west of the
international date line, serves as the dominant physical and biological
habitat in the North Pacific and is highly productive, likely due to
unique features such as eddies and meanders that concentrate prey and
support food webs. Juvenile loggerheads originating from nesting
beaches in Japan exhibit high site fidelity to an area referred to as
the Kuroshio Extension Bifurcation Region, an area with extensive
meanders and mesoscale eddies (Polovina et al., 2006). Juvenile turtles
also were found to correlate strongly with areas of surface chlorophyll
a levels in an area known as the Transition Zone Chlorophyll Front, an
area concentrating surface prey for loggerheads (Polovina et al., 2001;
Parker et al., 2005; Kobayashi et al., 2008). Another area found
ecologically unique to the North Pacific population of loggerheads,
likely because of the high density of pelagic red crabs (Pleuronocodes
planipes), is located off the Pacific coast of the Baja California
Peninsula, Mexico, where researchers have documented a foraging area
for juvenile turtles based on aerial surveys and satellite telemetry
(Seminoff et al., 2006; Peckham et al., 2007). Tag returns show post-
nesting females migrating into the East China Sea off South Korea,
China, and the Philippines, and the nearby coastal waters of Japan
(Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997, 2003). Clearly, the North
Pacific population of loggerheads is uniquely adapted to the ecological
setting of the North Pacific Ocean and serves as an important part of
the ecosystem it inhabits.
In summary, loggerheads inhabiting the North Pacific Ocean are
derived primarily, if not entirely, from Japanese beaches (although low
level nesting may occur outside Japan in areas surrounding the South
China Sea), with the possible exception of rare waifs over evolutionary
time scales. Further, nesting colonies of Japanese loggerheads are
found to be genetically distinct based on mtDNA analyses, and when
compared to much larger and more genetically diverse loggerhead
populations in the Atlantic and Mediterranean, Pacific loggerheads have
likely experienced critical bottlenecks (in Hatase et al., 2002a),
underscoring the importance of conservation and management to retain
this genetically distinct population.
In the South Pacific Ocean, loggerhead turtles nest primarily in
Queensland, Australia, and, to a lesser extent, New Caledonia and
Vanuatu (Limpus and Limpus, 2003; Limpus et al., 2006; Limpus, 2009).
Loggerheads from these rookeries undertake an oceanic developmental
migration,
[[Page 12604]]
traveling to habitats in the central and southeastern Pacific Ocean
where they may reside for several years prior to returning to the
western Pacific for reproduction. Loggerheads in this early life
history stage differ markedly from those originating from western
Australia beaches in that they undertake long west-to-east migrations,
likely using specific areas of the pelagic environment of the South
Pacific Ocean. An unknown portion of these loggerheads forage off Chile
and Peru, and preliminary genetic information from foraging areas in
the southeastern Pacific confirms that the haplotype frequencies among
juvenile turtles in these areas closely match those found at nesting
beaches in eastern Australia (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004; Donoso and
Dutton, 2006, 2007; Boyle et al., 2009). Large juvenile and adult
loggerheads generally remain in the western South Pacific, inhabiting
neritic and oceanic foraging sites during non-nesting periods (Limpus
et al., 1994; Limpus, 2009).
Loggerheads from Australia and New Caledonia apparently do not
travel north of the equator. Flipper tag recoveries from nesting
females have been found throughout the western Pacific, including sites
north of Australia, the Torres Straight, and the Gulf of Carpentaria
(Limpus, 2009). Of approximately 1,000 (adult and juvenile; male and
female) loggerheads that have been tagged in eastern Australian feeding
areas, only two have been recorded nesting outside of Australia; both
traveled to New Caledonia (Limpus, 2009). Flipper tagging programs in
Peru and Chile tagged approximately 500 loggerheads from 1999 to 2006,
none of which have been reported from outside of the southeastern
Pacific (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008a; S. Kelez, Duke University
Marine Laboratory, unpublished data; M. Donoso, ONG Pacifico Laud--
Chile, unpublished data). Limited satellite telemetry data from 12
turtles in the area show a similar trend (J. Mangel, Pro Delphinus,
unpublished data).
The spatial separation between the North Pacific and South Pacific
loggerhead populations has contributed to substantial differences in
the genetic profiles of the nesting populations in these two regions.
Whereas the dominant mtDNA haplotypes among loggerheads nesting in
Japan are CCP2 and CCP3 (equivalent to B and C respectively in Bowen et
al., 1995 and Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux et al., 2008; P. Dutton,
NMFS, unpublished data), loggerheads nesting in eastern Australia have
a third haplotype (CCP1, previously A) which is dominant (98 percent of
nesting females) (Bowen et al., 1994; FitzSimmons et al., 1996; Boyle
et al., 2009). Further, preliminary genetic analysis using
microsatellite markers (nuclear DNA) indicates genetic distinctiveness
between nesting populations in the North versus South Pacific (P.
Dutton, NMFS, personal communication, 2008).
The separateness between nesting populations in eastern Australia
(in the South Pacific Ocean) and western Australia (in the East Indian
Ocean) is less clear, although these too are considered to be
genetically distinct from one another (Limpus, 2009). For example,
mtDNA haplotype CCP1, which is the overwhelmingly dominant haplotype
among eastern Australia nesting females (98 percent), is also found in
western Australia, although at much lower frequency (33 percent)
(FitzSimmons et al., 1996, 2003). The remaining haplotype for both
regions was the CCP5 haplotype. Further, FitzSimmons (University of
Canberra, unpublished data) found significant differences in nuclear
DNA microsatellite loci from females nesting in these two regions.
Estimates of gene flow between eastern and western Australian
populations was an order of magnitude less than gene flow within
regions. These preliminary results based on nuclear DNA indicate that
male-mediated gene flow between eastern and western Australia may be
insignificant, which, when considered in light of the substantial
disparity in mtDNA haplotype frequencies between these two regions,
provides further evidence of population separation.
At present, there is no indication from genetic studies that the
loggerhead turtles nesting in eastern Australia are distinct from those
nesting in New Caledonia. Of 27 turtles sequenced from New Caledonia,
93 percent carried the CCP1 haplotype and the remaining had the CCP5
haplotype; similar to eastern Australia (Boyle et al., 2009).
The South Pacific population of loggerheads occupies an ecological
setting distinct from other loggerheads, including the North Pacific
population; however, less is known about the ecosystem on which South
Pacific oceanic juvenile and adult loggerheads depend. Sea surface
temperature and chlorophyll frontal zones in the South Pacific have
been shown to dramatically affect the movements of green turtles,
Chelonia mydas (Seminoff et al., 2008) and leatherback turtles,
Dermochelys coriacea (Shillinger et al., 2008), and it is likely that
loggerhead distributions are also affected by these mesoscale
oceanographic features.
Loggerheads in the South Pacific are substantially impacted by
periodic environmental perturbations such as the El Ni[ntilde]o
Southern Oscillation (ENSO). This 3- to 6-year cycle within the coupled
ocean-atmosphere system of the tropical Pacific brings increased
surface water temperatures and lower primary productivity, both of
which have profound biological consequences (Chavez et al., 1999).
Loggerheads are presumably adversely impacted by the reduced food
availability that often results from ENSO events, although data on this
subject are lacking. Although ENSO may last for only short periods and
thus not have a long-term effect on loggerheads in the region, recent
studies by Chaloupka et al. (2008) suggested that long-term increases
in sea surface temperature within the South Pacific may influence the
ability of the Australian nesting population to recover from historic
population declines.
Loggerheads originating from nesting beaches in the western South
Pacific are the only population of loggerheads to be found south of the
equator in the Pacific Ocean. As post-hatchlings, they are generally
swept south by the East Australian Current (Limpus et al., 1994), spend
a large portion of time foraging in the oceanic South Pacific Ocean,
and some migrate to the southeastern Pacific Ocean off the coasts of
Peru and Chile as juvenile turtles (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004;
Donoso et al., 2000; Boyle et al., 2009). As large juveniles and
adults, these loggerheads' foraging range encompasses the eastern
Arafura Sea, Gulf of Carpentaria, Torres Strait, Gulf of Papua, Coral
Sea, and western Tasman Sea to southern New South Wales including the
Great Barrier Reef, Hervey Bay, and Moreton Bay. The outer extent of
this range includes the coastal waters off eastern Indonesia
northeastern Papua New Guinea, northeastern Solomon Islands, and New
Caledonia (in Limpus, 2009).
In summary, all loggerheads inhabiting the South Pacific Ocean are
derived from beaches in eastern Australia and a lesser known number of
beaches in southern New Caledonia, Vanuatu, and Tokelau (Limpus and
Limpus, 2003; Limpus, 2009). Furthermore, nesting colonies of the South
Pacific population of loggerheads are found to be genetically distinct
from loggerheads in the North Pacific and Indian Ocean.
Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we
concur, that two discrete population segments exist in the Pacific
Ocean: (1) North Pacific Ocean and (2) South Pacific Ocean. These two
population segments are markedly separated from
[[Page 12605]]
each other and from population segments within the Indian Ocean and
Atlantic Ocean basins as a consequence of physical, ecological,
behavioral, and oceanographic factors. Information supporting this
conclusion includes genetic analysis, flipper tag recoveries, and
satellite telemetry, which indicate that individuals originating from
Japan remain in the North Pacific for their entire life cycle, never
crossing the equator or mixing with individuals from the South Pacific
(Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and Dutton, 2006; Dutton, 2007,
unpublished data). This apparent, almost complete separation most
likely results from: (1) The presence of two distinct Northern and
Southern Gyre (current flow) systems in the Pacific (Briggs, 1974), (2)
near-passive movements of post-hatchlings in these gyres that initially
move them farther away from areas of potential mixing along the
equator, and (3) the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles that prevents
turtles from returning to non-natal nesting areas. The separation of
the Pacific Ocean population segments from population segments within
the Indian Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins is believed to be the result
of land barriers and oceanographic barriers. Based on mtDNA analysis,
Bowen et al. (1994) found a separation of loggerheads in the Atlantic-
Mediterranean basins from those in the Indo-Pacific basins since the
Pleistocene period. Geography and climate appear to have shaped the
evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial
cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier
between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water
off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier between the
Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003).
Indian Ocean
Similar to loggerheads in the Pacific and Atlantic, loggerheads in
the Indian Ocean nest on coastal beaches, forage in neritic and oceanic
habitats, and undertake long-distance migrations between and within
these areas. The distribution of loggerheads in the Indian Ocean is
limited by the Asian landmass to the north (approximately 30[deg] N
latitude); distributions east and west are not restricted by landmasses
south of approximately 38[deg] S latitude.
Historical accounts of loggerhead turtles in the Indian Ocean are
found in Smith (1849), who described the species in South Africa, and
Deraniyagala (1933, 1939) who described Indian Ocean loggerheads within
the subspecies C. c. gigas. Hughes (1974) argued that there was little
justification for this separation.
In the North Indian Ocean, Oman hosts the vast majority of
loggerhead nesting. The largest nesting assemblage is at Masirah
Island, Oman, in the northern tropics at 21[deg] N latitude (Baldwin et
al., 2003). Other key nesting assemblages occur on the Al Halaniyat
Islands, Oman (17[deg] S latitude) and on Oman's Arabian Sea mainland
beaches south of Masirah Island to the Oman-Yemen border (17-20[deg] S
latitude) (IUCN--The World Conservation Union, 1989a, 1989b; Salm,
1991; Salm and Salm, 1991; Baldwin et al., 2003). In addition, nesting
probably occurs on the mainland of Yemen on the Arabian Sea coast, and
nesting has been confirmed on Socotra, an island off the coast of Yemen
(Pilcher and Saad, 2000).
Outside of Oman, loggerhead nesting is rare in the North Indian
Ocean. The only verified nesting beaches for loggerheads on the Indian
subcontinent are found in Sri Lanka (Deraniyagala, 1939; Kar and
Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, 1988; Kapurusinghe, 2006). Reports of regular
loggerhead nesting on the Indian mainland are likely misidentifications
of olive ridleys (Lepidochelys olivacea) (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe,
2006). Although loggerheads have been reported nesting in low numbers
in Myanmar, these data may not be reliable because of misidentification
of species (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000).
Limited information exists on foraging locations of North Indian
Ocean loggerheads. Foraging individuals have been reported off the
southern coastline of Oman (Salm et al., 1993) and in the Gulf of
Mannar, between Sri Lanka and India (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe,
2006). Satellite telemetry studies of post-nesting migrations of
loggerheads nesting on Masirah Island, Oman, have revealed extensive
use of the waters off the Arabian Peninsula, with the majority of
telemetered turtles (15 of 20) traveling southwest, following the
shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, and circling well offshore in
nearby oceanic waters (Environment Society of Oman and Ministry of
Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished data). A minority
traveled north as far as the western Persian (Arabian) Gulf (3 of 20)
or followed the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen as far west as the
Gulf of Aden and the Bab-el-Mandab (2 of 20). These preliminary data
suggest that post-nesting migrations and adult female foraging areas
may be centered within the region (Environment Society of Oman and
Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished data). No
tag returns or satellite tracks indicated that loggerheads nesting in
Oman traveled south of the equator.
In the East Indian Ocean, western Australia hosts all known
loggerhead nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting distributions in western
Australia span from the Shark Bay World Heritage Area northward through
the Ningaloo Marine Park coast to the North West Cape and to the nearby
Muiron Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from Dirk
Hartog Island have been recorded foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth
Gulf, while other adults range into the Gulf of Carpentaria (Baldwin et
al., 2003). At the eastern extent of this apparent range, there is
possible overlap with loggerheads that nest on Australia's Pacific
coast (Limpus, 2009). However, despite extensive tagging at principal
nesting beaches on Australia's Indian Ocean and Pacific coasts, no
exchange of females between nesting beaches has been observed (Limpus,
2009).
Loggerhead nesting in the Southwest Indian Ocean includes the
southeastern coast of Africa from the Paradise Islands in Mozambique
southward to St. Lucia in South Africa, and on the south and
southwestern coasts of Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003). Foraging
habitats are only known for the Tongaland, South Africa, adult female
loggerheads. Returns of flipper tags describe a range that extends
eastward to Madagascar, northward to Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya,
and southward to Cape Agulhas at the southernmost point of Africa
(Baldwin et al., 2003). Four post-nesting loggerheads satellite tracked
by Luschi et al. (2006) migrated northward, hugging the Mozambique
coast and remained in shallow shelf waters off Mozambique for more than
2 months. Only one post-nesting female from the Southwest Indian Ocean
population (South Africa) has been documented migrating north of the
equator (to southern Somalia) (Hughes and Bartholomew, 1996).
The available genetic information relates to connectivity and broad
evolutionary relationships between ocean basins. There is a lack of
genetic information on population structure among rookeries within the
Indian Ocean. Bowen et al. (1994) described mtDNA sequence diversity
among eight loggerhead nesting assemblages and found one of two
principal branches in the Indo-Pacific basins. Using additional
published and unpublished data, Bowen (2003) estimated divergence
between these two lineages to be approximately three million years.
Bowen pointed out evidence for more recent colonizations (12,000-
250,000 years ago) between the Indian Ocean and the Atlantic-
[[Page 12606]]
Mediterranean. For example, the sole mtDNA haplotype (among eight
samples) identified by Bowen et al. (1994) at Masirah Island, Oman, is
known from the Atlantic and suggests some exchange between oceans some
250,000 years ago. The other principal Indian Ocean haplotype reported
by Bowen et al. (1994) was seen in all loggerheads sampled (n=15) from
Natal, South Africa. Encalada et al. (1998) reported that this
haplotype was common throughout the North Atlantic and Mediterranean,
thus suggesting a similar exchange between the Atlantic and Indian
Oceans as recently as 12,000 years ago (Bowen et al., 1994). Bowen
(2003) speculated that Indian-Atlantic Ocean exchanges took place via
the temperate waters south of South Africa and became rare as the ocean
shifted to cold temperate conditions in this region.
To estimate loggerhead gene flow in and out of the Indian Ocean,
J.S. Reece (Washington University, personal communication, 2008)
examined 100 samples from Masirah Island, 249 from Atlantic rookeries
(from Encalada et al., 1998), and 311 from Pacific rookeries (from
Hatase et al., 2002a and Bowen et al., 1995). Reece estimated that gene
flow, expressed as number of effective migrants, or exchanges of
breeding females between Indian Ocean rookeries and those from the
Atlantic or Pacific occurred at the rate of less than 0.1 migrant per
generation. Reece estimated gene flow based on coalescence of combined
mtDNA and nuclear DNA data to be approximately 0.5 migrants per
generation. These unpublished results, while somewhat theoretical, may
indicate that there is restricted gene flow into and out of the Indian
Ocean. The low level of gene flow most likely reflects the historical
connectivity over geological timescales rather than any contemporary
migration, and is consistent with Bowen's hypothesis that exchange
occurred most recently over 12,000-3,000,000 years ago, and has been
restricted over recent ecological timescales.
The discrete status of three loggerhead populations in the Indian
Ocean is primarily supported by observations of tag returns and
satellite telemetry. The genetic information currently available based
on mtDNA sequences does not allow for a comprehensive analysis of
genetic population structure analysis for Indian Ocean rookeries,
although Bowen et al. (1994) indicated the Oman and South African
rookeries are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be
genetically distinct from the rookeries in western Australia. Based on
multiple lines of evidence, discrete status is supported for the North
Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, and Southwest Indian Ocean
loggerhead populations. Although there is not a sufficiently clear
picture of gene flow between these regions, significant vicariant
barriers likely exist between these three Indian Ocean populations that
would prevent migration of individuals on a time scale relative to
management and conservation efforts. These vicariant barriers are the
oceanographic phenomena associated with Indian Ocean equatorial waters,
and the large expanse between continents in the South Indian Ocean
without suitable benthic foraging habitat.
Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we
concur, that three discrete population segments exist in the Indian
Ocean: (1) North Indian Ocean, (2) Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, and
(3) Southwest Indian Ocean. These three population segments are
markedly separated from each other and from population segments within
the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins as a consequence of
physical, ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic factors.
Information supporting this conclusion is primarily based on
observations of tag returns and satellite telemetry. The genetic
information currently available based on mtDNA sequences does not allow
for a comprehensive analysis of genetic population structure for Indian
Ocean rookeries; however, the Oman and South African rookeries are
genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are completed for
these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be determined
genetically distinct from the rookeries in western Australia (Bowen et
al. 1994). Furthermore, significant vicariant barriers (i.e.,
oceanographic phenomena associated with Indian Ocean equatorial waters,
and the large expanse between continents in the South Indian Ocean
without suitable benthic foraging habitat) likely exist between these
three Indian Ocean populations that would prevent migration of
individuals on a time scale relative to management and conservation
efforts. The separation of the Indian Ocean population segments from
population segments within the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins
is believed to be the result of land barriers and oceanographic
barriers. Based on mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. (1994) found a
separation of loggerheads in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from
those in the Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene period.
Geography and climate appear to have shaped the evolution of these two
matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial cycles, the appearance
of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier between the Atlantic and
eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water off southern Africa
creating an oceanographic barrier between the Atlantic and Indian
Oceans (Bowen, 2003). In the East Indian Ocean, although there is
possible overlap with loggerheads that nest on Australia's Indian Ocean
and Pacific Ocean coasts, extensive tagging at the principal nesting
beaches on both coasts has revealed no exchange of females between
these nesting beaches (Limpus, 2009).
Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea
Within the Atlantic Ocean, loss and re-colonization of nesting
beaches over evolutionary time scales has been influenced by climate,
natal homing, and rare dispersal events (Encalada et al., 1998; Bowen
and Karl, 2007). At times, temperate beaches were too cool to incubate
eggs and nesting could have succeeded only on tropical beaches. Thus,
the contemporary distribution of nesting is the product of colonization
events from the tropical refugia during the last 12,000 years.
Apparently, turtles from the Northwest Atlantic colonized the
Mediterranean and at least two matrilines were involved (Schroth et
al., 1996); these rookeries became isolated from the Atlantic
populations in the last 10,000 years (Encalada et al., 1998). A similar
colonization event appears to have populated the Northeast Atlantic (C.
Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal
communication, 2008).
Nesting in the western South Atlantic occurs primarily along the
mainland coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro, with
peak concentrations in northern Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and
northern Rio de Janeiro (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007). In the
eastern South Atlantic, diffuse nesting may occur along the mainland
coast of Africa (Fretey, 2001), with more than 200 loggerhead nests
reported for Rio Longa beach in central Angola in 2005 (Brian, 2007).
However, other researchers have been unable to confirm nesting by
loggerheads in the last decade anywhere along the south Atlantic coast
of Africa, including Angola (Fretey, 2001; Weir et al., 2007). There is
the possibility that reports of nesting loggerheads from Angola and
Namibia (M[aacute]rquez M., 1990; Brian, 2007) may have arisen from
misidentified olive ridley turtles (Brongersma, 1982; Fretey, 2001). At
the current time, it is not possible to confirm that regular, if any,
nesting of
[[Page 12607]]
loggerheads occurs along the Atlantic coast of Africa, south of the
equator.
Genetic surveys of loggerheads have revealed that the Brazilian
rookeries have a unique mtDNA haplotype (Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce,
2001). The Brazilian mtDNA haplotype, relative to North Atlantic
haplotypes, indicates isolation of South Atlantic loggerheads from
North Atlantic loggerheads on a scale of 250,000-500,000 years ago, and
microsatellite DNA results show divergence on the same time scale
(Bowen, 2003). Brazil's unique haplotype has been found only in low
numbers in foraging populations of juvenile loggerheads of the North
Atlantic (Bass et al., 2004). Other lines of evidence support a deep
division between loggerheads from the South Atlantic and from the North
Atlantic, including: (1) A nesting season in Brazil that peaks in the
austral summer around December-January (Marcovaldi and Laurent, 1996),
as opposed to the April-September nesting season in the southeastern
United States in the northern hemisphere (Witherington et al., 2009);
and (2) no observations of tagged loggerheads moving across the equator
in the Atlantic, except a single case of a captive-reared animal that
was released as a juvenile from Esp[iacute]rito Santo and was
recaptured 3 years later in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). Post-
nesting females from Esp[iacute]rito Santo, Brazil, moved either north
or south along the coast, but remained between 10[deg] S latitude and
30[deg] S latitude (Projeto TAMAR, unpublished data).
Relatively little is known about the at-sea behavior of loggerheads
originating from nesting beaches in Brazil. Recaptures of tagged
juvenile turtles and nesting females have shown movement of animals up
and down the coast of South America (Almeida et al., 2000; Marcovaldi
et al., 2000; Laporta and Lopez, 2003; Almeida et al., 2007). Juvenile
loggerheads, presumably of Brazilian origin, have also been captured on
the high seas of the South Atlantic (Kotas et al., 2004; Pinedo and
Polacheck, 2004) and off the coast of Atlantic Africa (Petersen, 2005;
Petersen et al., 2007; Weir et al., 2007) suggesting that, like their
North Pacific and Northwest Atlantic counterparts, loggerheads of the
South Atlantic may undertake transoceanic developmental migrations
(Bolten et al., 1998; Peckham et al., 2007).
The mean size of reproductive female loggerheads in Brazil is 92.9
cm straight carapace length (SCL), which is comparable to the size of
nesting females in the Northwest Atlantic, but larger than nesting
females in the Northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean (Tiwari and
Bjorndal, 2000; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Varo Cruz et al., 2007).
Egg size and mass of Brazilian loggerheads are smaller than those from
the Northwest Atlantic, but larger than those of the Mediterranean
(Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000).
Within the Northwest Atlantic, the majority of nesting activity
occurs from April through September, with a peak in June and July
(Williams-Walls et al., 1983; Dodd, 1988; Weishampel et al., 2006).
Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of North
America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles, and The
Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern United States and on
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Sternberg, 1981; Ehrhart, 1989;
Ehrhart et al., 2003; NMFS and USFWS, 2008). Many nesting beaches
within the Northwest Atlantic have yet to be sampled for genetic
analysis. Five recovery units (subpopulations) have been identified
based on genetic differences and a combination of geographic
distribution of nesting densities and geographic separation. These
recovery units are: Northern Recovery Unit (Florida/Georgia border
through southern Virginia), Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit (Florida/
Georgia border through Pinellas County, Florida), Northern Gulf of
Mexico Recovery Unit (Franklin County, Florida, through Texas), Greater
Caribbean Recovery Unit (Mexico through French Guiana, The Bahamas,
Lesser Antilles, and Greater Antilles), and Dry Tortugas Recovery Unit
(islands located west of Key West, Florida) (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
There is limited exchange of nesting females among these recovery units
(Encalada et al., 1998; Foote et al., 2000; J. Richardson personal
communication cited in NMFS, 2001; Hawkes et al., 2005). Based on the
number of haplotypes, the highest level of loggerhead mtDNA genetic
diversity in the Atlantic has been observed in females of the Greater
Caribbean Recovery Unit that nest at Quintana Roo, Mexico (Encalada et
al., 1999; Nielsen et al., in press). However, genetic diversity should
be evaluated further using haplotype and nucleotide diversity
calculated similarly for each recovery unit. Genetic data are not
available for all the nesting assemblages in the region, including a
key nesting assemblage in Cuba. New genetic markers have recently been
developed, including primers that produce additional mtDNA sequence
data (Abreu-Grobois et al., 2006; LeRoux et al., 2008), and an array of
microsatellite markers (Shamblin et al., 2008) that will enable finer
resolution of population boundaries.
Loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic display complex population
structure based on life history stages. Based on mtDNA, oceanic
juveniles show no structure, neritic juveniles show moderate structure,
and nesting colonies show strong structure (Bowen et al., 2005). In
contrast, a survey using microsatellite (nuclear DNA) markers showed no
significant population structure among nesting populations (Bowen et
al., 2005), indicating that while females exhibit strong philopatry,
males may provide an avenue of gene flow between nesting colonies in
this region. However, the power to detect structure with the nuclear
markers used in this study may have been limited due to the few markers
used and small sample sizes. Nevertheless, Bowen et al. (2005) argued
that male-mediated gene flow within the Northwest Atlantic does not
detract from the classification of breeding areas as independent
populations (e.g., recovery units) because the production of progeny
depends on female nesting success. All Northwest Atlantic recovery
units are reproductively isolated from populations within the Northeast
Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea.
As oceanic juveniles, loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic use
the North Atlantic Gyre and often are associated with Sargassum
communities (Carr, 1987). They also are found in the Mediterranean Sea.
In these areas, they overlap with animals originating from the
Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea (Laurent et al., 1993,
1998; Bolten et al., 1998; Bowen et al., 2005; LaCasella et al., 2005;
Carreras et al., 2006; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2006; Revelles et al.,
2007). In the western Mediterranean, they tend to be associated with
the waters off the northern African coast and the northeastern Balearic
Archipelago, areas generally not inhabited by turtles of Mediterranean
origin (Carreras et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert et al.,
2008). As larger neritic juveniles, they show more structure and tend
to inhabit areas closer to their natal origins (Bowen et al., 2004),
but some do move to and from oceanic foraging grounds throughout this
life stage (Mansfield, 2006; McClellan and Read, 2007), and some
continue to use the Mediterranean Sea (Casale et al., 2008a; Eckert et
al., 2008). Adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in
distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic,
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and
[[Page 12608]]
Mediterranean. Carapace epibionts suggest the adult females of
different subpopulations use different foraging habitats (Caine, 1986).
In the Northwest Atlantic, based on satellite telemetry studies and
flipper tag returns, non-nesting adult females from the Northern
Recovery Unit reside primarily off the east coast of the United States;
movement into the Bahamas or the Gulf of Mexico is rare (Bell and
Richardson, 1978; Williams and Frick, 2001; Mansfield, 2006; Turtle
Expert Working Group, 2009). Adult females of the Peninsular Florida
Recovery Unit are distributed throughout eastern Florida, The Bahamas,
Greater Antilles, the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, and the Gulf of
Mexico, as well as along the Atlantic seaboard of the United States
(Meylan, 1982; Meylan et al., 1983; Foley et al., 2008; Turtle Expert
Working Group, 2009). Adult females from the Northern Gulf of Mexico
Recovery Unit remained in the Gulf of Mexico, including off the Yucatan
Peninsula of Mexico, based on satellite telemetry and flipper tag
returns (Foley et al., 2008; Turtle Expert Working Group, 2009; M.
Lamont, Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, personal
communication, 2009; M. Nicholas, National Park Service, personal
communication, 2009).
Nesting in the Northeast Atlantic is concentrated in the Cape Verde
Archipelago, with some nesting occurring on most of the islands, and
the highest concentration on the beaches of Boa Vista Island (Lopez-
Jurado et al., 2000; Varo Cruz et al., 2007; Loureiro, 2008). On
mainland Africa, there is minor nesting on the coasts of Mauritania to
Senegal (Brongersma, 1982; Arvy et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001). Earlier
reports of loggerhead nesting in Morocco (Pasteur and Bons, 1960) have
not been confirmed in recent years (Tiwari et al., 2001). Nesting has
not been reported from Macaronesia (Azores, Madeira Archipelago, The
Selvagens Islands, and the Canary Islands), other than in the Cape
Verde Archipelago (Brongersma, 1982). In Cape Verde, nesting begins in
mid June and extends into October (Cejudo et al., 2000), which is
somewhat later than when nesting occurs in the Northwest Atlantic.
Based on an analysis of mtDNA of 196 nesting females from Boa Vista
Island, the Cape Verde nesting assemblage is genetically distinct from
other studied rookeries (C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de
Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello
et al., 2009). The results also indicate that despite the close
proximity of the Mediterranean, the Boa Vista rookery is most closely
related to the rookeries of the Northwest Atlantic.
The distribution of juvenile loggerheads from the Northeast
Atlantic is largely unknown but they have been found on the oceanic
foraging grounds of the North Atlantic (A. Bolten, University of
Florida, personal communication, 2008, based on Bolten et al., 1998 and
LaCasella et al., 2005; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009; M. Tiwari, NMFS,
and A. Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data) and in the
western and central Mediterranean (A. Bolten, University of Florida,
personal communication, 2008, based on Carreras et al., 2006), along
with small juvenile loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic. The size
of nesting females in the Northeast Atlantic is comparable to those in
the Mediterranean (average 72-80 cm SCL; Margaritoulis et al., 2003)
and smaller than those in the Northwest Atlantic or the South Atlantic;
91 percent of the nesting turtles are less than 86.5 cm curved carapace
length (CCL) (Hawkes et al., 2006) and nesting females average 77.1 cm
SCL (Cejudo et al., 2000). Satellite-tagged, post-nesting females from
Cape Verde foraged in coastal waters along northwest Africa or foraged
oceanically, mostly between Cape Verde and the African shelf from
Mauritania to Guinea Bissau (Hawkes et al., 2006).
In the Mediterranean, nesting occurs throughout the central and
eastern basins on the shores of Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria,
Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia (Sternberg, 1981;
Margaritoulis et al., 2003; SWOT, 2007). Sporadic nesting also has been
reported in the western Mediterranean on Corsica (Delaugerre and
Cesarini, 2004), southwestern Italy (Bentivegna et al., 2005), and on
the Spanish Mediterranean coast (Tomas et al., 2003, 2008). Nesting in
the Mediterranean is concentrated between June and early August
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Within the Mediterranean, a recent study of mitochondrial and
nuclear DNA in nesting assemblages from Greece to Israel indicated
genetic structuring, philopatry by both females and males, and limited
gene flow between assemblages (Carreras et al., 2007). Genetic
differentiation based on mtDNA indicated that there are at least four
independent nesting subpopulations within the Mediterranean and usually
they are characterized by a single haplotype: (1) Mainland Greece and
the adjoining Ionian Islands, (2) eastern Turkey, (3) Israel, and (4)
Cyprus. There is no evidence of adult female exchange among these four
subpopulations (Carreras et al., 2006). In studies of the foraging
grounds in the western and central Mediterranean, seven of the 17
distinct haplotypes detected had not yet been described, indicating
that nesting beach data to describe the natal origins of juveniles
exploiting the western Mediterranean Sea are incomplete (Carreras et
al., 2006; Casale et al., 2008a). Gene flow among the Mediterranean
rookeries estimated from nuclear DNA was significantly higher than that
calculated from mtDNA, consistent with the scenario of female
philopatry maintaining isolation between rookeries, offset by male-
mediated gene flow. Nevertheless, the nuclear data show there was a
higher degree of substructuring among Mediterranean rookeries compared
to those in the Northwest Atlantic (Bowen et al., 2005; Carreras et
al., 2007).
Small oceanic juveniles from the Mediterranean Sea use the eastern
basin (defined as inclusive of the central Mediterranean, Ionian,
Adriatic, and Aegean Seas) and the western basin (defined as inclusive
of the Tyrrhenian Sea) along the European coast (Laurent et al., 1998;
Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Carreras et al., 2006; Revelles et al.,
2007). Larger juveniles also use the eastern Atlantic and the eastern
Mediterranean, especially the Tunisia-Libya shelf and the Adriatic Sea
(Laurent et al., 1993; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Monz[oacute]n-
Arg[uuml]llo et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007). Adults appear to
forage closer to the nesting beaches in the eastern basin; most tag
recoveries from females nesting in Greece have occurred in the Adriatic
Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004).
Loggerheads nesting in the Mediterranean were significantly smaller
than loggerheads nesting in the Northwest Atlantic and the South
Atlantic. Within the Mediterranean, straight carapace lengths ranged
from 58 to 95 cm SCL (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Greece's loggerheads
averaged 77-80 cm SCL (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000; Margaritoulis et al.,
2003), whereas Turkey's loggerheads averaged 72-73 cm SCL
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003). The Greece turtles also produced larger
clutches (relative to body size) than those produced by Florida or
Brazil nesters (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000). The authors suggested that
sea turtles in the Mediterranean encounter environmental conditions
significantly different from those experienced by populations elsewhere
in the Atlantic Ocean basin.
Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we
concur, that four discrete population
[[Page 12609]]
segments exist in the Atlantic Ocean/Mediterranean: (1) Northwest
Atlantic Ocean, (2) Northeast Atlantic Ocean, (3) South Atlantic Ocean,
and (4) Mediterranean Sea. These four population segments are markedly
separated from each other and from population segments within the
Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean basins as a consequence of physical,
ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic factors. Information
supporting this conclusion includes genetic analysis, flipper tag
recoveries, and satellite telemetry. Genetic studies have shown that
adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in distribution
among adult loggerheads in these four population segments (Bowen et
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007;
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas-Spain,
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). Although
loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, and
Mediterranean Sea population segments may comingle on oceanic foraging
grounds as juveniles, adults are apparently isolated from each other;
they also differ demographically. Data from satellite telemetry studies
and flipper tag returns have shown that nesting females from the
Northwest Atlantic return to the same nesting areas; they reveal no
evidence of movement of adults south of the equator or east of 40[deg]
W longitude. Similarly, there is no evidence of movement of Northeast
Atlantic adults south of the equator, west of 40[deg] W longitude, or
east of the Strait of Gibraltar, a narrow strait that connects the
Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea. Also, there is no evidence of
movement of adult Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of the Strait of
Gibraltar. With regard to South Atlantic loggerheads, there have been
no observations of tagged loggerheads moving across the equator in the
Atlantic, except a single case of a captive-reared animal that was
released as a juvenile from Esp[iacute]rito Santo and was recaptured 3
years later in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). The separation of the
Atlantic Ocean/Mediterranean Sea population segments from population
segments within the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean basins is believed
to be the result of land barriers and oceanographic barriers. Based on
mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. (1994) found a separation of loggerheads
in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from those in the Indo-Pacific
basins since the Pleistocene period. Geography and climate appear to
have shaped the evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the
onset of glacial cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating
a land barrier between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling
of cold water off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier
between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003).
Significance Determination
As stated in the preceding section, the BRT identified nine
discrete population segments. As described below by ocean basin, the
BRT found that each of the nine discrete population segments is
biologically and ecologically significant. They each represent a large
portion of the species range, sometimes encompassing an entire
hemispheric ocean basin. The range of each discrete population segment
represents a unique ecosystem, influenced by local ecological and
physical factors. The loss of any individual discrete population
segment would result in a significant gap in the loggerhead's range.
Each discrete population segment is genetically unique, often
identified by unique mtDNA haplotypes, and the BRT indicated that these
unique haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; the loss of any
one discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of
genetic diversity. Therefore, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that
these nine population segments are both discrete from other conspecific
population segments and significant to the species to which they
belong, Caretta caretta.
The geographic delineations given below for each discrete
population segment were determined primarily based on nesting beach
locations, genetic evidence, oceanographic features, thermal tolerance,
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution and
migrations from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. With
rare exception, adults from discrete population segments remain within
the delineated boundaries. In some cases, juvenile turtles from two or
more discrete population segments may mix on foraging areas and
therefore, their distribution and migrations may extend beyond the
geographic boundaries delineated below for each discrete population
segment (e.g., juvenile turtles from the Northwest Atlantic Ocean,
Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea discrete population
segments share foraging habitat in the western Mediterranean Sea).
Pacific Ocean
The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, of the North Pacific Ocean
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging
studies. The BRT determined that the North Pacific Ocean discrete
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly
from other population segments of the species in its genetic
characteristics. The North Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses
an entire hemispheric ocean basin and its loss would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon. There is no evidence or
reason to believe that female loggerheads from South Pacific nesting
beaches would repopulate the North Pacific nesting beaches should those
nesting assemblages be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Tagging
studies show that the vast majority of nesting females return to the
same nesting area. As summarized by Hatase et al. (2002a), of 2,219
tagged nesting females from Japan, only five females relocated their
nesting sites. In addition, flipper tag and satellite telemetry
research, as described in detail in the Discreteness Determination
section above, has shown no evidence of north-south movement of
loggerheads across the equator. This discrete population segment is
genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section above) and
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive
differences; thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the North Pacific
Ocean population segment is significant to the taxon to which it
belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of
the DPS policy.
The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 67[deg] W longitude and
139[deg] E longitude as the east and west boundaries, respectively, of
the South Pacific Ocean population segment based on oceanographic
features, loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch
data, and information on loggerhead distribution from satellite
telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the
South Pacific Ocean discrete population segment is biologically and
ecologically significant because the loss
[[Page 12610]]
of this population segment would result in a significant gap in the
range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from
other population segments of the species in its genetic
characteristics. The South Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses
an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon. The South Pacific Ocean
population is the only population of loggerheads found south of the
equator in the Pacific Ocean and there is no evidence or reason to
believe that female loggerheads from North Pacific nesting beaches
would repopulate the South Pacific nesting beaches should those nesting
assemblages be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). In addition,
flipper tag and satellite telemetry research, as described in detail in
the Discreteness Determination section above, has shown no evidence of
north-south movement of loggerheads across the equator. The BRT also
stated that it does not expect that recolonization from Indian Ocean
loggerheads would occur in eastern Australia within ecological time
frames. Despite evidence of foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria by
adult loggerheads from the nesting populations in eastern Australia
(South Pacific Ocean population segment) and western Australia
(Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment), the nesting females
from these two regions are considered to be genetically distinct from
one another (Limpus, 2009). In addition to a substantial disparity in
mtDNA haplotype frequencies between these two populations, FitzSimmons
(University of Canberra, unpublished data) found significant
differences in nuclear DNA microsatellite loci between females nesting
in these two regions, indicating separation between the South Pacific
Ocean and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segments. Long-
term studies show a high degree of site fidelity by adult females in
the South Pacific, with most females returning to the same beach within
a nesting season and in successive nesting seasons (Limpus, 1985, 2009;
Limpus et al., 1994). This has been documented as characteristic of
loggerheads from various rookeries throughout the world (Schroeder et
al., 2003). This discrete population segment is genetically unique and
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive
differences. Thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the South Pacific
Ocean population segment is significant to the taxon to which it
belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of
the DPS policy.
Indian Ocean
The BRT considered 30[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, of the North Indian Ocean
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging
studies. The BRT determined that the North Indian Ocean discrete
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly
from other population segments of the species in its genetic
characteristics. The North Indian Ocean population segment encompasses
an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic information
currently available for Indian Ocean populations indicates that the
Oman rookery in the North Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in
the Southwest Indian Ocean are genetically distinct, and once
sequencing studies are completed for these rookeries, it is likely that
they will also be determined to be genetically distinct from the
western Australia rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen
et al., 1994). In addition, oceanographic phenomena associated with
Indian Ocean equatorial waters exist between the North Indian Ocean
population segment and the two population segments in the South Indian
Ocean, which likely prevent migration of individuals across the equator
on a time scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant
et al., 2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe
that female loggerheads from the Southwest Indian Ocean or Southeast
Indo-Pacific Ocean would repopulate the North Indian Ocean nesting
beaches should those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen,
2003). Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we concur,
that the North Indian Ocean population segment is significant to the
taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the
significance element of the DPS policy.
The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 20[deg] E longitude at Cape
Agulhas on the southern tip of Africa and 80[deg] E longitude as the
east and west boundaries, respectively, of the Southwest Indian Ocean
population segment based on oceanographic features, thermal tolerance,
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution from
satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined
that the Southwest Indian Ocean discrete population segment is
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The
Southwest Indian Ocean population segment encompasses half of an
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon. Genetic information currently available for
Indian Ocean populations indicates that the Oman rookery in the North
Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in the Southwest Indian
Ocean are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be
determined to be genetically distinct from the western Australia
rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen et al., 1994). In
addition, vicariant barriers (i.e., oceanographic phenomena associated
with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, and the large expanse between
continents in the South Indian Ocean without suitable benthic foraging
habitat) likely exist between the three Indian Ocean populations that
would prevent migration of individuals between populations on a time
scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant et al.,
2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe that female
loggerheads from the North Indian Ocean or Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
would repopulate the Southwest Indian Ocean nesting beaches should
those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is
also no evidence of movement of adult Southwest Indian Ocean
loggerheads west of 20[deg] E longitude at Cape Agulhas, the
southernmost point on the African continent, or east of 80[deg] E
longitude within the Indian Ocean. Based on this information, the BRT
concluded, and we concur, that the Southwest Indian Ocean population
segment is significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and,
therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of the DPS
policy.
The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 139[deg] E
[[Page 12611]]
longitude and 80[deg] E longitude as the east and west boundaries,
respectively, of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment
based on oceanographic features, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch
data, and information on loggerhead distribution from satellite
telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean discrete population segment is
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses half of an
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon. Genetic information currently available for
Indian Ocean populations indicates that the Oman rookery in the North
Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in the Southwest Indian
Ocean are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be
determined to be genetically distinct from the western Australia
rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen et al., 1994). In
addition, vicariant barriers (i.e., oceanographic phenomena associated
with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, and the large expanse between
continents in the South Indian Ocean without suitable benthic foraging
habitat) likely exist between the three Indian Ocean populations that
would prevent migration of individuals between populations on a time
scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant et al.,
2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe that female
loggerheads from the North Indian Ocean or Southwest Indian Ocean would
repopulate the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean nesting beaches should
those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is
also no evidence of movement of adult Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
loggerheads west of 80[deg] E longitude within the Indian Ocean.
Despite evidence of foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria by adult
loggerheads from the nesting populations in eastern Australia (South
Pacific Ocean population segment) and western Australia (Southeast
Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment), the nesting females from these
two regions are considered to be genetically distinct from one another
(Limpus, 2009). In addition to a substantial disparity in mtDNA
haplotype frequencies between these two regions, FitzSimmons
(University of Canberra, unpublished data) found significant
differences in nuclear DNA microsatellite loci from females nesting in
these two regions, indicating separation between the South Pacific
Ocean population segment and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
population segment. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and
we concur, that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment is
significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it
satisfies the significance element of the DPS policy.
Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea
The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 40[deg] W longitude as the east
boundary of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment based on
oceanographic features, loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance,
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution from
satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined
that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean discrete population segment is
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The
Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment encompasses half of an
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies have shown that adult
populations are highly structured with no overlap in distribution among
adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic,
South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et al., 1994; Encalada et
al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; C. Monzon-Arguello,
Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal communication,
2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is no evidence or reason to
believe that female loggerheads from the Northeast Atlantic,
Mediterranean Sea, or South Atlantic nesting beaches would repopulate
the Northwest Atlantic nesting beaches should these populations be lost
(Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Data from satellite telemetry
studies and flipper tag returns, as described in detail in the
Discreteness Determination section above, have shown that the vast
majority of nesting females from the Northwest Atlantic return to the
same nesting area; they reveal no evidence of movement of adults south
of the equator or east of 40[deg] W longitude. This discrete population
segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section
above) and the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could
represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this discrete
population segment would represent a significant loss of genetic
diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we concur,
that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment is significant to
the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the
significance element of the DPS policy.
The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 40[deg] W longitude as the west
boundary of the Northeast Atlantic Ocean population segment. The BRT
considered the boundary between the Northeast Atlantic Ocean and
Mediterranean Sea population segments as 5[deg]36' W longitude (Strait
of Gibraltar). These boundaries are based on oceanographic features,
loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and
information on loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and
flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the Northeast Atlantic
Ocean discrete population segment is biologically and ecologically
significant because the loss of this population segment would result in
a significant gap in the range of the taxon, and the population segment
differs markedly from other population segments of the species in its
genetic characteristics. The Northeast Atlantic Ocean population
segment encompasses half of an hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss
would result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic
studies have shown that adult populations are highly structured with no
overlap in distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest
Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea
(Bowen et al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et
al., 2007; C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--
Spain, personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009).
There is no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from
the Northwest Atlantic, Mediterranean Sea, or South Atlantic nesting
beaches would repopulate the Northeast Atlantic nesting beaches should
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is
also no evidence
[[Page 12612]]
of movement of Northeast Atlantic adults west of 40[deg] W longitude or
east of the Strait of Gibraltar (5[deg]36' W longitude). This discrete
population segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness
Determination section above) and the BRT indicated that these unique
haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this
discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of
genetic diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we
concur, that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean population segment is
significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it
satisfies the significance element of the DPS policy.
The BRT considered the Mediterranean Sea west to 5[deg]36' W
longitude (Strait of Gibraltar) as the boundary of the Mediterranean
Sea population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging
studies. The BRT determined that the Mediterranean Sea discrete
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly
from other population segments of the species in its genetic
characteristics. The Mediterranean Sea population segment encompasses
the entire Mediterranean Sea basin, and its loss would result in a
significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies have shown
that adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in
distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic,
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007;
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain,
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is
no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from the
Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, or South Atlantic nesting
beaches would repopulate the Mediterranean Sea nesting beaches should
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). As
previously described, adults from the Mediterranean Sea population
segment appear to forage closer to the nesting beaches in the eastern
basin, and most flipper tag recoveries from females nesting in Greece
have occurred in the Adriatic Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et
al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004). There is no evidence of movement of
adult Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of the Strait of Gibraltar
(5[deg]36' W longitude). This discrete population segment is
genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section above) and
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive
differences; thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the Mediterranean
Sea population segment is significant to the taxon to which it belongs,
and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of the DPS
policy.
The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north
and south boundaries, respectively, and 20[deg] E longitude at Cape
Agulhas on the southern tip of Africa and 67[deg] W longitude as the
east and west boundaries, respectively, of the South Atlantic Ocean
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging
studies. The BRT determined that the South Atlantic Ocean discrete
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly
from other population segments of the species in its genetic
characteristics. The South Atlantic Ocean population segment
encompasses an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would
result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies
have shown that adult populations are highly structured with no overlap
in distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic,
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007;
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas-Spain,
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is
no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from the
Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, or Mediterranean Sea nesting
beaches would repopulate the South Atlantic nesting beaches should
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). This
discrete population segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness
Determination section above) and the BRT indicated that these unique
haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this
discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of
genetic diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we
concur, that the South Atlantic Ocean population segment is significant
to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the
significance element of the DPS policy.
In summary, based on the information provided in the Discreteness
Determination and Significance Determination sections above, the BRT
identified nine loggerhead DPSs distributed globally: (1) North Pacific
Ocean DPS, (2) South Pacific Ocean DPS, (3) North Indian Ocean DPS, (4)
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, (5) Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, (6)
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, (7) Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS, (8)
Mediterranean Sea DPS, and (9) South Atlantic Ocean DPS. We concur with
the findings and application of the DPS policy described by the BRT and
conclude that the nine DPSs identified by the BRT warrant delineation
as DPSs (i.e., they are discrete and significant).
Significant Portion of the Range
We have determined that the range of each DPS contributes
meaningfully to the conservation of the DPS and that populations that
may contribute more or less to the conservation of each DPS throughout
a portion of its range cannot be identified due to the highly migratory
nature of the listed entity.
The loggerhead sea turtle is highly migratory and crosses multiple
domestic and international geopolitical boundaries. Depending on the
life stage, they may occur in oceanic waters or along the continental
shelf of landmasses, or transit back and forth between oceanic and
neritic habitats. Protection and management of both the terrestrial and
marine environments is essential to recovering the listed entity.
Management measures implemented by any State, foreign nation, or
political subdivision likely would only affect individual sea turtles
during certain stages and seasons of the life cycle. Management
measures implemented by any State, foreign nation, or political
subdivision may also affect individuals from multiple DPSs because
juvenile turtles from disparate DPSs can overlap on foraging grounds or
migratory corridors (e.g., Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, and
Mediterranean Sea DPSs). The ``significant'' term in ``significant
portion of the range'' refers to the contribution of the population(s)
[[Page 12613]]
in a portion of the range to the conservation of the listable entity
being considered. The BRT was unable to identify any particular portion
of the range of any of the DPSs that was more significant to the DPS
than another portion of the same range because of the migratory nature
of the loggerhead turtle and the fact that different life stages
undergo threats and benefit from conservation efforts throughout the
geographic range of each DPS. The next section describes our evaluation
of the status of each DPS throughout its range.
Status of the Nine Loggerhead DPSs
Abundance estimates across all life stages do not exist for the
nine DPSs. Within the global range of the species, and within each DPS,
the primary data available are collected on nesting beaches, either as
counts of nests or counts of nesting females, or a combination of both
(either direct or extrapolated). Information on abundance and trends
away from the nesting beaches is limited or non-existent, primarily
because these data are, relative to nesting beach studies, logistically
difficult and expensive to obtain. Therefore, the primary information
source for directly evaluating status and trends of the nine DPSs is
nesting beach data.
North Pacific Ocean DPS
In the North Pacific, loggerhead nesting is essentially restricted
to Japan where monitoring of loggerhead nesting began in the 1950s on
some beaches, and expanded to include most known nesting beaches since
approximately 1990. Kamezaki et al. (2003) reviewed census data
collected from most of the Japanese nesting beaches. Although most
surveys were initiated in the 1980s and 1990s, some data collection
efforts were initiated in the 1950s. Along the Japanese coast, nine
major nesting beaches (greater than 100 nests per season) and six
``submajor'' beaches (10-100 nests per season) were identified. Census
data from 12 of these 15 beaches provide composite information on
longer-term trends in the Japanese nesting assemblage. Using
information collected on these beaches, Kamezaki et al. (2003)
concluded a substantial decline (50-90 percent) in the size of the
annual loggerhead nesting population in Japan in recent decades. Snover
(2008) combined nesting data from the Sea Turtle Association of Japan
and data from Kamezaki et al. (2002) to provide a recent 18-year time
series of nesting data from 1990-2007. Nesting declined from an initial
peak of approximately 6,638 nests in 1990-1991, followed by a steep
decline to a low of 2,064 nests in 1997. During the past decade,
nesting increased gradually to 5,167 nests in 2005, declined and then
rose again to a high of just under 11,000 nests in 2008. Estimated nest
numbers for 2009 are on the order of 7,000-8,000 nests. While nesting
numbers have gradually increased in recent years and the number for
2009 is similar to the start of the time series in 1990, historical
evidence indicates that there has been a substantial decline over the
last half of the 20th century.
South Pacific Ocean DPS
In the South Pacific, loggerhead nesting is almost entirely
restricted to eastern Australia (primarily Queensland) and New
Caledonia, with the majority of nesting occurring in eastern Australia,
a population that has been well studied. The size of the annual
breeding population (females only) has been monitored at numerous
rookeries in Australia since 1968 (Limpus and Limpus, 2003), and these
data constitute the primary measure of the current status of the DPS.
The total nesting population for Queensland was approximately 3,500
females in the 1976-1977 nesting season (Limpus, 1985; Limpus and
Reimer, 1994). Little more than two decades later, Limpus and Limpus
(2003) estimated this nesting population at less than 500 females in
the 1999-2000 nesting season. There has been a marked decline in the
number of females breeding annually since the mid-1970s, with an
estimated 50 to 80 percent decline in the number of breeding females at
various Australian rookeries up to 1990 (Limpus and Reimer, 1994) and a
decline of approximately 86 percent by 1999 (Limpus and Limpus, 2003).
Comparable nesting surveys have not been conducted in New Caledonia
however. Information from pilot surveys conducted in 2005, combined
with oral history information collected, suggest that there has been a
decline in loggerhead nesting (Limpus et al., 2006). Based on data from
the pilot study, only 60 to 70 loggerheads nested on the four surveyed
New Caledonia beaches during the 2004-2005 nesting season (Limpus et
al., 2006).
Studies of eastern Australia loggerheads at their foraging areas
provide some information on the status of non-breeding loggerheads of
the South Pacific Ocean DPS. Chaloupka and Limpus (2001) determined
that the resident loggerhead population on coral reefs of the southern
Great Barrier Reef declined at 3 percent per year from 1985 to the late
1990s. The observed decline was hypothesized as a result of recruitment
failure, given few anthropogenic impacts and constant high annual
survivorship measured at this foraging habitat (Chaloupka and Limpus,
2001). Concurrently, a decline in new recruits was measured in these
foraging areas (Limpus and Limpus, 2003).
North Indian Ocean DPS
The North Indian Ocean hosts the largest nesting assemblage of
loggerheads in the eastern hemisphere; the vast majority of these
loggerheads nest in Oman (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting occurs in
greatest density on Masirah Island; the number of emergences ranges
from 27-102 per km nightly (Ross, 1998). Nesting densities have
complicated the implementation of standardized nesting beach surveys,
and more precise nesting data have only been collected since 2008.
Extrapolations resulting from partial surveys and tagging in 1977-1978
provided broad estimates of 19,000-60,000 females nesting annually at
Masirah Island, while a more recent partial survey in 1991 provides an
estimate of 23,000 nesting females at Masirah Island (Baldwin, 1992;
Ross, 1979, 1998; Ross and Barwani 1982). A reinterpretation of these
estimates, assuming 50 percent nesting success (as compared to 100
percent in the original estimates), resulted in an estimate of 20,000
to 40,000 females nesting annually (Baldwin et al., 2003). Reliable
trends in nesting cannot be determined due to the lack of standardized
surveys at Masirah Island prior to 2008. In 2008, about 50,000 nests
were estimated based on daily surveys of the highest density nesting
beaches and weekly surveys on all remaining island nesting beaches.
Even using the low end of the 1977-1978 estimates of 20,000 nesting
females at Masirah, this suggests a significant decline in the size of
the nesting population and is consistent with observations by local
rangers that the population has declined dramatically in the last three
decades (E. Possardt, FWS, personal communication, 2008). If the higher
estimates are accurate then the decline would be greater than 70
percent.
In addition to the nesting beaches on Masirah Island, over 3,000
nests per year have been recorded in Oman on the Al-Halaniyat Islands
and, along the Oman mainland of the Arabian Sea, approximately 2,000
nests are deposited annually (Salm, 1991; Salm et al., 1993). In Yemen,
on Socotra Island, 50-100 loggerheads were estimated to have nested in
1999 (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). A time series of nesting data based on
standardized surveys is not available to determine trends for these
nesting sites.
[[Page 12614]]
Loggerhead nesting is rare elsewhere in the northern Indian Ocean
and in some cases is complicated by inaccurate species identification
(Shanker, 2004; Tripathy, 2005). A small number of nesting females use
the beaches of Sri Lanka every year; however, there are no records that
Sri Lanka has ever been a major nesting area for loggerheads
(Kapurusinghe, 2006). Loggerheads have been reported nesting in low
numbers in Myanmar; however, these data may not be reliable because of
misidentification of species (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000).
Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean DPS
In the eastern Indian Ocean, loggerhead nesting is restricted to
western Australia (Dodd, 1988), and this nesting population is the
largest in Australia (Wirsing et al., unpublished data, cited in
Natural Heritage Trust, 2005). Dirk Hartog Island hosts about 70-75
percent of nesting individuals in the eastern Indian Ocean (Baldwin et
al., 2003). Surveys have been conducted on the island for the duration
of six nesting seasons between 1993/1994 and 1999/2000 (Baldwin et al.,
2003). An estimated 800-1,500 loggerheads nest annually on Dirk Hartog
Island beaches (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Fewer loggerheads (approximately 150-350 per season) are reported
nesting on the Muiron Islands; however, more nesting loggerheads are
reported here than on North West Cape (approximately 50-150 per season)
(Baldwin et al., 2003). Although data are insufficient to determine
trends, evidence suggests the nesting population in the Muiron Islands
and North West Cape region was depleted before recent beach monitoring
programs began (Nishemura and Nakahigashi, 1990; Poiner et al., 1990;
Poiner and Harris, 1996).
Southwest Indian Ocean DPS
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the highest concentration of nesting
occurs on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, where surveys and
management practices were instituted in 1963 (Baldwin et al., 2003). A
trend analysis of index nesting beach data from this region from 1965
to 2008 indicates an increasing nesting population between the first
decade of surveys, which documented 500-800 nests annually, and the
last 8 years, which documented 1,100-1,500 nests annually (Nel, 2008).
These data represent approximately 50 percent of all nesting within
South Africa and are believed to be representative of trends in the
region. Loggerhead nesting occurs elsewhere in South Africa, but
sampling is not consistent and no trend data are available. The total
number of females nesting annually in South Africa is estimated between
500-2,000 (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, surveys have been
instituted much more recently; likely less than 100 females nest
annually and no trend data are available (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Similarly, in Madagascar, loggerheads have been documented nesting in
low numbers, but no trend data are available (Rakotonirina, 2001).
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of
North America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles,
and The Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern U.S. and on
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Sternberg, 1981; Ehrhart, 1989;
Ehrhart et al., 2003; NMFS and FWS, 2008). Collectively, the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean hosts the most significant nesting assemblage of
loggerheads in the western hemisphere and is one of the two largest
loggerhead nesting assemblages in the world. NMFS and FWS (2008),
Witherington et al. (2009), and TEWG (2009) provide comprehensive
analyses of the status of the nesting assemblages within the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean DPS using standardized data collected over survey
periods ranging from 10 to 23 years. The results of these analyses,
using different analytical approaches, were consistent in their
findings--there has been a significant, overall nesting decline within
this DPS.
NMFS and FWS (2008) identified five recovery units (nesting
subpopulations) in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean: the Northern U.S.
(Florida/Georgia border to southern Virginia); Peninsular Florida
(Florida/Georgia border south through Pinellas County, excluding the
islands west of Key West, Florida); Dry Tortugas (islands west of Key
West, Florida); Northern Gulf of Mexico (Franklin County, Florida, west
through Texas); and Greater Caribbean (Mexico through French Guiana,
The Bahamas, Lesser and Greater Antilles). Declining trends in the
annual number of nests were documented for all recovery units for which
there were adequate data. The most significant declining trend has been
documented for the Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit, where nesting
declined 26 percent over the 20-year period from 1989-2008, and
declined 41 percent over the period 1998-2008 (NMFS and FWS, 2008;
Witherington et al., 2009). The most standardized nest count from this
recovery unit in 2009 recorded the fourth lowest loggerhead nesting in
the 21-year monitoring period, reinforcing the assessment of nesting
decline (B. Witherington, FWC, personal communication, 2010). The
Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit represents approximately 87 percent of
all nesting effort in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS (Ehrhart et al.,
2003). The Northern U.S. Recovery Unit is the second largest recovery
unit within the DPS and is declining significantly at 1.3 percent
annually since 1983 (NMFS and FWS, 2008). The Greater Caribbean
Recovery Unit is the third largest recovery unit within the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean DPS, with the majority of nesting at Quintana Roo,
Mexico. TEWG (2009) reported a greater than 5 percent annual decline in
loggerhead nesting from 1995-2006 at Quintana Roo.
In an effort to evaluate loggerhead population status and trends
beyond the nesting beach, NMFS and FWS (2008) and TEWG (2009) reviewed
data from in-water studies within the range of the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean DPS. NMFS and FWS (2008), in the Recovery Plan for the Northwest
Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle, summarized population
trend data reported from nine in-water study sites, located between
Long Island Sound, New York, and Florida Bay, Florida, where
loggerheads were regularly captured and where efforts were made to
provide local indices of abundance. The study periods for these nine
sites varied. The earliest began in 1987, and the most recent were
initiated in 2000. None included annual sampling. Results reported from
four of the studies indicated no discernible trend, two studies
reported declining trends, and two studies reported increasing trends.
Trends at one study site, Mosquito Lagoon, Florida, indicated either no
trend (all data) or a declining trend (more recent data), depending on
whether all sample years were used or only the more recent, and likely
more comparable sample years, were used. TEWG (2009) used raw data from
six of the aforementioned nine in-water study sites to conduct trend
analyses. Results from three of the four sites located in the southeast
U.S. showed an increasing trend in the abundance of loggerheads, one
showed no discernible trend, and the two sites located in the northeast
U.S. showed a decreasing trend in abundance of loggerheads. Both NMFS
and FWS (2008) and TEWG (2009) stress that population trend results
currently available from in-water studies must be viewed with caution
given the limited number of sampling sites, size of sampling areas,
biases in sampling, and caveats associated with the analyses.
[[Page 12615]]
Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS
In the northeastern Atlantic, the Cape Verde Islands support the
only large nesting population of loggerheads in the region (Fretey,
2001). Nesting occurs at some level on most of the islands in the
archipelago with the largest nesting numbers reported from the island
of Boa Vista where studies have been ongoing since 1998 (Lazar and
Holcer, 1998; Lopez-Jurado et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001; Varo Cruz et
al., 2007; Loureiro, 2008; M. Tiwari, NMFS, personal communication,
2008). On Boa Vista Island, 833 and 1,917 nests were reported in 2001
and 2002 respectively from 3.1 km of beach (Varo Cruz et al., 2007) and
between 1998 and 2002 the local project had tagged 2,856 females (Varo
Cruz et al., 2007). More recently, in 2005, 5,396 nests and 3,121
females were reported from 9 km of beach on Boa Vista Island (Lopez-
Jurado et al., 2007). From Santiago Island, 66 nests were reported from
four beaches in 2007 and 53 nests from five beaches in 2008 (http://
tartarugascaboverde.wordpress.com/santiago). Due to limited data
available, a population trend cannot currently be determined for the
Cape Verde population; however, available information on the directed
killing of nesting females suggests that this nesting population is
under severe pressure and likely significantly reduced from historic
levels. Loureiro (2008) reported a reduction in nesting from historic
levels at Santiago Island, based on interviews with elders. Elsewhere
in the northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead nesting is non-existent or
occurs at very low levels. In Morocco, anecdotal reports indicated high
numbers of nesting turtles in southern Morocco (Pasteur and Bons,
1960), but a few recent surveys of the Atlantic coastline have
suggested a dramatic decline (Tiwari et al., 2001, 2006). A few nests
have been reported from Mauritania (Arvy et al., 2000) and Sierra Leone
(E. Aruna, Conservation Society of Sierra Leone, personal
communication, 2008). Some loggerhead nesting in Senegal and elsewhere
along the coast of West Africa has been reported; however, a more
recent and reliable confirmation is needed (Fretey, 2001).
Mediterranean Sea DPS
Nesting occurs throughout the central and eastern Mediterranean in
Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai,
Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia (Sternberg, 1981; Margaritoulis et al., 2003;
SWOT, 2007). In addition, sporadic nesting has been reported from the
western Mediterranean, but the vast majority of nesting (greater than
80 percent) occurs in Greece and Turkey (Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
The documented annual nesting of loggerheads in the Mediterranean
averages about 5,000 nests (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). There is no
discernible trend in nesting at the two longest monitoring projects in
Greece, Laganas Bay (Margaritoulis, 2005) and southern Kyparissia Bay
(Margaritoulis and Rees, 2001). However, the nesting trend at Rethymno
Beach, which hosts approximately 7 percent of all documented loggerhead
nesting in the Mediterranean, shows a highly significant declining
trend (1990-2004) (Margaritoulis et al., 2009). In Turkey, intermittent
nesting surveys have been conducted since the 1970s with more
consistent surveys conducted on some beaches only since the 1990s,
making it difficult to assess trends in nesting. Ilgaz et al. (2007)
reported a declining trend at Fethiye Beach from 1993-2004, this beach
represents approximately 10 percent of loggerhead nesting in Turkey
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
South Atlantic Ocean DPS
In the South Atlantic nesting occurs primarily along the mainland
coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro, with peak
concentrations in northern Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and northern
Rio de Janeiro with peak nesting along the coast of Bahia (Marcovaldi
and Chaloupka, 2007). Prior to 1980, loggerhead nesting populations in
Brazil were considered severely depleted. Recently, Marcovaldi and
Chaloupka (2007) reported a long-term, sustained increasing trend in
nesting abundance over a 16-year period from 1988 through 2003 on 22
surveyed beaches containing more than 75 percent of all loggerhead
nesting in Brazil. A total of 4,837 nests were reported from these
survey beaches for the 2003-2004 nesting season (Marcovaldi and
Chaloupka, 2007).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead DPSs
Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations
at 50 CFR part 424 set forth procedures for adding species to the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Species. Under section 4(a)
of the Act, we must determine if a species is threatened or endangered
because of any of the following five factors: (A) The present or
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or
range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence.
We have described the effects of various factors leading to the
decline of the loggerhead sea turtle in the original listing
determination (43 FR 32800; July 28, 1978) and other documents (NMFS
and USFWS, 1998, 2007, 2008). In making this finding, information
regarding the status of each of the nine loggerhead DPSs is considered
in relation to the five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA.
The reader is directed to section 5 of the Status Review for a more
detailed discussion of the factors affecting the nine identified
loggerhead DPSs. In section 5.1., a general description of the threats
that occur for all DPSs is presented under the relevant section 4(a)(1)
factor. In section 5.2, threats that are specific to a particular DPS
are presented by DPS under each section 4(a)(1) factor. That
information is incorporated here by reference; the following is a
summary of that information by DPS.
North Pacific Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
North Pacific result from coastal development and construction,
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting,
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction,
beach erosion, beach sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native
vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (NMFS and USFWS,
1998). Beaches in Japan where loggerheads nest are extensively eroded
due to dredging and dams constructed upstream, and are obstructed by
seawalls as well. Unfortunately, no quantitative studies have been
conducted to determine the impact to the loggerhead nesting populations
(Kamezaki et al., 2003). However, it is clear that loggerhead nesting
habitat has been impacted by erosion and extensive beach use by
tourists, both of which have contributed to unusually high mortality of
eggs and pre-emergent hatchlings at many Japanese rookeries (Matsuzawa,
2006).
Maehama Beach and Inakahama Beach on Yakushima in Kagoshima
Prefecture account for approximately 30 percent of loggerhead nesting
in Japan (Kamezaki et al., 2003), making Yakushima an important area
for nesting beach protection. However, the
[[Page 12616]]
beaches suffer from beach erosion and light pollution, especially from
passing cars, as well as from tourists encroaching on the nesting
beaches (Matsuzawa, 2006). Burgeoning numbers of visitors to beaches
may cause sand compaction and nest trampling. Egg and pre-emergent
hatchling mortality in Yakushima has been shown to be higher in areas
where public access is not restricted and is mostly attributed to human
foot traffic on nests (Kudo et al., 2003). Fences have been constructed
around areas where the highest densities of nests are laid; however,
there are still lower survival rates of eggs and pre-emergent
hatchlings due to excessive foot traffic (Ohmuta, 2006).
Loggerhead nesting habitat also has been lost at important
rookeries in Miyazaki due in part to port construction that involved
development of a groin of 1 kilometer from the coast into the sea, a
yacht harbor with breakwaters and artificial beach, and an airport,
causing erosion of beaches on both sides of the construction zone. This
once excellent nesting habitat for loggerheads is now seriously
threatened by erosion (Takeshita, 2006).
Minabe-Senri beach, Wakayama Prefecture is a ``submajor'' nesting
beach (in Kamezaki et al., 2003), but is one of the most important
rookeries on the main island of Japan (Honshu). Based on unpublished
data, Matsuzawa (2006) reported hatching success of unwashed-out
clutches at Minabe-Senri beach to be 24 percent in 1996, 50 percent in
1997, 53 percent in 1998, 48 percent in 1999, 62 percent in 2000, 41
percent in 2001, and 34 percent in 2002.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the North Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging,
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods
not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also deplete
invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In
many cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide with fishing zones. For
example, using aerial surveys and satellite telemetry, juvenile
foraging hotspots have recently been identified off the coast of Baja
California, Mexico; these hotspots overlap with intensive small-scale
fisheries (Peckham and Nichols, 2006; Peckham et al., 2007, 2008).
Comprehensive data currently are unavailable to fully understand how
intense harvesting of fish resources changes neritic and oceanic
ecosystems. Climate change also may result in future trophic changes,
thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the North Pacific Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that coastal development and coastal armoring on nesting beaches in
Japan are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
In Japan, the use of loggerhead meat for food is not popular except
historically in local communities such as Kochi and Wakayama
prefectures. In addition, egg collection was common in the coastal
areas during times of hunger and later by those who valued loggerhead
eggs as revitalizers or aphrodisiacs and acquired them on the black
market (in Kamezaki et al., 2003; Takeshita, 2006). Currently, due in
large part to research and conservation efforts throughout the country,
egg harvesting no longer represents a problem in Japan (Kamezaki et
al., 2003; Ohmuta, 2006; Takeshita, 2006). Laws were enacted in 1973 to
prohibit egg collection on Yakushima, and in 1988, the laws were
extended to the entire Kagoshima Prefecture, where two of the most
important loggerhead nesting beaches are protected (Matsuzawa, 2006).
Despite national laws, in many other countries where loggerheads
are found migrating through or foraging, the hunting of adult and
juvenile turtles is still a problem, as seen in Baja California Sur,
Mexico (Koch et al., 2006). Sea turtles have been protected in Mexico
since 1990, when a Federal law decreed the prohibition of the
``extraction, capture and pursuit of all species of sea turtle in
Federal waters or from beaches within national territory * * * [and a
requirement that] * * * any species of sea turtle incidentally captured
during the operations of any commercial fishery shall be returned to
the sea, independently of its physical state, dead or alive'' (in
Garcia-Martinez and Nichols, 2000). Despite the ban, studies have shown
that sea turtles continue to be caught, both indirectly in fisheries
and by a directed harvest of juvenile turtles. Turtles are principally
hunted using nets, longlines, and harpoons. While some are killed
immediately, others are kept alive in pens and transported to market.
The market for sea turtles consists of two types: the local market
(consumed locally) and the export market (sold to restaurants in Mexico
cities such as Tijuana, Ensenada, and Mexicali, and U.S. cities such as
San Diego and Tucson). Consumption is highest during holidays such as
Easter and Christmas (Wildcoast/Grupo Tortuguero de las Californias,
2003).
Based on a combination of analyses of stranding data, beach and sea
surveys, tag-recapture studies, and extensive interviews, all carried
out between June 1994 and January 1999, Nichols (2003) conservatively
estimated the annual take of sea turtles by various fisheries and
through direct harvest in the Baja California, Mexico, region. Sea
turtle mortality data collected between 1994 and 1999 indicated that
over 90 percent of sea turtles recorded dead were either green turtles
(30 percent of total) or loggerheads (61 percent of total), and signs
of human consumption were evident in over half of the specimens. These
studies resulted in an estimated 1,950 loggerheads killed annually,
affecting primarily juvenile size classes. The primary causes for
mortality were the incidental take in a variety of fishing gears and
direct harvest for consumption and [illegal] trade (Nichols, 2003).
From April 2000 to July 2003 throughout the Bahia Magdalena region
(including local beaches and towns), researchers found 1,945 sea turtle
carcasses, 44.1 percent of which were loggerheads. Of the sea turtle
carcasses found, slaughter for human consumption was the primary cause
of death for all species (63 percent for loggerheads). Over 90 percent
of all turtles found were juvenile turtles (Koch et al., 2006). As the
population of green turtles has declined in Baja California Sur waters,
poachers have switched to loggerheads (H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula,
personal communication, 2006).
In summary, overutilization for commercial purposes in both Japan
and Mexico likely was a factor that contributed to the historic
declines of this DPS. Current illegal harvest of loggerheads in Baja
California for human consumption continues as a significant threat to
the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the North Pacific Ocean. As in other nesting
locations, egg predation also exists in Japan, particularly by raccoon
dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides) and weasels (Mustela itatsi); however,
quantitative data do not exist to evaluate the impact on loggerhead
populations (Kamezaki et
[[Page 12617]]
al., 2003). Loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean also may be impacted
by harmful algal blooms.
In summary, although nest predation in Japan is known to occur,
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of
nest predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the North Pacific Ocean. The
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.1.4. of the Status Review
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Pacific Ocean is
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported
fisheries, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive
bycatch reduction technologies.
In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal development and coastal
armoring on nesting beaches in Japan continues as a substantial threat
(see Factor A). Coastal armoring, if left unaddressed, will become an
even more substantial threat as sea level rises. Recently, the Japan
Ministry of Environment has supported the local non-governmental
organization conducting turtle surveys and conservation on Yakushima in
establishing guidelines for surveys and minimizing impacts by humans
encroaching on the nesting beaches. As of the 2009 nesting season,
humans accessing Inakahama, Maehama, and Yotsuse beaches at night must
comply with the established rules (Y. Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle Association
of Japan, personal communication, 2009).
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of North Pacific Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threats from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development and
coastal armoring (Factor A) are significant relative to the persistence
of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Incidental capture in artisanal and commercial fisheries is a
significant threat to the survival of loggerheads in the North Pacific.
Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and demersal longlines, drift and
set gillnets, bottom and mid-water trawling, fishing dredges, pound
nets and weirs, haul and purse seines, pots and traps, and hook and
line gear.
Based on turtle sightings and capture rates reported in an April
1988 through March 1989 survey of fisheries research and training
vessels and extrapolated to total longline fleet effort by the Japanese
fleet in 1978, Nishemura and Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that 21,200
turtles, including greens, leatherbacks, loggerheads, olive ridleys,
and hawksbills, were captured annually by Japanese tuna longliners in
the western Pacific and South China Sea, with a reported mortality of
approximately 12,300 turtles per year. Using commercial tuna longline
logbooks, research vessel data, and questionnaires, Nishemura and
Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that for every 10,000 hooks in the western
Pacific and South China Sea, one turtle is captured, with a mortality
rate of 42 percent. Although species-specific information on the
bycatch is not available, vessels reported that 36 percent of the
sightings of turtles in locations that overlap with these commercial
fishing grounds were loggerheads.
Caution should be used in interpreting the results of Nishemura and
Nakahigashi (1990), including estimates of sea turtle take rate (per
number of hooks) and resultant mortality rate, and estimates of annual
take by the fishery, for the following reasons: (1) The data collected
were based on observations by training and research vessels, logbooks,
and a questionnaire (i.e., hypothetical), and do not represent actual,
substantiated logged or observed catch of sea turtles by the fishery;
(2) the authors assumed that turtles were distributed homogeneously;
and (3) the authors used only one year (1978) to estimate total effort
and distribution of the Japanese tuna longline fleet. Although the data
and analyses provided by Nishemura and Nakahigashi (1990) are
conjectural, longliners fishing in the Pacific have significantly
impacted and, with the current level of effort, probably will continue
to have significant impacts on sea turtle populations.
Foreign high-seas driftnet fishing in the North Pacific Ocean for
squid, tuna, and billfish ended with a United Nations moratorium in
December 1992. Except for observer data collected in 1990-1991, there
is virtually no information on the incidental take of sea turtle
species by the driftnet fisheries prior to the moratorium. The high-
seas squid driftnet fishery in the North Pacific was observed in Japan,
Korea, and Taiwan, while the large-mesh fisheries targeting tuna and
billfish were observed in the Japanese fleet (1990-1991) and the
Taiwanese fleet (1990). A combination of observer data and fleet effort
statistics indicate that 2,986 loggerhead turtles were entangled by the
combined fleets of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan from June 1990 through May
1991, when all fleets were monitored. Of these incidental
entanglements, an estimated 805 loggerheads were killed (27 percent
mortality rate) (Wetherall, 1997). Data on size composition of the
turtles caught in the high-seas driftnet fisheries also were collected
by observers. The majority of loggerheads measured by observers were
juvenile (Wetherall, 1997). The cessation of high-seas driftnet fishing
in 1992 should have reduced the incidental take of marine turtles.
However, nations involved in driftnet fishing may have shifted to other
gear types (e.g., pelagic or demersal longlines, coastal gillnets);
this shift in gear types could have resulted
[[Page 12618]]
in either similar or increased turtle bycatch and associated mortality.
These rough mortality estimates for a single fishing season provide
only a narrow glimpse of the impacts of the driftnet fishery on sea
turtles, and a full assessment of impacts would consider the turtle
mortality generated by the driftnet fleets over their entire range.
Unfortunately, comprehensive data are lacking, but the observer data do
indicate the possible magnitude of turtle mortality given the best
information available. Wetherall et al. (1993) speculate that the
actual mortality of sea turtles may have been between 2,500 and 9,000
per year, with most of the mortalities being loggerheads taken in the
Japanese and Taiwanese large-mesh fisheries.
While a comprehensive, quantitative assessment of the impacts of
the North Pacific driftnet fishery on turtles is impossible without a
better understanding of turtle population abundance, genetic
identities, exploitation history, and population dynamics, it is likely
that the mortality inflicted by the driftnet fisheries in 1990 and in
prior years was significant (Wetherall et al., 1993), and the effects
may still be evident in sea turtle populations today. The high
mortality of juvenile turtles and reproductive adults in the high-seas
driftnet fishery has probably altered the current age structure
(especially if certain age groups were more vulnerable to driftnet
fisheries) and therefore diminished or limited the reproductive
potential of affected sea turtle populations.
Extensive ongoing studies regarding loggerhead mortality and
bycatch have been administered off the coast of Baja California Sur,
Mexico. The location and timing of loggerhead strandings documented in
2003-2005 along a 43-kilometer beach (Playa San Lazaro) indicated
bycatch in local small-scale fisheries. In order to corroborate this,
in 2005, researchers observed two small-scale fleets operating closest
to an area identified as a high-use area for loggerheads. One fleet,
based out of Puerto Lopez-Mateos, fished primarily for halibut using
bottom set gillnets, soaking from 20 to 48 hours. This fleet consisted
of up to 75 boats in 2005, and, on a given day, 9 to 40 vessels fished
the deep area (32-45 meter depths). During a 2-month period, 11
loggerheads were observed taken in 73 gillnet day-trips, with eight of
those loggerheads landed dead (observed mortality rate of 73 percent).
The other fleet, based in Santa Rosa, fished primarily for demersal
sharks using bottom-set longlines baited with tuna or mackerel and left
to soak for 20 to 48 hours. In 2005, the fleet numbered only five to
six vessels. During the seven daylong bottom-set longline trips
observed, 26 loggerheads were taken, with 24 of them landed dead
(observed mortality rate of 92 percent). Based on these observations,
researchers estimated that in 2005 at least 299 loggerheads died in the
bottom-set gillnet fishery and at least 680 loggerheads died in the
bottom-set longline fishery. This annual bycatch estimate of
approximately 1,000 loggerheads is considered a minimum and is also
supported by shoreline mortality surveys and informal interviews
(Peckham et al., 2007).
These results suggest that incidental capture at Baja California
Sur is one of the most significant sources of mortality identified for
the North Pacific loggerhead population and underscores the importance
of reducing bycatch in small-scale fisheries.
In the U.S. Pacific, longline fisheries targeting swordfish and
tuna and drift gillnet fisheries targeting swordfish have been
identified as the primary fisheries of concern for loggerheads. Bycatch
of loggerhead turtles in these fisheries has been significantly reduced
as a result of time-area closures, required gear modifications, and
hard caps imposed on turtle bycatch, with 100 percent observer coverage
in certain areas.
The California/Oregon (CA/OR) drift gillnet fishery targets
swordfish and thresher shark off the west coast of the United States.
The fishery has been observed by NMFS since July 1990 and currently
averages 20 percent. From July 1990 to January 2000, the CA/OR drift
gillnet fishery was observed to incidentally capture 17 loggerheads (12
released alive, 1 injured, and 4 killed). Based on a worst-case
scenario, NMFS estimated that a maximum of 33 loggerheads in a given
year could be incidentally taken by the CA/OR drift gillnet fleet. Sea
turtle mortality rates for hard-shelled species were estimated to be 32
percent (NMFS, 2000).
In 2000, analyses conducted under the mandates of the ESA showed
that the CA/OR drift gillnet fishery was taking excessive numbers of
sea turtles, such that the fishery ``jeopardized the continued
existence of'' loggerheads and leatherbacks. In this case, the
consulting agency (NMFS) was required to provide a reasonable and
prudent alternative to the action (i.e., the fishery). In order to
reduce the likelihood of interactions with loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS
has regulations in place to close areas to drift gillnet fishing off
southern California during forecasted or occurring El Ni[ntilde]o
events from June 1 through August 31, when loggerheads are likely to
move into the area from the Pacific coast of Baja California following
a preferred prey species, pelagic red crabs.
Prior to 2000, the Hawaii-based longline fishery targeted highly
migratory species north of Hawaii using gear largely used by fleets
around the world. From 1994-1999, the fishery was estimated to take
between 369 and 501 loggerheads per year, with between 64 and 88
mortalities per year (NMFS, 2000). Currently, the Hawaii-based shallow
longline fishery targeting swordfish is strictly regulated such that an
annual take of 17 loggerheads is authorized for the fishery, beginning
in 2004, when the fishery was re-opened after being closed for several
years. In 2004 and 2005, the fishing year was completed without
reaching the turtle take levels (1 and 10 loggerheads were captured,
respectively, with fleets operating with 100 percent observer
coverage). However, in 2006, 17 loggerheads were taken, forcing the
fishery to be shut down early. In 2007, 15 loggerheads were taken by
the fishery. Most loggerheads were released alive (NMFS-Pacific Islands
Regional Office, Observer Database Public Web site, 2008).
Recent investigations off the coast of Japan, particularly focused
off the main islands of Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu, have revealed a
major threat to the more mature stage classes of loggerheads
(approximately 70-80 cm SCL) due to pound net fisheries set offshore of
the nesting beaches and in the coastal foraging areas. While pound nets
constitute the third largest fishery in terms of metric tons of fish
caught in Japan, they account for the majority of loggerhead bycatch by
Japanese fisheries. Open-type pound nets studied in an area off Shikoku
were shown to take loggerheads as the most prevalent sea turtle species
caught but had lower mortality rates (less than 15 percent), primarily
because turtles could reach the surface to breathe. Middle layer and
bottom-type pound nets in particular have high rates of mortality
(nearly 100 percent), because the nets are submerged and sea turtles
are unable to reach the surface. Estimates of loggerhead mortality in
one area studied between April 2006 and September 2007 were on the
order of 100 individuals. While the fishing industry has an interest in
changing its gear to open-type, it is very expensive, and the support
from the Japanese government is limited (T. Ishihara, Sea Turtle
Association of Japan, personal communication, 2007). Nonetheless, the
BRT recognizes that coastal pound net fisheries off Japan may pose a
[[Page 12619]]
significant threat to the North Pacific population of loggerheads.
Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries in the North
Pacific Ocean on loggerhead sea turtles is very difficult given the low
level of observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by
countries that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to
quantify the effect of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads, and
annual estimates of bycatch were on the order of over 10,000 sea
turtles, with as many as 2,600 individual loggerheads killed annually
through immediate or delayed mortality as a result of interacting with
the gear (Lewison et al., 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the North Pacific
Ocean. For example, Matsuzawa et al. (2002) found heat-related
mortality of pre-emergent hatchlings in Minabe Senri Beach and
concluded that this population is vulnerable to even small temperature
increases resulting from global warming because sand temperatures
already exceed the optimal thermal range for incubation. Recently,
Chaloupka et al. (2008) used generalized additive regression modeling
and autoregressive-prewhitened cross-correlation analysis to consider
whether changes in regional ocean temperatures affect long-term nesting
population dynamics for Pacific loggerheads from primary nesting
assemblages in Japan and Australia. Researchers chose four nesting
sites with a generally long time series to model, two in Japan (Kamouda
rookery, declining population, and Yakushima rookery, generally
increasing in the last 20 years), and two in Australia (Woongarra
rookery, generally declining through early 1990s and beginning to
recover, and Wreck Island rookery, which is generally declining).
Analysis of 51 years of mean annual sea surface temperatures around two
core foraging areas off Japan and eastern Australia, showed a general
warming of the oceans in these regions. In general, nesting abundance
for all four rookeries was inversely related to sea surface
temperatures; that is, higher sea surface temperatures during the
previous year in the core foraging area resulted in lower summer season
nesting at all rookeries. Given that cooler ocean temperatures are
generally associated with increased productivity and that female sea
turtles generally require at least 1 year to acquire sufficient fat
stores for vitellogenesis to occur in the foraging grounds, as well as
the necessary energy required for migration, any lag in productivity
due to warmer temperatures has physiological basis. Over the long term,
warming ocean temperatures could therefore lead to lower productivity
and prey abundance, and thus reduced nesting and recruitment by Pacific
loggerheads (Chaloupka et al., 2008).
Other anthropogenic impacts include boat strikes, ingestion of and
entanglement in marine debris, and entrainment in coastal power plants.
Natural environmental events, such as cyclones and hurricanes, may
affect loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean. Typhoons also have been
shown to cause severe beach erosion and negatively affect hatching
success at many loggerhead nesting beaches in Japan, especially in
areas already prone to erosion. For example, during the 2004 season,
the Japanese archipelago suffered a record number of typhoons and many
nests were drowned or washed out. Extreme sand temperatures at nesting
beaches also create highly skewed female sex ratios of hatchlings or
threaten the health of hatchlings. Without human intervention to
protect clutches against some of these natural threats, many of these
nests would be lost (Matsuzawa, 2006).
In summary, we find that the North Pacific Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Pacific
Ocean, including the coastal pound net fisheries off Japan, coastal
fisheries impacting juvenile foraging populations off Baja California,
Mexico, and undescribed fisheries likely affecting loggerheads in the
South China Sea and the North Pacific Ocean, is a significant threat to
the persistence of this DPS.
South Pacific Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
South Pacific result from coastal development and construction,
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting,
beachfront lighting, vehicular traffic, beach erosion, beach pollution,
removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation
(NMFS and USFWS, 1998; Limpus, 2009).
Removal or destruction of native dune vegetation, which enhances
beach stability and acts as an integral buffer zone between land and
sea, results in erosion of nesting habitat. Preliminary studies on
nesting beaches in New Caledonia include local oral histories that
attribute the decrease in loggerhead nesting to the removal of
vegetation for construction purposes and subsequent beach erosion
(Limpus et al., 2006).
Beach armoring presents a barrier to nesting in the South Pacific.
On the primary nesting beach in New Caledonia, a rock wall was
constructed to prevent coastal erosion, and sea turtle nesting attempts
have been unsuccessful. Local residents are seeking authorization to
extend the wall further down the beach (Limpus et al., 2006).
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the South Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging,
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Climate change,
for instance, may result in future trophic changes, thus impacting
loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the South Pacific Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that coastal armoring and removal of native dune vegetation on nesting
beaches are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Legislation in Australia outlaws the harvesting of loggerheads by
indigenous peoples (Limpus et al., 2006). Despite national laws, in
many areas the poaching of eggs and hunting of adult and juvenile
turtles is still a problem, and Limpus (2009) suggests that the harvest
rate of loggerheads by indigenous hunters, both within Australia and in
neighboring countries, is on the order of 40 turtles per year.
Preliminary studies suggest that local harvesting in New Caledonia
constitutes about 5 percent of the nesting population (Limpus et al.,
2006). Loggerheads also are consumed after being captured incidentally
in high-seas fisheries of the southeastern Pacific (Alfaro-Shigueto et
al., 2006), and occasionally may be the product of illegal trade
throughout the region.
In summary, current illegal harvest of loggerheads in Australia and
New Caledonia for human consumption, as well as the consumption of
loggerheads incidentally taken in high-seas fisheries,
[[Page 12620]]
continues as a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the South Pacific. While the prevalence of
fibropapillomatosis in most loggerhead populations is thought to be
small, an exception is in Moreton Bay, Australia, where 4.4 percent of
the 320 loggerheads captured exhibited the disease during 1990-1992
(Limpus et al., 1994). A subsequent study also found a high prevalence
of fibropapillomatosis in the area (Quackenbush et al., 2000).
Predation on nests and hatchlings by terrestrial vertebrates is a
major problem at loggerhead rookeries in the South Pacific. At mainland
rookeries in eastern Australia, for example, the introduced fox (Vulpes
vulpes) has been the most significant predator on loggerhead eggs
(Limpus, 1985, 2009). Although this has been minimized in recent years
(to less than 5 percent; Limpus, 2009), researchers believe the earlier
egg loss will greatly impact recruitment to this nesting population in
the early 21st century (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). Predation on
hatchlings by crabs and diurnal birds is also a threat (Limpus, 2009).
In New Caledonia, feral dogs pose a predation threat to nesting
loggerheads, and thus far no management has been implemented (Limpus et
al., 2006).
In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Although current fox
predation levels in eastern Australia are greatly reduced from historic
levels, predation by other species still occurs, and predation by feral
dogs in New Caledonia has not been addressed. In addition, a high
prevalence of the fibropapillomatosis disease exists in Moreton Bay,
Australia. Therefore, predation and disease are believed to be a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the South Pacific Ocean. The
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.2.4. of the Status Review
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation
(Hykle, 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Pacific Ocean is
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported
fisheries, the continued expansion of artisanal fleets in the
southeastern Pacific, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive
bycatch reduction technologies.
In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal armoring and erosion
resulting from the removal of native dune vegetation on nesting beaches
continues as a substantial threat (see Factor A). Coastal armoring, if
left unaddressed, will become an even more substantial threat as sea
level rises.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of South Pacific Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal armoring and
removal of native dune vegetation (Factor A) is significant relative to
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Incidental capture in artisanal and commercial fisheries is a
significant threat to the survival of loggerheads throughout the South
Pacific. The primary gear types involved in these interactions include
longlines, driftnets, set nets, and trawl fisheries. These are employed
by both artisanal and industrial fleets, and target a wide variety of
species including tunas, sharks, sardines, swordfish, and mahi mahi.
In the southwestern Pacific, bottom trawling gear has been a
contributing factor to the decline in the eastern Australian loggerhead
population (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). The northern Australian prawn
fishery (NPF) is made up of both a banana prawn fishery and a tiger
prawn fishery, and extends from Cape York, Queensland (142[deg] E) to
Cape Londonberry, Western Australia (127[deg] E). The fishery is one of
the most valuable in all of Australia and in 2000 comprised 121 vessels
fishing approximately 16,000 fishing days (Robins et al., 2002a). In
2000, the use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) in the NPF was made
mandatory, due in part to several factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft
Australian Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles, (2) requirement of the
Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for
Commonwealth fisheries to become ecologically sustainable, and (3) the
1996 U.S. import embargo on wild-caught prawns taken in a fishery
without adequate turtle bycatch management practices (Robins et al.,
2002a). Data primarily were collected by volunteer fishers who were
trained extensively in the collection of scientific data on sea turtles
caught as bycatch in their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in this
fishery, the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as
bycatch, with a mortality rate of an estimated 40 percent due to
drowning, injuries, or being returned to the water comatose (Poiner and
Harris, 1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in effect, the
annual bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to less than 200
sea turtles per year, with a mortality rate of approximately 22 percent
(based on recent years). This lower mortality rate also may be based on
better sea turtle handling techniques adopted by the fleet. In general,
loggerheads were the third most common sea turtle taken in this
fishery.
Loggerheads also are taken by longline fisheries operating out of
[[Page 12621]]
Australia (Limpus, 2009). For example, Robins et al. (2002b) estimate
that approximately 400 turtles are killed annually in Australian
pelagic longline fishery operations. Of this annual estimate,
leatherbacks accounted for over 60 percent of this total, while
unidentified hardshelled turtles accounted for the remaining species.
Therefore, the effect of this longline fishery on loggerheads is
unknown.
Loggerheads also have been the most common turtle species captured
in shark control programs in Australia (Kidston et al., 1992; Limpus,
2009). From 1998-2002, a total of 232 loggerheads was captured with 195
taken on drum lines and 37 taken in nets, both with a low level of
direct mortality (Limpus, 2009).
In the southeastern Pacific, significant bycatch has been reported
in artisanal gillnet and longline shark and mahi mahi fisheries
operating out of Peru (Kelez et al., 2003; Alfaro-Shigueto et al.,
2006) and, to a lesser extent, Chile (Donoso and Dutton, 2006). The
fishing industry in Peru is the second largest economic activity in the
country, and, over the past few years, the longline fishery has rapidly
increased. Currently, nearly 600 longline vessels fish in the winter
and over 1,300 vessels fish in the summer. During an observer program
in 2003/2004, 588 sets were observed during 60 trips, and 154 sea
turtles were taken as bycatch. Loggerheads were the species most often
caught (73.4 percent). Of the loggerheads taken, 68 percent were
entangled and 32 percent were hooked. Of the two fisheries, sea turtle
bycatch was highest during the mahi mahi season, with 0.597 turtles/
1,000 hooks, while the shark fishery caught 0.356 turtles/1,000 hooks
(Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008b). A separate study by Kelez et al.
(2003) reported that approximately 30 percent of all turtles bycaught
in Peru were loggerheads. In many cases, loggerheads are kept on board
for human consumption; therefore, the mortality rate in this artisanal
longline fishery is likely high because sea turtles are retained for
future consumption or sale.
Data on loggerhead bycatch in Chile are limited to the industrial
swordfish fleet. Since 1990, fleet size has ranged from 7 to 23 vessels
with a mean of approximately 14 vessels per year. These vessels fish up
to and over 1,000 nautical miles along the Chilean coast with
mechanized sets numbering approximately 1,200 hooks (M. Donoso, ONG
Pacifico Laud--Chile, personal communication, 2007). Loggerhead bycatch
is present in Chilean fleets; however, the catch rate is substantially
lower than that reported for Peru (P. Dutton, NMFS, and M. Donoso, ONG
Pacifico Laud--Chile, unpublished data).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other threats such as debris ingestion, boat strikes, and port
dredging also impact loggerheads in the South Pacific, although these
threats have been minimized in recent years due to a variety of
legislative actions (Limpus, 2009). Loggerhead mortality resulting from
dredging of channels in Queensland is a persistent, albeit minor
problem. From 1999-2002, the average annual reported mortality was 1.7
turtles per year (range = 1-3) from port dredging operations (Limpus,
2009). Climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact
loggerheads in the South Pacific Ocean, yet the impact of these threats
has not been quantified.
Natural environmental events, such as cyclones or hurricanes, may
affect loggerheads in the South Pacific Ocean. These types of events
may disrupt loggerhead nesting activity, albeit on a temporary scale.
Chaloupka et al. (2008) demonstrated that nesting abundance of
loggerheads in Australia was inversely related to sea surface
temperatures, and suggested that a long-term warming trend in the South
Pacific may be adversely impacting the recovery potential of this
population.
In summary, we find that the South Pacific Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Pacific
Ocean is a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
North Indian Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
North Indian Ocean result from coastal development and construction,
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, beach pollution,
removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (E.
Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008).
The primary loggerhead nesting beaches of this DPS are at Masirah
Island, Oman, and are still relatively undeveloped but now facing
increasing development pressures. Newly paved roads closely paralleling
most of the Masirah Island coast are bringing newly constructed highway
lights (E. Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008) and greater
access to nesting beaches by the public. Light pollution from the
military installation at Masirah Island also is evident at the most
densely nested northern end of the island and is a likely cause of
hatchling misorientation and nesting female disturbance (E. Possardt,
USFWS, personal observation, 2008). Beach driving occurs on most of the
major beaches outside the military installation. This vehicular traffic
creates ruts that obstruct hatchling movements (Mann, 1977; Hosier et
al., 1981; Cox et al., 1994; Baldwin, 1992), tramples nests, and
destroys vegetation and dune formation processes, which exacerbates
light pollution effects. Free ranging camels, sheep, and goats
overgraze beach vegetation, which impedes natural dune formation (E.
Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008). Development of a new
hotel on a major loggerhead nesting beach at Masirah Island is near
completion and, although not yet approved, there are plans for a major
resort at an important loggerhead nesting beach on one of the Halaniyat
Islands. Armoring structures common to many developed beaches
throughout the world are not yet evident on the major loggerhead
nesting beaches of this DPS.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the North Indian Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging,
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods
not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also deplete
invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In
many cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide with fishing zones. There
has been an apparent growth in artisanal and commercial fisheries in
waters surrounding Masirah Island (Baldwin, 1992). Climate change also
may result in future trophic changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey
abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the North Indian Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that coastal development, beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach
driving on nesting beaches in Oman are significant threats to the
persistence of this DPS.
[[Page 12622]]
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
The use of loggerhead meat for food in Oman is not legal or
popular. However, routine egg collection on Masirah Island does occur
(Baldwin, 1992). The extent of egg collection as estimated by Masirah
rangers and local residents is approximately 2,000 clutches per year
(less than 10 percent).
In summary, although the collection of eggs for human consumption
is known to occur, it does not appear to be a significant threat to the
persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the North Indian Ocean. Natural egg predation on
Oman loggerhead nesting beaches undoubtedly occurs, but is not well
documented or believed to be significant. Predation on hatchlings by
Arabian red fox (Vulpes vulpes arabica), ghost crabs (Ocypode saratan),
night herons (Nycticorax nycticorax), and gulls (Larus spp.) likely
occurs. While quantitative data do not exist to evaluate these impacts
on the North Indian Ocean loggerhead population, they are not likely to
be significant.
In summary, although nest predation is known to occur and hatchling
predation is likely, quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the
degree of impact of nest predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the North Indian Ocean. The
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.3.4. of the Status Review
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Impacts to loggerheads and loggerhead nesting habitat from coastal
development, beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach driving on
nesting beaches in Oman is substantial (see Factor A). In addition,
fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Indian Ocean, although
not quantified, is a likely substantial (see Factor E). Threats to
nesting beaches are likely to increase, which would require additional
and widespread nesting beach protection efforts (Factor A). Little is
currently being done to monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and
oceanic fisheries in the range of the North Indian Ocean DPS; this
mortality is likely to continue and increase with expected additional
fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E).
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of North Indian Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development,
beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach driving (Factor A) is
significant relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
The magnitude of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles in
artisanal and commercial fisheries in the North Indian Ocean is
difficult to assess. A bycatch survey administered off the coast of Sri
Lanka between September 1999 and November 2000 reported 5,241 total
turtle entanglements, of which 1,310 were loggerheads, between
Kalpitiya and Kirinda (Kapurusinghe and Saman, 2001; Kapurusinghe and
Cooray, 2002). Sea turtle bycatch has been reported in driftnet and set
gillnets, longlines, trawls, and hook and line gear (Kapurusinghe and
Saman, 2001; Kapurusinghe and Cooray, 2002; Lewison et al., 2004).
Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads
in the North Indian Ocean is difficult given the low level of observer
coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by countries that
have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to quantify the
effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads globally (Lewison et
al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch data available from the
North Indian Ocean to use in their assessment, extrapolations that
considered bycatch data for the Pacific and Atlantic basins gave a
conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured in the Indian Ocean
in the year 2000. Interviews with rangers at Masirah Island reveal that
shark gillnets capture many loggerheads off nesting beaches during the
nesting season. As many as 60 boats are involved in this fishery with
up to 6 km of gillnets being fished daily from June through October
along the Masirah Island coast. Rangers reported one example of 17
loggerheads in one net (E. Possardt, USFWS, personal communication,
2008).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or
entanglement in marine debris, as well as entrainment in coastal power
plants, likely apply to loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. Similar
to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level rise have the
potential to impact loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. This
includes beach erosion and loss from rising sea levels, skewed
hatchling sex ratios from rising beach incubation temperatures, and
abrupt disruption of ocean currents used for natural dispersal during
the complex life cycle. Climate change impacts could have profound
long-term impacts on nesting populations in the North Indian Ocean, but
it is not possible to quantify the potential impacts at this point in
time.
Natural environmental events, such as cyclones, tsunamis, and
hurricanes, affect loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. For example,
during the 2007 season, Oman suffered a rare typhoon. In general,
however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they may affect
loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally localized
and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting
seasons.
In summary, we find that the North Indian Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea
[[Page 12623]]
turtle is negatively affected by both natural and manmade impacts as
described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we find that fishery
bycatch that occurs throughout the North Indian Ocean, although not
quantified, is a likely a significant threat to the persistence of this
DPS.
Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
The primary loggerhead nesting beaches for this DPS occur in
Australia on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al.,
2003), which are undeveloped. Dirk Hartog Island is soon to become part
of the National Park System.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel
dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change.
Fishing methods not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also
deplete invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem
dynamics. In many cases, loggerhead foraging areas coincide with
fishing zones. Climate change also may result in future trophic
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of
the loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in
its marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not
available to assess the significance of these threats to the
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Legislation in Australia outlaws the harvesting of loggerheads by
indigenous peoples (Limpus et al., 2006). Dirk Hartog Island and Murion
Islands are largely uninhabited, and poaching of eggs and turtles is
likely negligible.
In summary, harvest of eggs and turtles is believed to be
negligible and does not appear to be a threat to the persistence of
this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. On the North
West Cape and the beaches of the Ningaloo coast of mainland Australia,
a long established feral European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) population
preyed heavily on eggs and is thought to be responsible for the lower
numbers of nesting turtles on the mainland beaches (Baldwin et al.,
2003). The fox populations have been eradicated on Dirk Hartog Island
and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003).
In summary, nest predation likely was a factor that contributed to
the historic decline of this DPS. However, foxes have been eradicated
on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands, and current fox predation
levels on mainland beaches in western Australia are greatly reduced
from historic levels. Therefore, predation no longer appears to be a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Southeast Indo-Pacific
Ocean. The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.4.4. of the
Status Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle
(2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of
these international instruments. The problems with existing
international treaties are often that they have not realized their full
potential, do not include some key countries, do not specifically
address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a
sovereign authority to enforce environmental regulations. The
ineffectiveness of international treaties and national legislation is
oftentimes due to the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to
implement and enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is
available in a special 2002 issue of the Journal of International
Wildlife Law and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle
Conservation (Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southeast Indo-Pacific
Ocean, although not quantified, is a likely substantial (see Factor E).
With the exception of efforts to reduce loggerhead bycatch in the
northern Australian prawn fishery, little is currently being done to
monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and oceanic fisheries in the
range of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS. This mortality is likely
to continue and increase with expected additional fishing effort from
commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E). Although national and
international governmental and non-governmental entities are currently
working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions
have been implemented, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can
be sufficiently reduced in the near future due to the challenges of
mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported fisheries, the
continued expansion of artisanal fleets, the lack of comprehensive
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of Southeast Indo-Pacific
Ocean loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are
not being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads.
We find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
The extent of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles in
artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
is unknown. Sea turtles are caught in pelagic and demersal longlines,
gillnets, trawls, seines, and pots and traps (Environment Australia,
2003). There is evidence of significant historic bycatch from prawn
fisheries, which may have depleted nesting populations long before
nesting surveys were initiated in the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads
in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean is very difficult given the low
level of observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by
countries that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to
quantify the effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads
globally (Lewison et al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch
data available from the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean to use in their
assessment, extrapolations that considered bycatch data for the Pacific
and Atlantic basins gave a conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads
captured
[[Page 12624]]
in the Indian Ocean in the year 2000. Loggerheads are known to be taken
by Japanese longline fisheries operating off of Western Australia
(Limpus, 2009). The effect of the longline fishery on loggerheads in
the Indian Ocean is largely unknown (Lewison et al., 2004).
The northern Australian prawn fishery (NPF) is made up of both a
banana prawn fishery and a tiger prawn fishery, and extends from Cape
York, Queensland (142[deg] E) to Cape Londonberry, Western Australia
(127[deg] E). The fishery is one of the most valuable in all of
Australia and in 2000 comprised 121 vessels fishing approximately
16,000 fishing days (Robins et al., 2002a). In 2000, the use of turtle
excluder devices in the NPF was made mandatory, due in part to several
factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft Australian Recovery Plan for
Marine Turtles, (2) requirement of the Australian Environment
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for Commonwealth fisheries
to become ecologically sustainable, and (3) the 1996 U.S. import
embargo on wild-caught prawns taken in a fishery without adequate
turtle bycatch management practices (Robins et al., 2002a). Data
primarily were collected by volunteer fishers who were trained
extensively in the collection of scientific data on sea turtles caught
as bycatch in their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in this fishery,
the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as bycatch,
with a mortality rate of an estimated 40 percent, due to drowning,
injuries, or being returned to the water comatose (Poiner and Harris,
1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in effect, the annual
bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to less than 200 sea
turtles per year, with a mortality rate of approximately 22 percent
(based on recent years). This lower mortality rate also may be based on
better sea turtle handling techniques adopted by the fleet. In general,
loggerheads were the third most common sea turtle taken in this
fishery.
Loggerheads also have been the most common turtle species captured
in shark control programs in Pacific Australia (Kidston et al., 1992;
Limpus, 2009); however, the Western Australian demersal longline
fishery for sharks has no recorded interaction with loggerheads. From
1998-2002, a total of 232 loggerheads were captured, with 195 taken on
drum lines and 37 taken in nets, both with a low level of direct
mortality (Limpus, 2009).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or
entanglement in marine debris, likely apply to loggerheads in the
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. Similar to other areas of the world,
climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact
loggerheads in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. This includes beach
erosion and loss from rising sea levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios
from rising beach incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of
ocean currents used for natural dispersal during the complex life
cycle. Climate change impacts could have profound long-term impacts on
nesting populations in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, but it is not
possible to quantify the potential impacts at this point in time.
Natural environmental events, such as cyclones and hurricanes, may
affect loggerheads in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. In general,
however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they may affect
loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally localized
and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting
seasons.
In summary, we find that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of
the loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch, particularly from the northern Australian
prawn fishery, was a factor that contributed to the historic decline of
this DPS. Although loggerhead bycatch has been greatly reduced in the
northern Australian prawn fishery, bycatch that occurs elsewhere in the
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, although not quantified, is likely a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
Southwest Indian Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
All nesting beaches within South Africa are within protected areas
(Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, nesting beaches in the Maputo
Special Reserve (approximately 60 km of nesting beach) and in the
Paradise Islands are within protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003;
Costa et al., 2007). There are no protected areas for loggerheads in
Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS include fishing practices, channel
dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change.
Fishing methods not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also
deplete invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem
dynamics. In many cases, loggerhead foraging areas coincide with
fishing zones. Climate change also may result in future trophic
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in its
marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not
available to assess the significance of these threats to the
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, on the east coast of Africa,
subsistence hunting by local people is a continued threat to
loggerheads (Baldwin et al., 2003). Illegal hunting of marine turtles
and egg harvesting remains a threat in Mozambique as well (Louro et
al., 2006).
In summary, harvest of loggerheads and eggs for human consumption
on the east coast of Africa, although not quantified, is likely a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the Southwest Indian Ocean. Side striped jackals
(Canis adustus) and honey badgers (Melivora capensis) are known to
depredate nests (Baldwin et al., 2003).
In summary, although nest predation is known to occur, quantitative
data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of nest
predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Southwest Indian Ocean.
The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.5.4. of the Status
Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002)
and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address
[[Page 12625]]
sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign
authority to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation
(Hykle, 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian Ocean,
although not quantified, is likely substantial (see Factor E). This
mortality is likely to continue and may increase with expected
additional fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries.
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of Southwest Indian Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
The full extent of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles
in artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southwest Indian Ocean is
unknown. Sea turtles are caught in demersal and pelagic longlines,
trawls, gillnets, and seines (Petersen, 2005; Louro et al., 2006;
Petersen et al., 2007, 2009; Costa et al., 2007; Fennessy and Isaksen,
2007). There is evidence of significant historic bycatch from prawn
fisheries, which may have depleted nesting populations long before
nesting surveys were initiated in the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads
in the Southwest Indian Ocean is very difficult given the low level of
observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by countries
that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to quantify the
effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads globally (Lewison et
al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch data available from the
Southwest Indian Ocean to use in their assessment, extrapolations that
considered bycatch data for the Pacific and Atlantic basins gave a
conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured in the Indian Ocean
in the year 2000. The effect of the longline fishery on loggerheads in
the Indian Ocean is largely unknown (Lewison et al., 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or
entanglement in marine debris, likely apply to loggerheads in the
Southwest Indian Ocean. Similar to other areas of the world, climate
change and sea level rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in
the Southwest Indian Ocean. This includes beach erosion and loss from
rising sea levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios from rising beach
incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of ocean currents used
for natural dispersal during the complex life cycle. Climate change
impacts could have profound long-term impacts on nesting populations in
the Southwest Indian Ocean, but it is not possible to quantify the
potential impacts at this point in time.
Natural environmental events, such as cyclones, tsunamis and
hurricanes, may affect loggerheads in the Southwest Indian Ocean. In
general, however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they
may affect loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally
localized and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple
nesting seasons.
In summary, we find that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian
Ocean, although not quantified, is likely a significant threat to the
persistence of this DPS.
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
Northwest Atlantic results from coastal development and construction,
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting,
placement of nearshore shoreline stabilization structures, beachfront
lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, beach erosion, beach sand
placement, removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native
vegetation (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
Numerous beaches in the southeastern United States are eroding due
to both natural (e.g., storms, sea level changes, waves, shoreline
geology) and anthropogenic (e.g., construction of armoring structures,
groins, and jetties; coastal development; inlet dredging) factors. Such
shoreline erosion leads to a loss of nesting habitat for sea turtles.
In the southeastern United States, numerous erosion control
structures (e.g., bulkheads, seawalls, soil retaining walls, rock
revetments, sandbags, geotextile tubes) that create barriers to nesting
have been constructed. The proportion of coastline that is armored is
approximately 18 percent (239 km) in Florida (Clark, 1992; Schroeder
and Mosier, 2000; Witherington et al., 2006), 9 percent (14 km) in
Georgia (M. Dodd, GDNR, personal communication, 2009), 12 percent (29
km) in South Carolina (D. Griffin, SCDNR, personal communication,
2009), and 3 percent (9 km) in North Carolina (M. Godfrey, North
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 2009). These estimates of
armoring extent do not include structures that are also barriers to sea
turtle nesting but do not fit the definition of armoring, such as dune
crossovers, cabanas, sand fences, and recreational equipment. Jetties
have been placed at many ocean inlets along the U.S. Atlantic coast to
keep transported sand from closing the inlet channel. Witherington et
al. (2005) found a significant negative relationship between loggerhead
nesting density and distance from the nearest of 17 ocean inlets on the
Atlantic coast of Florida. The effect of inlets in lowering nesting
density was observed both updrift and downdrift of the inlets, leading
researchers to propose that beach instability from both erosion and
accretion may discourage loggerhead nesting.
Stormwater and other water source runoff from coastal development,
including beachfront parking lots, building rooftops, roads, decks, and
draining swimming pools adjacent to the beach, is frequently discharged
directly onto Northwest Atlantic beaches and dunes either by sheet
flow, through stormwater collection system outfalls, or through small
diameter
[[Page 12626]]
pipes. These outfalls create localized erosion channels, prevent
natural dune establishment, and wash out sea turtle nests (Florida Fish
and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data). Contaminants
contained in stormwater, such as oils, grease, antifreeze, gasoline,
metals, pesticides, chlorine, and nutrients, are also discharged onto
the beach and have the potential to affect sea turtle nests and
emergent hatchlings. The effects of these contaminants on loggerheads
are not yet understood. As a result of natural and anthropogenic
factors, beach nourishment is a frequent activity, and many beaches are
on a periodic nourishment schedule. On severely eroded sections of
beach, where little or no suitable nesting habitat previously existed,
beach nourishment has been found to result in increased nesting (Ernest
and Martin, 1999). However, on most beaches in the southeastern United
States, nesting success typically declines for the first year or two
following construction, even though more nesting habitat is available
for turtles (Trindell et al., 1998; Ernest and Martin, 1999; Herren,
1999).
Coastal development also contributes to habitat degradation by
increasing light pollution. Both nesting and hatchling sea turtles are
adversely affected by the presence of artificial lighting on or near
the beach (Witherington and Martin, 1996). Experimental studies have
shown that artificial lighting deters adult female turtles from
emerging from the ocean to nest (Witherington, 1992). Witherington
(1986) also noted that loggerheads aborted nesting attempts at a
greater frequency in lighted areas. Because adult females rely on
visual brightness cues to find their way back to the ocean after
nesting, those turtles that nest on lighted beaches may become
disoriented (unable to maintain constant directional movement) or
misoriented (able to maintain constant directional movement but in the
wrong direction) by artificial lighting and have difficulty finding
their way back to the ocean. In some cases, misdirected nesting females
have crawled onto coastal highways and have been struck and killed by
vehicles (FFWCC, unpublished data).
Hatchlings exhibit a robust sea-finding behavior guided by visual
cues (Witherington and Bjorndal 1991; Salmon et al., 1992; Lohmann et
al., 1997; Witherington and Martin, 1996; Lohmann and Lohmann, 2003);
direct and timely migration from the nest to sea is critical to their
survival. Hatchlings have a tendency to orient toward the brightest
direction as integrated over a broad horizontal area. On natural
undeveloped beaches, the brightest direction is commonly away from
elevated shapes (e.g., dune, vegetation, etc.) and their silhouettes
and toward the broad open horizon of the sea. On developed beaches, the
brightest direction is often away from the ocean and toward lighted
structures. Hatchlings unable to find the ocean, or delayed in reaching
it, are likely to incur high mortality from dehydration, exhaustion, or
predation (Carr and Ogren, 1960; Ehrhart and Witherington, 1987;
Witherington and Martin, 1996). Hatchlings lured into lighted parking
lots or toward streetlights are often crushed by passing vehicles
(McFarlane, 1963; Philibosian, 1976; Peters and Verhoeven, 1994;
Witherington and Martin, 1996). Uncommonly intense artificial lighting
can even draw hatchlings back out of the surf (Daniel and Smith, 1947;
Carr and Ogren, 1960; Ehrhart and Witherington, 1987).
Reports of hatchling disorientation events in Florida alone
describe several hundred nests each year and are likely to involve tens
of thousands of hatchlings (Nelson et al., 2002); however, this number
calculated is likely a vast underestimate. Independent of these
reports, Witherington et al. (1996) surveyed hatchling orientation at
nests located at 23 representative beaches in six counties around
Florida in 1993 and 1994 and found that, by county, approximately 10 to
30 percent of nests showed evidence of hatchlings disoriented by
lighting. From this survey and from measures of hatchling production
(Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data),
the number of hatchlings disoriented by lighting in Florida is
calculated in the range of hundreds of thousands per year.
In the United States, vehicular driving is allowed on certain
beaches in northeast Florida (Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, and Volusia
Counties), northwest Florida (Walton and Gulf Counties), Georgia
(Cumberland, Little Cumberland, and Sapelo Islands), North Carolina
(Fort Fisher State Recreation Area, Carolina Beach, Freeman Park,
Onslow Beach, Emerald Isle, Indian Beach/Salter Path, Pine Knoll
Shores, Atlantic Beach, Cape Lookout National Seashore, Cape Hatteras
National Seashore, Nag's Head, Kill Devil Hills, Town of Duck, and
Currituck Banks), Virginia (Chincoteague NWR and Wallops Island), and
Texas (the majority of beaches except for a highly developed section of
South Padre Island and Padre Island National Seashore, San Jose Island,
Matagorda Island, and Matagorda Peninsula where driving is not allowed
or is limited to agency personnel, land owners, and/or researchers).
Beach driving has been found to reduce the quality of loggerhead
nesting habitat in several ways. In the southeastern U.S., vehicle ruts
on the beach have been found to prevent or impede hatchlings from
reaching the ocean following emergence from the nest (Mann, 1977;
Hosier et al., 1981; Cox et al., 1994; Hughes and Caine, 1994). Sand
compaction by vehicles has been found to hinder nest construction and
hatchling emergence from nests (Mann, 1977). Vehicle lights and vehicle
movement on the beach after dark results in reduced habitat
suitability, which can deter females from nesting and disorient
hatchlings. Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting beaches
contributes to erosion, especially during high tides or on narrow
beaches where driving is concentrated on the high beach and foredune.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean include fishing practices, channel
dredging, sand extraction, oil exploration and development, marine
pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods not only incidentally
capture loggerheads, but also deplete invertebrate and fish populations
and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. Although anthropogenic disruptions
of natural ecological interactions have been difficult to discern, a
few studies have been focused on the effects of these disruptions on
loggerheads. For instance, Youngkin (2001) analyzed gut contents from
hundreds of loggerheads stranded in Georgia over a 20-year period. His
findings point to the probability of major effects on loggerhead diet
from activities such as shrimp trawling and dredging. Lutcavage and
Musick (1985) found that horseshoe crabs strongly dominated the diet of
loggerheads in Chesapeake Bay in 1980-1981. Subsequently, fishermen
began to harvest horseshoe crabs, primarily for use as bait in the eel
and whelk pot fisheries, using several gear types. Atlantic coast
horseshoe crab landings increased by an order of magnitude (0.5 to 6.0
million pounds) between 1980 and 1997, and in 1998 the Atlantic States
Marine Fisheries Commission implemented a horseshoe crab fishery
management plan to curtail catches (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries
Commission, 1998). The decline in horseshoe crab availability has
apparently caused a diet shift in juvenile loggerheads, from
[[Page 12627]]
predominantly horseshoe crabs in the early to mid-1980s to blue crabs
in the late 1980s and early 1990s, to mostly finfish in the late 1990s
and early 2000s (Seney, 2003; Seney and Musick, 2007). These data
suggest that turtles are foraging in greater numbers in or around
fishing gears and on discarded bycatch (Seney, 2003).
Periodic dredging of sediments from navigational channels is
carried out at large ports to provide for the passage of large
commercial and military vessels. In addition, sand mining (dredging)
for beach renourishment and construction projects occurs in the
Northwest Atlantic along the U.S., Mexico, Central American, Colombia,
and Venezuela coasts. Although directed studies have not been
conducted, dredging activities, which occur regularly in the Northwest
Atlantic, have the potential to destroy or degrade benthic habitats
used by loggerheads. Channelization of inshore and nearshore habitat
and the subsequent disposal of dredged material in the marine
environment can destroy or disrupt resting or foraging grounds
(including grass beds and coral reefs) and may affect nesting
distribution by altering physical features in the marine environment
(Hopkins and Murphy, 1980). Oil exploration and development on live
bottom areas may disrupt foraging grounds by smothering benthic
organisms with sediments and drilling muds (Coston-Clements and Hoss,
1983). The effects of benthic habitat alteration on loggerhead prey
abundance and distribution, and the effects of these potential changes
on loggerhead populations, have not been determined but are of concern.
Climate change also may result in trophic changes, thus impacting
loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that coastal development, beachfront lighting, and coastal armoring and
other erosion control structures on nesting beaches in the United
States are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS. We also
find that anthropogenic disruptions of natural ecological interactions
as a result of fishing practices, channel dredging, and oil exploration
and development are likely a significant threat to the persistence of
this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs
is reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. In the
Caribbean, 12 of 29 (41 percent) countries/territories allow the
harvest of loggerheads (NMFS and USFWS, 2008; see Appendix 3; A.
Bolten, University of Florida, personal communication, 2009); this
takes into account the September 2009 ban on the harvest of sea turtles
in The Bahamas. Loggerhead harvest in the Caribbean is generally
restricted to the non-nesting season with the exception of St. Kitts
and Nevis, where turtle harvest is allowed annually from March 1
through September 30, and the Turks and Caicos Islands, where turtle
harvest is allowed year-round. Most countries/territories that allow
harvest have regulations that favor the harvest of large juvenile and
adult turtles, the most reproductively valuable members of the
population. Exceptions include the Cayman Islands, which mandates
maximum size limits, and Haiti and Trinidad and Tobago, which have no
size restrictions. All North, Central, and South American countries in
the Northwest Atlantic have enacted laws that mandate complete
protection of loggerheads from harvest in their territorial waters with
the exception of Guyana. Despite national laws, in many countries the
poaching of eggs and hunting of adult and juvenile turtles still occurs
at varying levels (NMFS and USFWS, 2008; see Appendix 3).
In summary, harvest of loggerheads in the Caribbean for human
consumption has been and continues to be a significant threat to the
persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the Northwest Atlantic. Viral diseases have not
been documented in free-ranging loggerheads, with the possible
exception of sea turtle fibropapillomatosis, which may have a viral
etiology (Herbst and Jacobson, 1995; George, 1997). Although
fibropapillomatosis reaches epidemic proportions in some wild green
turtle populations, the prevalence of this disease in most loggerhead
populations is thought to be small. An exception is Florida Bay where
approximately 9.5 percent of the loggerheads captured exhibit
fibropapilloma-like external lesions (B. Schroeder, NMFS, personal
communication, 2006). Mortality levels and population-level effects
associated with the disease are still unknown. Heavy infestations of
endoparasites may cause or contribute to debilitation or mortality in
loggerhead turtles. Trematode eggs and adult trematodes were recorded
in a variety of tissues including the spinal cord and brain of
debilitated loggerheads during an epizootic in South Florida, USA,
during late 2000 and early 2001. These endoparasites were implicated as
a possible cause of the epizootic (Jacobson et al., 2006). Although
many health problems have been described in wild populations through
the necropsy of stranded turtles, the significance of diseases on the
ecology of wild loggerhead populations is not known (Herbst and
Jacobson, 1995).
Predation of eggs and hatchlings by native and introduced species
occurs on almost all nesting beaches throughout the Northwest Atlantic.
The most common predators at the primary nesting beaches in the
southeastern United States are ghost crabs (Ocypode quadrata), raccoons
(Procyon lotor), feral hogs (Sus scrofa), foxes (Urocyon
cinereoargenteus and Vulpes vulpes), coyotes (Canis latrans),
armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus), and red fire ants (Solenopsis
invicta) (Stancyk, 1982; Dodd, 1988). In the absence of well managed
nest protection programs, predators may take significant numbers of
eggs; however, nest protection programs are in place at most of the
major nesting beaches in the Northwest Atlantic.
Non-native vegetation has invaded many coastal areas and often
outcompetes native plant species. Exotic vegetation may form
impenetrable root mats that can invade and desiccate eggs, as well as
trap hatchlings. The Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) is
particularly harmful to sea turtles. Dense stands have taken over many
coastal areas throughout central and south Florida. Australian pines
cause excessive shading of the beach that would not otherwise occur.
Studies in Florida suggest that nests laid in shaded areas are
subjected to lower incubation temperatures, which may alter the natural
hatchling sex ratio (Marcus and Maley, 1987; Schmelz and Mezich, 1988;
Hanson et al., 1998). Fallen Australian pines limit access to suitable
nest sites and can entrap nesting females (Austin, 1978; Reardon and
Mansfield, 1997). The shallow root network of these pines can interfere
with nest construction (Schmelz and Mezich, 1988). Davis and Whiting
(1977) reported that nesting activity declined in Everglades National
Park where dense stands of Australian pine took over native dune
vegetation on a
[[Page 12628]]
remote nesting beach. Beach vitex (Vitex rotundifolia) is native to
countries in the western Pacific and was introduced to the horticulture
trade in the southeastern United States in the mid-1980s and is often
sold as a ``dune stabilizer.'' Its presence on North Carolina and South
Carolina beaches has a negative effect on sea turtle nesting as its
dense mats interfere with sea turtle nesting and hatchling emergence
from nests (Brabson, 2006). This exotic plant is crowding out the
native species, such as sea oats and bitter panicum, and can colonize
large areas in just a few years. Sisal, or century plant (Agave
americana), is native to arid regions of Mexico. The plant was widely
grown in sandy soils around Florida in order to provide fiber for
cordage. It has escaped cultivation in Florida and has been purposely
planted on dunes. Although the effects of sisal on sea turtle nesting
are uncertain, thickets with impenetrable sharp spines are occasionally
found on developed beaches.
Harmful algal blooms, such as a red tide, also affect loggerheads
in the Northwest Atlantic. In Florida, the species that causes most red
tides is Karenia brevis, a dinoflagellate that produces a toxin
(Florida Marine Research Institute, 2003) and can cause mortality in
birds, marine mammals, and sea turtles. During four red tide events
along the west coast of Florida, sea turtle stranding trends indicated
that these events were acting as a mortality factor (Redlow et al.,
2003). Furthermore, brevetoxin concentrations supportive of
intoxication were detected in biological samples from dead and moribund
sea turtles during a mortality event in 2005 and in subsequent events
(Fauquier et al., 2007). The population level effects of these events
are not yet known.
In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Although current
predation levels in the United States are greatly reduced from historic
levels, predation still occurs in the United States, as well as in
Mexico, and can be significant in the absence of well managed
protection efforts. Although diseases and parasites are known to impact
loggerheads in this DPS, the significance of these threats is not
known. Overall, however, predation and disease are believed to be a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean
(Conant et al., 2009). Hykle (2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the
effectiveness of some of these international instruments. The problems
with existing international treaties are often that they have not
realized their full potential, do not include some key countries, do
not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped
by the lack of a sovereign authority to enforce environmental
regulations.
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Atlantic Ocean is
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced across the range of the
DPS in the near future because of the diversity and magnitude of the
fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of Northwest Atlantic Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development,
beachfront lighting, and coastal armoring and other erosion control
structures on nesting beaches in the United States (Factor A) is
significant relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Bycatch of loggerheads in commercial and recreational fisheries in
the Northwest Atlantic is a significant threat facing the species in
this region. A variety of fishing gears that incidentally capture
loggerhead turtles are employed including gillnets, trawls, hook and
line, longlines, seines, dredges, pound nets, and various types of
pots/traps. Among these, gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear contribute
to the vast majority of bycatch mortality of loggerheads annually
throughout their range in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico
(Epperly et al., 1995; NMFS, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008; Lewison et al.,
2003, 2004; Richards, 2007; NMFS, unpublished data). Considerable
effort has been expended since the 1980s to document and address
fishery bycatch, especially in the United States and Mexico. Observer
programs have been implemented in some fisheries to collect turtle
bycatch data, and efforts to reduce bycatch and mortality of
loggerheads in certain fishing operations have been undertaken and
implemented or partially implemented. These efforts include developing
gear solutions to prevent or reduce captures or to allow turtles to
escape without harm (e.g., TEDs, circle hooks and bait combinations),
implementing time and area closures to prevent interactions from
occurring (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing along the mid-Atlantic
coast during the critical time of northward migration of loggerheads),
implementation of careful release protocols (e.g., requirements for
careful release of turtles captured in longline fisheries),
prohibitions of gillnetting in some U.S. State waters), and/or
modifying gear (e.g., requirements to reduce mesh size in the leaders
of pound nets in certain U.S. coastal waters to prevent entanglement).
The primary bycatch reduction focus in the Northwest Atlantic,
since the 1978 ESA listing of the loggerhead, has been on bycatch
reduction in shrimp trawls. The United States has required the use of
turtle excluder devices (TEDs) throughout the year since the mid-1990s,
with modifications required and implemented as necessary (52 FR 24244;
June 29, 1987; 57 FR 57348; December 4, 1992). Most notably, in 2003,
NMFS implemented new requirements for TEDs in the shrimp trawl fishery
to ensure that large loggerheads could escape through TED openings (68
FR 8456; February 21, 2003). Significant effort has been expended to
transfer this technology to other shrimping fleets in the Northwest
Atlantic; however, not all nations where loggerheads occur require the
device be used. Enforcement of TED regulations is difficult and
compliance is not believed to be complete. Because
[[Page 12629]]
TEDs are not 100 percent effective, a significant number of loggerheads
are estimated to still be killed annually in shrimp trawls throughout
the Northwest Atlantic. In the U.S. Southeast food shrimp trawl
fishery, NMFS estimated the annual mortality of loggerheads in the Gulf
of Mexico and southeastern U.S. Atlantic Ocean as 3,948 individuals (95
percent confidence intervals, 1,221-8,498) (NMFS, 2002). Shrimping
effort in the southeastern United States has reportedly declined; a
revised estimate of annual loggerhead mortality for the Gulf of Mexico
segment of the Southeast food shrimp trawl fishery is 647 individuals
(NMFS, unpublished data).
Other trawl fisheries operating in Northwest Atlantic waters that
are known to capture sea turtles include, but are not limited to,
summer flounder, calico scallop, sea scallop, blue crab, whelk,
cannonball jellyfish, horseshoe crab, and mid-Atlantic directed finfish
trawl fisheries and the Sargassum fishery. In the United States, the
summer flounder fishery is the only trawl fishery (other than the
shrimp fishery) with Federally mandated TED use (in certain areas).
Loggerhead annual bycatch estimates in 2004 and 2005 in U.S. mid-
Atlantic scallop trawl gear ranged from 81 to 191 turtles, depending on
the estimation methodology used (Murray, 2007). Estimated average
annual bycatch of loggerheads in other mid-Atlantic Federally managed
bottom otter trawl fisheries during 1996-2004 was 616 turtles (Murray,
2006). The harvest of Sargassum by trawlers can result in incidental
capture of post-hatchlings and habitat destruction (Schwartz, 1988;
Witherington, 2002); however, this fishery is not currently active.
Dredge fishing gear is the predominant gear used to harvest sea
scallops off the mid- and northeastern United States Atlantic coast.
Turtles can be struck and injured or killed by the dredge frame and/or
captured in the bag where they may drown or be further injured or
killed when the catch and heavy gear are dumped on the vessel deck.
Total estimated bycatch of loggerhead turtles in the U.S. sea scallop
dredge fishery operating in the mid-Atlantic region (New York to North
Carolina) from June through November is on the order of several hundred
turtles per year (Murray, 2004, 2005, 2007). The impact of the sea
scallop dredge fishery on loggerheads in U.S. waters of the Northwest
Atlantic remains a serious concern.
Incidental take of oceanic-stage loggerheads in pelagic longline
fisheries has recently received significant attention (Balazs and
Pooley, 1994; Bolten et al., 1994, 2000; Aguilar et al., 1995; Laurent
et al., 1998; Long and Schroeder, 2004; Watson et al., 2005). Large-
scale commercial longline fisheries operate throughout the pelagic
range of the Northwest Atlantic loggerhead, including the western
Mediterranean. The largest size classes in the oceanic stage are the
size classes impacted by the swordfish longline fishery in the Azores
(Bolten, 2003) and on the Grand Banks off Newfoundland (Watson et al.,
2005), and this is likely the case for other nation's fleets operating
in the region, including but not limited to, the European Union, United
States, Japan, and Taiwan. The demographic consequences relative to
population recovery of the increased mortality of these size classes
have been discussed (Crouse et al., 1987; see also Heppell et al., 2003
and Chaloupka, 2003). Estimates derived from data recorded by the
international observer program (IOP) suggest that thousands of mostly
juvenile loggerheads have been captured in the Canadian pelagic
longline fishery in the western North Atlantic since 1999 (Brazner and
McMillan, 2008). NMFS (2004) estimates that 635 loggerheads (143
lethal) will be taken annually in the U.S. pelagic longline fishery.
Incidental capture of neritic-stage loggerheads in demersal
longline fishing gear has also been documented. Richards (2007)
estimated total annual bycatch of loggerheads in the Southeast U.S.
Atlantic and U.S. Gulf of Mexico commercial directed shark bottom
longline fishery from 2003-2005 as follows: 2003: 302-1,620 (CV 0.45);
2004: 95-591 (CV 0.49); and 2005: 139-778 (CV 0.46). NMFS (2009)
estimated the total number of captures of hardshell turtles in the U.S.
Gulf of Mexico reef fish fishery (demersal longline fishery) from July
2006-December 2008 as 861 turtles (95 percent confidence intervals,
383-1934). These estimates are not comprehensive across this gear type
(i.e., pelagic and demersal longline) throughout the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean. Cumulatively, the bycatch and mortality of Northwest Atlantic
loggerheads in longline fisheries is significant.
Gillnet fisheries may be the most ubiquitous of fisheries operating
in the neritic range of the Northwest Atlantic loggerhead.
Comprehensive estimates of bycatch in gillnet fisheries do not yet
exist and, while this precludes a quantitative analysis of their
impacts on loggerhead populations, the cumulative mortality of
loggerheads in gillnet fisheries is likely high. In the U.S. mid-
Atlantic, the average annual estimated bycatch of loggerheads from
1995-2006 was 350 turtles (CV= 0.20., 95 percent confidence intervals
over the 12-year period: 234 to 504) (Murray, 2009). In the United
States, some States (e.g., South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana,
and Texas) have prohibited gillnets in their waters, but there remain
active gillnet fisheries in other U.S. States, in U.S. Federal waters,
Mexico waters, Central and South America waters, and the Northeast
Atlantic.
Pound nets are fixed gear composed of a series of poles driven into
the bottom upon which netting is suspended. Pound nets basically
operate like a trap with the pound constructed of a series of funnels
leading to a bag that is open at the top, and a long leader of netting
that extends from shallow to deeper water where the pound is located.
In some configurations, the leader is suspended from the surface by a
series of stringers or vertical lines. Sea turtles incidentally
captured in the open top pound, which is composed of small mesh
webbing, are usually safe from injury and may be released easily when
the fishermen pull the nets (Mansfield et al., 2002). However, sea
turtle mortalities have been documented in the leader of certain pound
nets. Large mesh leaders (greater than 12-inch stretched mesh) may act
as a gillnet, entangling sea turtles by the head or foreflippers
(Bellmund et al., 1987) or may act as a barrier against which turtles
may be impinged (NMFS, unpublished data). Nets with small mesh leaders
(less than 8 inches stretched mesh) usually do not present a mortality
threat to loggerheads, but some mortalities have been reported
(Morreale and Standora, 1998; Epperly et al., 2000, 2007; Mansfield et
al., 2002). In 2002, the United States prohibited, in certain areas
within the Chesapeake Bay and at certain times, pound net leaders
having mesh greater than or equal to 12 inches and leaders with
stringers (67 FR 41196; June 17, 2002). Subsequent regulations have
further restricted the use of certain pound net leaders in certain
geographic areas and established pound net leader gear modifications
(69 FR 24997; May 5, 2004; 71 FR 36024; June 23, 2006).
Pots/traps are commonly used to target crabs, lobsters, whelk, and
reef fishes. These traps vary in size and configuration, but all are
attached to a surface float by means of a vertical line leading to the
trap. Entanglement and mortality of loggerheads has been documented in
various pot/trap fisheries in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico.
Data from the U.S. Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network indicate
that 82 loggerheads (dead and rescued alive) were documented by the
[[Page 12630]]
stranding network in various pot/trap gear from 1996-2005, of these
approximately 30-40 percent were adults and the remainder juvenile
turtles (NMFS, unpublished data). Without intervention it is likely
that the majority of the live, entangled turtles would die.
Additionally, documented strandings represent only a portion of total
interactions and mortality. Recently, a small number of loggerhead
entanglements also have been recorded in whelk pot bridles in the U.S.
Mid-Atlantic (M. Fagan, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, personal
communication, 2008). However, no dedicated observer programs exist to
provide estimates of take and mortality from pot/trap fisheries;
therefore, comprehensive estimates of loggerhead interactions with pot/
trap gear are not available, but the gear is widely used throughout the
range of the DPS, and poses a continuing threat.
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Propeller and collision injuries from boats and ships are becoming
more common in sea turtles. In the U.S. Atlantic, from 1997 to 2005,
14.9 percent of all stranded loggerheads were documented as having
sustained some type of propeller or collision injuries (NMFS,
unpublished data). The incidence of propeller wounds observed in sea
turtles stranded in the United States has risen from approximately 10
percent in the late 1980s to a record high of 20.5 percent in 2004
(NMFS, unpublished data). In the United States, propeller wounds are
greatest in Southeast Florida; during some years, as many as 60 percent
of the loggerhead strandings found in these areas had propeller wounds
(Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data).
As the number of vessels increases, in concert with increased coastal
development, especially in nearshore waters, propeller and vessel
collision injuries are also expected to rise.
Several activities associated with offshore oil and gas production,
including oil spills, water quality (operational discharge), seismic
surveys, explosive platform removal, platform lighting, and noise from
drillships and production activities, are known to impact loggerheads
(National Research Council, 1996; Minerals Management Service, 2000;
Gregg Gitschlag, NMFS, personal communication, 2007; Viada et al.,
2008). Currently, there are 3,443 Federally regulated offshore
platforms in the Gulf of Mexico dedicated to natural gas and oil
production. Additional State-regulated platforms are located in State
waters (Texas and Louisiana). There are currently no active leases off
the Atlantic coast.
Oil spills also threaten loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic. Two
oil spills that occurred near loggerhead nesting beaches in Florida
were observed to affect eggs, hatchlings, and nesting females.
Approximately 350,000 gallons of fuel oil spilled in Tampa Bay in
August 1993 and was carried onto nesting beaches in Pinellas County.
Observed mortalities included 31 hatchlings and 176 oil-covered nests;
an additional 2,177 eggs and hatchlings were either exposed to oil or
disturbed by response activities (Florida Department of Environmental
Protection et al., 1997). Another spill near the beaches of Broward
County in August 2000 involved approximately 15,000 gallons of oil and
tar (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, 2002). Models estimated that
approximately 1,500 to 2,000 hatchlings and 0 to 1 adults were injured
or killed. Annually about 1 percent of all sea turtle strandings along
the U.S. east coast have been associated with oil, but higher rates of
3 to 6 percent have been observed in South Florida and Texas (Teas,
1994; Rabalais and Rabalais, 1980; Plotkin and Amos, 1990).
In addition to the destruction or degradation of habitat, periodic
dredging of sediments from navigational channels can also result in
incidental mortality of sea turtles. Direct injury or mortality of
loggerheads by dredges has been well documented in the southeastern and
mid-Atlantic United States (National Research Council, 1990).
Solutions, including modification of dredges and time/area closures,
have been successfully implemented to reduce mortalities and injuries
in the United States (NMFS, 1991, 1995, 1997; Nelson and Shafer, 1996).
The entrainment and entrapment of loggerheads in saltwater cooling
intake systems of coastal power plants has been documented in New
Jersey, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas (Eggers, 1989; National
Research Council, 1990; Carolina Power and Light Company, 2003; FPL and
Quantum Resources, Inc., 2005; Progress Energy Florida, Inc., 2003).
Average annual incidental capture rates for most coastal plants from
which captures have been reported amount to several turtles per plant
per year. One notable exception is the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant
located on Hutchinson Island, Florida. During the first 15 years of
operation (1977-1991), an average of 128 loggerheads per year was
captured in the intake canal with a mortality rate of 6.4 percent.
During 1991-2005, loggerhead captures more than doubled (average of 308
per year), while mortality rates decreased to 0.3 percent per year (FPL
and Quantum Resources, Inc., 2005).
Although not a major source of mortality, cold stunning of
loggerheads has been reported at several locations in the United
States, including Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts (Still et al., 2002);
Long Island Sound, New York (Meylan and Sadove, 1986; Morreale et al.,
1992); the Indian River system, Florida (Mendonca and Ehrhart, 1982;
Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989); and Texas inshore waters (Hildebrand,
1982; Shaver, 1990). Cold stunning is a phenomenon during which turtles
become incapacitated as a result of rapidly dropping water temperatures
(Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989; Morreale et al., 1992). As
temperatures fall below 8-10[deg] C, turtles may lose their ability to
swim and dive, often floating to the surface. The rate of cooling that
precipitates cold stunning appears to be the primary threat, rather
than the water temperature itself (Milton and Lutz, 2003). Sea turtles
that overwinter in inshore waters are most susceptible to cold
stunning, because temperature changes are most rapid in shallow water
(Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989).
Another natural factor that has the potential to affect recovery of
loggerhead turtles is aperiodic hurricanes. In general, these events
are episodic and, although they may affect loggerhead hatchling
production, the results are generally localized and they rarely result
in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting seasons. The negative
effects of hurricanes on low-lying and/or developed shorelines may be
longer-lasting and a greater threat overall.
Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the Northwest
Atlantic. This includes beach erosion and loss from rising sea levels,
repeated inundation of nests, skewed hatchling sex ratios from rising
beach incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of ocean currents
used for natural dispersal during the complex life cycle.
In summary, we find that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Atlantic
Ocean, particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from gillnet,
longline, and trawl fisheries throughout their range in the Atlantic
Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, is a significant threat to the persistence of
this DPS. In addition, boat strikes are
[[Page 12631]]
becoming more common and are likely also a significant threat to the
persistence of this DPS.
Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
Northeast Atlantic result from coastal development and construction,
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting,
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction,
beach erosion, and beach pollution (Formia et al., 2003; Loureiro,
2008).
In the Northeast Atlantic, the only loggerhead nesting of note
occurs in the Cape Verde Islands. The Cape Verde government's plans to
develop Boa Vista Island, the location of the main nesting beaches,
could increase the terrestrial threats to loggerheads (van Bogaert,
2006). Sand extraction on Santiago Island, Cape Verde, may be
responsible for the apparent decrease in nesting there (Loureiro,
2008). Both sand extraction and beachfront lighting have been
identified as serious threats to the continued existence of a nesting
population on Santiago Island (Loureiro, 2008). Scattered and
infrequent nesting occurs in western Africa, where much
industrialization is located on the coast and population growth rates
fluctuate between 0.8 percent (Cape Verde) and 3.8 percent (C[ocirc]te
D'Ivoire) (Abe et al., 2004; Tayaa et al., 2005). Land mines on some of
the beaches of mainland Africa, within the reported historical range of
nesting by loggerheads (e.g., the Western Sahara region), would be
detrimental to nesters and are an impediment to scientific surveys of
the region (Tiwari et al., 2001). Tiwari et al. (2001) noted a high
level of human use of many of the beaches in Morocco--enough that any
evidence of nesting activity would be quickly erased. Garbage litters
many developed beaches (Formia et al., 2003). Erosion is a problem
along the long stretches of high energy ocean shoreline of Africa and
is further exacerbated by sand mining and harbor building (Formia et
al., 2003); crumbling buildings claimed by the sea may present
obstructions to nesting females.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the Northeast Atlantic Ocean include fishing practices, marine
pollution and climate change. Ecosystem alterations have occurred due
to the tremendous human pressure on the environment in the region.
Turtles, including loggerheads, usually are included in ecosystem
models of the region (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). In the Canary
Current Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), the area is characterized by the
Global International Waters Assessment as severely impacted in the area
of modification or loss of ecosystems or ecotones and health impacts,
but these impacts are decreasing (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). The Celtic-
Biscay Shelf LME is affected by alterations to the seabed, agriculture,
and sewage (Vald[eacute]s and Lavin, 2002). The Gulf of Guinea has been
characterized as severely impacted in the area of solid wastes by the
Global International Waters Assessment; this and other pollution
indicators are increasing (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). Marine pollution,
such as oil and debris, has been shown to negatively impact loggerheads
and represent a degradation of the habitat (Or[oacute]s et al., 2005,
2009; Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). Climate change also may
result in future trophic changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey
abundance and/or distribution.
Additionally, fishing is a major source of ecosystem alteration of
the neritic and oceanic habitats of loggerhead turtles in the region.
Fishing effort off the western African coast is increasing and record
low biomass has been recorded for exploited resources, representing a
13X decline in biomass since 1960 (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004).
Throughout the North Atlantic, fishery landings fell by 90 percent
during the 20th century, foreboding a trophic cascade and a change in
food-web competition (Pauly et al., 1998; Christensen et al., 2003).
For a description of the exploited marine resources in the region, see
Lamboeuf (1997). The Celtic-Biscay Shelf LME, the Iberian Coastal
Ecosystem LME, the Canary Current LME, and the Guinea Current LME all
are severely overfished, and effort now is turning to a focus on
pelagic fisheries, whereas historically there were demersal fisheries.
The impacts continue to increase in the Guinea Current LME despite
efforts throughout the region to reduce fishing pressure (http://
www.lme.noaa.gov).
The threats to bottom habitat for loggerheads include modification
of the habitat through bottom trawling. Trawling occurs off the
European coast and the area off Northwest Africa is one of the most
intensively trawled areas in the world (Zeeberg et al., 2006). Trawling
has been banned in the Azores, Madeira, and Canary Islands to protect
cold-water corals (Lutter, 2005). Although illegal, trawling also
occurs in the Cape Verde Islands (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). The use
of destructive fishing practices, such as explosives and toxic
chemicals, has been reported in the Canary Current area, causing
serious damage to both the resources and the habitat (Tayaa et al.,
2005).
In summary, we find that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that sand extraction and beachfront lighting on nesting beaches are
significant threats to the persistence of this DPS. We also find that
anthropogenic disruptions of natural ecological interactions as a
result of fishing practices and marine pollution are likely a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs
still exists and remains the most serious threat facing nesting turtles
in the Northeast Atlantic. Historical records indicate turtles were
harvested throughout Macaronesia (see Lopez-Jurado, 2007). Intensive
exploitation has been cited for the extirpation of the loggerhead
nesting colony in the Canary Islands (Lopez-Jurado, 2007), and heavy
human predation on nesting and foraging animals occurred on Santiago
Island, Cape Verde, the first in the Archipelago to be settled
(Loureiro, 2008), as well as on Sal and Sao Vicente islands (Lopez-
Jurado, 2007). Nesting loggerheads and eggs are still harvested at Boa
Vista, Cape Verde (Cabrera et al., 2000; Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). In
2007, over 1,100 (36 percent) of the nesting turtles were hunted, which
is about 15 percent of the estimated adult female population (Marco et
al., in press). In 2008, the military protected one of the major
nesting beaches on Boa Vista where in 2007 55 percent of the mortality
had occurred; with the additional protection, only 17 percent of the
turtles on that beach were slaughtered (Roder et al., in press). On Sal
Island, 11.5 percent of the emergences on unprotected beaches ended
with mortality, whereas mortality was 3 percent of the emergences on
protected beaches (Cozens et al., in press). The slaughter of nesting
turtles is a problem wherever turtles nest in the Cape Verde Islands
and may approach 100 percent in some places (C. Roder, Turtle
Foundation, M[uuml]nsing, Germany,
[[Page 12632]]
personal communication, 2009; Cozens, in press). The meat and eggs are
consumed locally as well as traded among the archipelago (C. Roder,
Turtle Foundation, M[uuml]nsing, Germany, personal communication,
2009). Hatchlings are collected on Sal Island, but this activity
appears to be rare on other islands of the archipelago (J. Cozens, SOS
Tartarugas, Santa Maria, Sal Island, Cape Verde, personal
communication, 2009). Additionally, free divers target turtles for
consumption of meat, often selectively taking large males (Lopez-Jurado
et al., 2003). Turtles are harvested along the African coast and, in
some areas, are considered a significant source of food and income due
to the poverty of many residents along the African coast (Formia et
al., 2003). Loggerhead carapaces are sold in markets in Morocco and
Western Sahara (Fretey, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Benhardouze et al.,
2004).
In summary, overutilization for human consumption likely was a
factor that contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Current
harvest of loggerhead turtles and eggs for human consumption in both
Cape Verde and along the African coast, as well as the sale of
loggerhead carapaces in markets in Africa, are a significant threat to
the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean. Spontaneous diseases
documented in the Northeast Atlantic include pneumonia, hepatitis,
meningitis, septicemic processes, and neoplasia (Or[oacute]s et al.,
2005). Pneumonia could result from the aspiration of water from forced
submergence in fishing gear. The authors also reported nephritis,
esophagitis, nematode infestation, and eye lesions. Fibropapillomatosis
does not appear to be an issue in the Northeast Atlantic.
Nest depredation by ghost crabs (Ocypode cursor) occurs in Cape
Verde (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2000). The ghost crabs feed on both eggs
and hatchlings. Arvy et al. (2000) reported predation of loggerhead
eggs in two nests in Mauritania by golden jackals (Canis aureus); a
loggerhead turtle creating a third nest also had been killed, with meat
and eggs eaten, but the predator was not identified.
Loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic also may be impacted by
harmful algal blooms, which have been reported infrequently in the
Canary Islands and the Iberian Coastal LME (Ramos et al., 2005; Akin-
Oriola et al., 2006; Amorim and Dale, 2006; Moita et al., 2006; http://
www.lme.noaa.gov).
In summary, although disease and predation are known to occur,
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of
these threats on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northeast Atlantic
Ocean. The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.7.4. of the
Status Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle
(2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of
these international instruments. The problems with existing
international treaties are often that they have not realized their full
potential, do not include some key countries, do not specifically
address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a
sovereign authority to enforce environmental regulations. The
ineffectiveness of international treaties and national legislation is
oftentimes due to the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to
implement and enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is
available in a special 2002 issue of the Journal of International
Wildlife Law and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle
Conservation (Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Ongoing directed lethal take of nesting females and eggs (Factor
B), low hatching and emergence success (Factors A, B, and C), and
mortality of juvenile and adult turtles from fishery bycatch (Factor E)
that occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic Ocean is substantial.
Currently, conservation efforts to protect nesting females are growing,
and a reduction in this source of mortality is likely to continue in
the near future. Although national and international governmental and
non-governmental entities in the Northeast Atlantic are currently
working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions
have been implemented, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can
be sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries
operating within the range of this DPS, lack of bycatch reduction in
coastal fisheries in Africa, the lack of comprehensive information on
fishing distribution and effort, limitations on implementing
demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of Northeast Atlantic Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for harvest of turtles and eggs for human consumption
(Factor B), fishery bycatch (Factor E), and sand extraction and
beachfront lighting on nesting beaches (Factor A) is significant
relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Loggerhead turtles strand throughout the Northeast Atlantic
(Fretey, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Duguy et al., 2004, 2005; Witt et
al., 2007), and there are indications that the turtles become entangled
in nets and monofilament and swallow hooks in the region (Or[oacute]s
et al., 2005; Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). On the European
coasts, most stranded loggerheads are small (mean of less than 30 cm
SCL), but a few are greater than 60 cm SCL (Witt et al., 2007).
Similarly, Tiwari et al. (2001) and Benhardouze et al. (2004) indicated
that the animals they viewed in Morocco and Western Sahara were small
juveniles and preliminary genetic analyses of stranded turtles indicate
that they are of western Atlantic origin (M. Tiwari, NMFS, and A.
Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data), whereas Fretey (2001)
reported that loggerheads captured and stranded in Mauritania were both
juvenile and adult-sized animals.
Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial
fisheries is a threat to the survival of loggerheads in the Northeast
Atlantic. Sea turtles may be caught in a multitude of gears deployed in
the region: Pelagic and demersal longlines, drift and set gillnets,
bottom and mid-water trawling, weirs, haul and purse seines, pots and
traps, cast nets, and hook and line gear (see Pascoe and
Gr[eacute]boval, 2003; Bayliff et al., 2005; Tayaa et al., 2005; Dossa
et al., 2007). Fishing effort off the western African coast has been
increasing (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). Impacts
[[Page 12633]]
continue to increase in the Guinea Current LME, but, in contrast, the
impacts are reported to be decreasing in the Canary Current LME (http:/
/www.lme.noaa.gov). Throughout the region, fish stocks are depleted and
management authorities are striving to reduce the fishing pressure.
In the Northeast Atlantic, loggerheads, particularly the largest
size classes in the oceanic environment (most of which are small
juveniles), are captured in surface longline fisheries targeting
swordfish (Ziphias gladius) and tuna (Thunnus spp.) (Ferreira et al.,
2001; Bolten, 2003). Bottom longlines in Madeira Island targeting
black-scabbard (Aphanopus carbo) capture and kill small juvenile
loggerhead turtles as the fishing depth does not allow hooked turtles
to surface (Dellinger and Encarna[ccedil][acirc]o, 2000; Delgado et
al., in press).
In United Kingdom and Irish waters, loggerhead bycatch is uncommon
but has been noted in pelagic driftnet fisheries (Pierpoint, 2000;
Rogan and Mackey, 2007). Loggerheads have not been captured in pelagic
trawls, demersal trawls, or gillnets in United Kingdom and Irish waters
(Pierpoint, 2000), but have been captured in nets off France (Duguy et
al., 2004, 2005).
International fleets of trawl fisheries operate in Mauritania and
have been documented to capture sea turtles, including loggerheads
(Zeeberg et al., 2006). Despite being illegal, trawling occurs in the
Cape Verde Islands and has the potential to capture and kill loggerhead
turtles; one piece of abandoned trawl net washed ashore with eight live
and two dead loggerheads (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). Longlines,
seines, and hook and line have been documented to capture loggerheads
35-73 cm SCL off the northwestern Moroccan coast (Benhardouze, 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or
entanglement in marine debris, also apply to loggerheads in the
Northeast Atlantic. Propeller and boat strike injuries have been
documented in the Northeast Atlantic (Oros et al., 2005; Calabuig
Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). Exposure to crude oil is also of
concern. Loggerhead strandings in the Canary Islands have shown
evidence of hydrocarbon exposure as well as ingestion of marine debris,
such as plastic and monofilament (Oros et al., 2005; Calabuig Miranda
and Liria Loza, 2007), and in the Azores and elsewhere plastic debris
is found both on the beaches and floating in the waters (Barrerios and
Barcelos, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001). Pollution from heavy metals is a
concern for the seas around the Iberian Peninsula (European
Environmental Agency, 1998) and in the Guinea Current LME (Abe et al.,
2004). Bioaccumulation of metals in loggerheads has been measured in
the Canary Islands and along the French Atlantic Coast (Caurant et al.,
1999; Torrent et al., 2004). However, the consequences of long-term
exposure to heavy metals are unknown (Torrent et al., 2004).
Natural environmental events, such as climate change, could affect
loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic. Similar to other areas of the
world, climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact
loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic, and the changes may be further
exacerbated by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. These
effects include flooding of nesting beaches, shifts in ocean currents,
ecosystem shifts in prey distribution and abundance, and a shift in the
sex ratio of the population if rookeries do not migrate concurrently
(e.g., northward in the case of global warming) or if nesting phenology
does not change (see Doody et al., 2006). Tropical and sub-tropical
storms occasionally strike the area and could have a negative impact on
nesting, although such an impact would be of limited duration.
In summary, we find that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic
Ocean, particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from longline and
trawl fisheries, is a significant threat to the persistence of this
DPS.
Mediterranean Sea DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
In the Mediterranean, some areas known to host nesting activity in
the past have been lost to turtles (e.g., Malta) or severely degraded
(e.g., Israel) (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Destruction and
modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the Mediterranean result
from coastal development and construction, placement of erosion control
structures and other barriers to nesting, beachfront lighting,
vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, beach erosion, beach
sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native vegetation, and
planting of non-native vegetation (Baldwin, 1992; Margaritoulis et al.,
2003). These activities may directly impact the nesting success of
loggerheads and survivability of eggs and hatchlings. Nesting in the
Mediterranean almost exclusively occurs in the Eastern basin, with the
main concentrations found in Cyprus, Greece, Turkey, and Libya
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Laurent et al., 1999); therefore, the
following threats to the nesting habitat are concentrated in these
areas.
The Mediterranean experiences a large influx of tourists during the
summer months, coinciding with the nesting season. Margaritoulis et al.
(2003) stated that extensive urbanization of the coastline, largely a
result of tourism and recreation, is likely the most serious threat to
loggerhead nesting areas. The large numbers of tourists that use
Mediterranean beaches result in an increase in umbrellas, chairs,
garbage, and towels, as well as related hotels, restaurants, and
stationary (e.g., street lights, hotels) and moving (e.g., cars)
lighting, all which can impact sea turtle nesting success
(Demetropoulos, 2000). Further, the eastern Mediterranean is exposed to
high levels of pollution and marine debris, in particular the nesting
beaches of Cyprus, Turkey, and Egypt (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004).
Construction and infrastructure development also have the potential
to alter nesting beaches and subsequently impact nesting success. The
construction of new buildings on or near nesting beaches has been a
problem in Greece and Turkey (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). The construction
of a jetty and waterworks around Mersin, Turkey, has contributed
significantly to the continuous loss of adjacent beach (Cami[ntilde]as,
2004).
Beach erosion and sand extraction also pose a problem for sea
turtle nesting sites. The noted decline of the nesting population at
Rethymno, Island of Crete, Greece, is partly attributed to beach
erosion caused by construction on the high beach and at sea (e.g.,
groins) (Margaritoulis et al., 2009). A 2001 survey of Lebanese nesting
beaches found severe erosion on beaches where previous nesting had been
reported, and in some cases the beaches had disappeared completely
(Venizelos et al., 2005). Definitive causes of this erosion were found
to be sand extraction, offshore sand dredging, and sediment removal
from river beds for construction and military purposes. Beach erosion
also may occur from natural changes, with the same deleterious effects
to loggerhead nesting.
[[Page 12634]]
On Patara, Turkey, beach erosion and subsequent inundation by waves and
shifting sand dunes are responsible for about half of all loggerhead
nest losses (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Erosion can further be exacerbated
when native dune vegetation, which enhances beach stability and acts as
an integral buffer zone between land and sea, is degraded or destroyed.
This in turn often leaves insufficient nesting opportunities above the
high tide line, and nests may be washed out. In contrast, the planting
or invasion of less stabilizing, non-native plants can lead to
increased erosion and degradation of suitable nesting habitat. Finally,
sand extraction has been a serious problem on Mediterranean nesting
beaches, especially in Turkey (T[uuml]rkozan and Baran, 1996), Cyprus
(Godley et al., 1996; Demetropoulos and Hadjichristophorou, 1989), and
Israel (Levy, 2003).
While the most obvious effect of nesting beach destruction and
modification may be to the existence of the actual nests, hatchlings
are also threatened by habitat alteration. In the Mediterranean,
disorientation of hatchlings due to artificial lighting has been
recorded mainly in Greece (Rees, 2005; Margaritoulis et al., 2007,
2009), Turkey (T[uuml]rkozan and Baran, 1996), and Lebanon (Newbury et
al., 2002). Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting beaches may
disrupt the natural beach environment and contribute to erosion,
especially during high tides or on narrow beaches where driving is
concentrated on the high beach and foredune. On Zakynthos Island in
Greece, Venizelos et al. (2006) reported that vehicles drove along the
beach and sand dunes throughout the tourist season on East Laganas and
Kalamaki beaches, leaving deep ruts in the sand, disturbing sea turtles
trying to nest, and impacting hatchlings trying to reach the sea.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in
the Mediterranean Sea include fishing practices, channel dredging, sand
extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Trawling occurs
throughout the Mediterranean, most notably in areas off Albania,
Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Libya, Morocco,
Slovenia, Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and Casale, 1999;
Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Casale, 2008). This fishing practice has the
potential to destroy bottom habitat in these areas. Fishing methods
affect neritic zones by not only impacting bottom habitat and
incidentally capturing loggerheads but also depleting fish populations,
and thus altering ecosystem dynamics. For example, depleted fish stocks
in Zakynthos, Greece, likely contributed to predation of adult
loggerheads by monk seals (Monachus monachus) (Margaritoulis et al.,
1996). Further, by depleting fish populations, the trophic dynamics
will be altered, which may then in turn affect the ability of
loggerheads to find prey resources. If loggerheads are not able to
forage on the necessary prey resources, their long-term survivability
may be impacted. Climate change also may result in future trophic
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
Marine pollution, including direct contamination and structural
habitat degradation, can affect loggerhead neritic and oceanic habitat.
As the Mediterranean is an enclosed sea, organic and inorganic wastes,
toxic effluents, and other pollutants rapidly affect the ecosystem
(Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). The Mediterranean has been declared a ``special
area'' by the MARPOL Convention, in which deliberate petroleum
discharges from vessels are banned, but numerous repeated offenses are
still thought to occur (Pavlakis et al., 1996). Some estimates of the
amount of oil released into the region are as high as 1,200,000 metric
tons (Alpers, 1993). Direct oil spill events also occur as happened in
Lebanon in 2006 when 10,000 to 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil spilled
into the eastern Mediterranean (United Nations Environment Programme,
2007).
Destruction and modification of loggerhead habitat also may occur
as a result of other activities. For example, underwater explosives
have been identified as a key threat to loggerhead habitat in
internesting areas in the Mediterranean (Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Further, the Mediterranean is a site of intense tourist activity, and
corresponding boat anchoring also may impact loggerhead habitat in the
neritic environment.
In summary, we find that the Mediterranean Sea DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find
that coastal development, placement of barriers to nesting, beachfront
lighting, and erosion resulting from sand extraction, offshore sand
dredging, and sediment removal from river beds are significant threats
to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Mediterranean turtle populations were subject to severe
exploitation until the mid-1960s (Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs is
reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. For
example, Nada and Casale (2008) found that egg collection (for
individual consumption) still occurs in Egypt. In some areas of the
Mediterranean, like on the Greek Island of Zakynthos, nesting beaches
are protected (Panagopoulou et al., 2008), so egg harvest by humans in
those areas is likely negligible.
Exploitation of juveniles and adults still occurs in some
Mediterranean areas. In Tunisia, clandestine trade for local
consumption is still recorded, despite prohibition of the sale of
turtles in fish markets in 1989 (Laurent et al., 1996). In Egypt,
turtles are sold in fish markets despite prohibitive laws; of 71
turtles observed at fish markets in 1995 and 1996, 68 percent were
loggerheads (Laurent et al., 1996). Nada (2001) reported 135 turtles
(of which 85 percent were loggerheads) slaughtered at the fish market
of Alexandria in 6 months (December 1998-May 1999). Based on observed
sea turtle slaughters in 1995 and 1996, Laurent et al. (1996) estimated
that several thousand sea turtles were probably killed each year in
Egypt. More recently, a study found that the open selling of sea
turtles in Egypt generally has been curtailed due to enforcement
efforts, but a high level of intentional killing for the black market
or for direct personal consumption still exists (Nada and Casale,
2008). Given the high numbers of turtles caught in this area, several
hundred turtles are currently estimated to be slaughtered each year in
Egypt (Nada and Casale, 2008). This estimate likely includes both
juvenile and adult loggerheads, as Egyptian fish markets have been
documented selling different sized sea turtles. While the mean sea
turtle size was 65.7 cm CCL (range 38-86.3 cm CCL; n=48), 37.5 percent
of observed loggerhead samples were greater than 70 cm CCL (Laurent et
al., 1996).
In summary, overutilization for commercial purposes likely was a
factor that contributed to the historic declines of this DPS. Current
illegal harvest of loggerheads in Egypt for human consumption continues
as a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads
[[Page 12635]]
found in the Mediterranean. Endoparasites in loggerheads have been
studied in the western Mediterranean. While the composition of the
gastrointestinal community of sea turtles is expected to include
digeneans, nematodes, and aspidogastreans, loggerheads in the
Mediterranean were found to harbor only four digenean species typical
of marine turtles (Aznar et al., 1998). There have been no records of
fibropapillomatosis in the Mediterranean. While there is the potential
for disease in this area, information on the prevalence of such disease
is lacking.
In the Mediterranean Sea, loggerhead hatchlings and eggs are
subject to depredation by wild canids (i.e., foxes (Vulpes vulpes),
golden jackals (Canis aureus)), feral/domestic dogs, and ghost crabs
(Ocypode cursor) (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Predators have caused
the loss of 48.4 percent of loggerhead clutches at Kyparissia Bay,
Greece (Margaritoulis, 1988), 70-80 percent at Dalyan Beach, Turkey
(Erk'akan, 1993), 36 percent (includes green turtle clutches) in Cyprus
(Broderick and Godley, 1996), and 44.8 percent in Libya (Laurent et
al., 1995). A survey of the Syrian coast in 1999 found 100 percent nest
predation, mostly due to stray dogs and humans (Venizelos et al.,
2005). Loggerhead eggs are also depredated by insect larvae in Cyprus
(McGowan et al., 2001), Turkey ([Ouml]zdemir et al., 2004), and Greece
(Lazou and Rees, 2006). Ghost crabs have been reported preying on
loggerhead hatchlings in northern Cyprus and Egypt, suggesting 66
percent of emerging hatchlings succumb to this mortality source (Simms
et al., 2002). Predation also has been influenced by anthropogenic
sources. On Zakynthos, Greece, a landfill site next to loggerhead
nesting beaches has resulted in an artificially high level of seagulls
(Larus spp.), which results in increased predation pressure on
hatchlings (Panagopoulou et al., 2008). Planting of non-native plants
also can have a detrimental effect on nests in the form of roots
invading eggs (e.g., tamarisk tree (Tamarix spp.) roots invading eggs
in Zakynthos, Greece) (Margaritoulis et al., 2007).
Predation on adult and juvenile loggerheads has also been
documented in the Mediterranean. Predation of nesting loggerheads by
golden jackals has been recorded in Turkey (Peters et al., 1994).
During a 1995 survey of loggerhead nesting in Libya, two nesting
females were found killed by carnivores, probably jackals (Laurent et
al., 1997). Off the sea turtle nesting beach of Zakynthos, Greece,
adult loggerheads were found being predated upon by Mediterranean monk
seals (Monachus monachus). Of the eight predated turtles observed or
reported, 62.5 percent were adult males (Margaritoulis et al., 1996).
Further, stomach contents were examined from 24 Mediterranean white
sharks (Carcharodon carcharias), and 17 percent contained remains of
marine turtles, including two loggerheads, one green, and one
unidentifiable turtle (Fergusson et al., 2000). One of the loggerhead
turtles ingested was a juvenile with a carapace length of approximately
60 cm (length not reported as either SCL or CCL). Fergusson et al.
(2000) report that white shark interactions with sea turtles are likely
rare east of the Ionian Sea, and while the impact of shark predation on
turtle populations is unknown, it is probably small compared to other
sources of mortality.
The Mediterranean is a low-productivity body of water, with high
water clarity as a result. However, harmful algal blooms do occur in
this area (e.g., off Algeria in 2002), and the problem is particularly
acute in enclosed ocean basins such as the Mediterranean. In the
northern Adriatic Sea, fish kills have occurred as a result of noxious
phytoplankton blooms and anoxic conditions (Mediterranean Sea LME).
While fish may be more susceptible to these harmful algal blooms,
loggerheads in the Mediterranean also may be impacted by such noxious
or toxic phytoplankton to some extent.
In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Current nest and
hatchling predation on several Mediterranean nesting beaches is
believed to be a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Mediterranean Sea. The
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.8.4. of the Status Review
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Mediterranean Sea (see
Factor E), as well as anthropogenic threats to nesting beaches (Factor
A) and eggs/hatchlings (Factors A, B, C, and E), is substantial.
Although conservation efforts to protect some nesting beaches are
underway, more widespread and consistent protection is needed. Although
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities
in the Mediterranean Sea are currently working toward reducing
loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in commercial and artisanal
fisheries operating within the range of this DPS, the lack of
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of Mediterranean Sea
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and impacts to nesting beach
habitat (Factor A) is significant relative to the persistence of this
DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Other anthropogenic and natural factors affecting loggerhead
survival include incidental bycatch in fisheries, vessel collisions,
marine pollution, climate change, and cyclonic storm events. Fishing
practices alone have been estimated to result in over 150,000 sea
turtle captures per year, with
[[Page 12636]]
approximately 50,000 mortalities (Casale, 2008).
The only estimation of loggerhead survival probabilities in the
Mediterranean was calculated by using capture-mark-recapture techniques
from 1981-2003 (Casale et al., 2007c). Of the 3,254 loggerheads tagged,
134 were recaptured at different sites throughout the Mediterranean.
Most recaptured animals were juveniles (mean 54.4 cm CCL; range 25-88
cm CCL), but the study did not delineate between juvenile life stages.
This research estimated a loggerhead annual survival probability of
0.73(95 percent confidence interval; 0.67-0.78), recognizing that there
are methodological limitations of the technique used. Nonetheless,
Casale et al. (2007a) stated that assuming a natural survivorship no
higher than 0.95 and a tag loss rate of 0.1, a range of 0.1-0.2 appears
reasonable for the additional human induced mortality (from all
sources).
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial
fisheries is a significant threat to the survivability of loggerheads
in the Mediterranean. Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and demersal
longlines, drift gillnets, set gillnets and trammel nets, bottom and
mid-water trawls, seines, dredges, traps/pots, and hook and line gear.
In a 2004 FAO Fisheries Report, Cami[ntilde]as (2004) stated that the
main fisheries affecting sea turtles in the Mediterranean Sea (at that
time) were Spanish and Italian longline, North Adriatic Italian,
Tunisian, and Turkish trawl, and Moroccan and Italian driftnet.
Available information on sea turtle bycatch by gear type is discussed
below. There is growing evidence that artisanal/small vessel fisheries
(set gillnet, bottom longline, and part of the pelagic longline
fishery) may be responsible for a comparable or higher number of
captures with higher mortality rates than the commercial/large vessel
fisheries (Casale, 2008) as previously suggested by indirect clues
(Casale et al., 2005a).
Mediterranean fish landings have increased steadily since the
1950s, but the FAO 10-year capture trend from 1990-1999 shows stable
landings (Mediterranean LME, http://www.lme.noaa.gov). However, stable
fish landings may result from stable fishing effort at the same catch
rates, or higher fishing effort at lower catch rates. As fish stocks in
the Mediterranean are being depleted (P. Casale, MTSG-IUCN Italy,
personal communication, 2009), fishing effort in some areas may be
increasing to catch the available fish. This trend has not yet been
verified throughout the Mediterranean, but fishing pressures may be
increasing even though landings appear stable.
Longline Fisheries
In the Mediterranean, pelagic longline fisheries targeting
swordfish (Ziphias gladius) and albacore (Thunnus alalunga) may be the
primary source of loggerhead bycatch. It appears that most of the
incidental captures occur in the western and central portions of the
area (Demetropoulos and Hadjichristophorou, 1995). The most severe
bycatch in the Mediterranean occurs around the Balearic Islands where
1,950-35,000 juveniles are caught annually in the surface longline
fishery (Mayol and Castell[oacute] Mas, 1983; Cami[ntilde]as, 1988,
1997; Aguilar et al., 1995). Specifically, the following regions have
reported annual estimates of total turtle bycatch from pelagic
longlines: Spain--17,000 to 35,000 turtles (Aguilar et al., 1995;
Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003); Italy (Ionian Sea)--1,084 to 4,447
turtles (Deflorio et al., 2005); Morocco--3,000 turtles (Laurent,
1990); Greece--280 to 3,310 turtles (Panou et al., 1999; Kapantagakis
and Lioudakis, 2006); Italy (Lampedusa)--2,100 turtles (Casale et al.,
2007a); Malta--1,500 to 2,500 turtles (Gramentz, 1989); South Tunisia
(Gulf of Gab[egrave]s)--486 turtles (Jribi et al., 2008); and Algeria--
300 turtles (Laurent, 1990).
For the entire Mediterranean pelagic longline fishery, an
extrapolation resulted in a bycatch estimate of 60,000 to 80,000
loggerheads in 2000 (Lewison et al., 2004). Further, a more recent
paper used the best available information to estimate that Spain,
Morocco, and Italy have the highest level of sea turtle bycatch, with
over 10,000 turtle captures per year for each country, and Greece,
Malta, Libya, and Tunisia each catch 1,000 to 3,000 turtles per year
(Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of loggerhead
sea turtle captures by all Mediterranean pelagic longline fisheries may
be greater than 50,000 (Casale, 2008). Note that these are not
necessarily individual turtles, as the same sea turtle can be captured
more than once.
Mortality estimates in the pelagic longline fishery at gear
retrieval appear to be lower than in some other types of gear (e.g.,
set gillnet). Although limited to observations of direct mortality at
gear retrieval, Carreras et al. (2004) found mortality to be low (0-7.7
percent) in the longline fishery off the Balearic Islands, and Jribi et
al. (2008) reported 0 percent direct mortality in the southern Tunisia
surface longline fishery. These estimates are consistent with those
found in other areas; direct mortality was estimated at 4.3 percent in
Greece (n=23), 0 percent in Italy (n=214), and 2.6 percent in Spain
(n=676) (Laurent et al., 2001). However, considering injured turtles
and those released with hooks, the potential for mortality is likely
much higher. Based upon observations of hooked loggerhead turtles in
captivity, Aguilar et al. (1995) estimated 20-30 percent of animals
caught in longline gear may eventually die. More recently, Casale et
al. (2008b) found, given variations in hook position affecting
survivability, the mortality rate of turtles caught by pelagic
longlines may be higher than 30 percent, which is greater than
previously thought (17-42 percent; Lewison et al., 2004). Considering
direct and post-release mortality, Casale (2008) used a conservative
approach to arrive at 40 percent for the average mortality from
Mediterranean pelagic longlines. The result is an estimated 20,000
turtles killed per year by pelagic longlines (Casale, 2008).
In general, most of the turtles captured in the Mediterranean
surface longline fisheries are juvenile animals (Aguilar et al., 1995;
Panou et al., 1999; Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003; Casale et al., 2007a;
Jribi et al., 2008), but some adult loggerhead bycatch is also
reported. Considering data from many Mediterranean areas and research
studies, the average size of turtles caught by pelagic longlines was
48.9 cm CCL (range 20.5-79.2 cm CCL; n=1868) (Casale, 2008).
Specifically, in the Spanish surface longline fishery, 13 percent of
estimated carapace sizes (n=455) ranged from 75.36 to 107 cm CCL,
considered to be adult animals (Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003), and in
the Ionian Sea, 15 percent of a total 157 loggerhead turtles captured
in swordfish longlines were adult animals (estimated size at greater
than or equal to 75 cm) (Panou et al., 1999).
Bottom longlines are also fished in the Mediterranean, but specific
capture rates for loggerheads are largely unknown for many areas. The
countries with the highest number of documented captures (in the
thousands per year) are Tunisia, Libya, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Morocco,
and Italy (Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of
loggerhead sea turtle captures (not necessarily individual turtles) by
all Mediterranean demersal longliners may be greater than 35,000
(Casale, 2008). Given available information and using a conservative
approach, mortality from bottom longlines may be at least equal to
pelagic longline mortality (40
[[Page 12637]]
percent; Casale, 2008). The result is an estimated 14,000 turtles
killed per year in Mediterranean bottom longlines (Casale, 2008). It is
likely that these animals represent mostly juvenile loggerheads, Casale
(2008) reported an average turtle size of 51.8 cm CCL (n=35) in bottom
longlines based on available data throughout the Mediterranean.
Artisanal longline fisheries also have the potential to take sea
turtles. A survey of 54 small boat (4-10 meter length) artisanal
fishermen in Cyprus and Turkey resulted in an estimated minimum bycatch
of over 2,000 turtles per year, with an estimated 10 percent mortality
rate (Godley et al., 1998a). These small boats fished with a
combination of longlines and trammel/gillnets. However, note that it is
likely that a proportion (perhaps a large proportion) of the turtle
bycatch estimated in this study are green turtles.
Set Net (Gillnet) Fisheries
As in other areas, sea turtles have the potential to interact with
set nets (gillnets or trammel nets) in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean
set nets refer to gillnets (a single layer of net) and trammel nets,
which consist of three layers of net with different mesh size. Casale
(2008) estimated that the countries with the highest number of
loggerhead captures (in the thousands per year) are Tunisia, Libya,
Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, and Croatia. Italy, Morocco, Egypt, and France
likely have high capture rates as well. Available information suggests
the annual number of loggerhead captures by Mediterranean set nets may
be greater than 30,000 (Casale, 2008).
Due to the nature of the gear and fishing practices (e.g.,
relatively long soak times), incidental capture in gillnets is among
the highest source of direct sea turtle mortality. An evaluation of
turtles tagged then recaptured in gillnets along the Italian coast
found 14 of 19 loggerheads (73.7 percent) to be dead (Argano et al.,
1992). Gillnets off France were observed to capture six loggerheads
with a 50 percent mortality rate (Laurent, 1991). Six loggerheads were
recovered in gillnets off Croatia between 1993 and 1996; 83 percent
were found dead (Lazar et al., 2000). Off the Balearic Islands, 196 sea
turtles were estimated to be captured in lobster trammel nets in 2001,
with a CPUE of 0.17 turtles per vessel (Carreras et al., 2004).
Mortality estimates for this artisanal lobster trammel net fishery
ranged from 78 to 100 percent. Given this mortality rate and the number
of turtles reported in lobster trammel nets, Carreras et al. (2004)
estimate that a few thousand loggerhead turtles are killed annually by
lobster trammel nets in the whole western Mediterranean. Considering
data throughout the entire Mediterranean, as well as a conservative
approach, Casale (2008) considered mortality by set nets to be 60
percent, with a resulting estimate of 16,000 turtles killed per year.
Most of these animals are likely juveniles; Casale (2008) evaluated
available set net catch data throughout the Mediterranean and found an
average size of 45.4 cm CCL (n=74).
As noted above, artisanal set net fisheries also may capture
numerous sea turtles, as observed off Cyprus and Turkey (Godley et al.,
1998a).
Driftnet Fisheries
Historically, driftnet fishing in the Mediterranean caught large
numbers of sea turtles. An estimated 16,000 turtles were captured
annually in the Ionian Sea driftnet fishery in the 1980s (De Metrio and
Megalofonou, 1988). The United Nations established a worldwide
moratorium on driftnet fishing effective in 1992, but unregulated
driftnetting continued to occur in the Mediterranean. For instance, a
bycatch estimate of 236 loggerhead turtles was developed for the
Spanish swordfish driftnet fishery in 1994 (Silvani et al., 1999).
While the Spanish fleet curtailed activity in 1994, the Moroccan,
Turkish, French, and Italian driftnet fleets continued to operate.
Tudela et al. (2005) presented bycatch rates for driftnet fisheries in
the Alboran Sea and off Italy. The Moroccan Alboran Sea driftnet fleet
bycatch rate ranged from 0.21 to 0.78 loggerheads per haul, whereas the
Italian driftnet fleet had a lower bycatch rate of 0.046 to 0.057
loggerheads per haul (Di Natale, 1995; Caminas, 1997; Silvani et al.,
1999). The use of driftnets in the Mediterranean continues to be
illegal: the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean
prohibited driftnet fishing in 1997; a total ban on driftnet fishing by
the European Union fleet in the Mediterranean went into effect in 2002;
and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
(ICCAT) banned driftnets in 2003. Nevertheless, there are an estimated
600 illegal driftnet vessels operating in the Mediterranean, including
fleets based in Algeria, France, Italy, Morocco, and Turkey
(Environmental Justice Foundation, 2007). In particular, the Moroccan
fleet, operating in the Alboran Sea and Straits of Gibraltar, comprises
the bulk of Mediterranean driftnetting, and has been found responsible
for high bycatch, including loggerhead turtles (Environmental Justice
Foundation, 2007; Aksissou et al., in press). Driftnet fishing in the
Mediterranean, and accompanying threats to loggerhead turtles,
continues to occur.
Trawl Fisheries
Sea turtles are known to be incidentally captured in trawls in
Albania, Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Libya,
Morocco, Slovenia, Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and Casale, 1999;
Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Casale, 2008). Laurent et al. (1996) estimated
that approximately 10,000 to 15,000 sea turtles (most of which are
loggerheads) are captured by bottom trawling in the entire
Mediterranean. More recently, Casale (2008) compiled available trawl
bycatch data throughout the Mediterranean and reported that Italy and
Tunisia have the highest level of sea turtle bycatch, potentially over
20,000 captures per year combined, and Croatia, Greece, Turkey, Egypt,
and Libya each catch more than 2,000 turtles per year. Further, Spain
and Albania may each capture a few hundred sea turtles per year
(Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of sea turtle
captures by all Mediterranean trawlers may be greater than 40,000
(Casale, 2008). Note that these are capture events and not necessarily
individual turtles.
Although juveniles are incidentally captured in trawl gear in many
areas of the Mediterranean (Casale et al., 2004, 2007a; Jribi et al.,
2007), adult turtles are also found. In Egypt, 25 percent of
loggerheads captured in bottom trawl gear (n=16) were greater than or
equal to 70 cm CCL, and in Tunisia, 26.2 percent (n=62) were of this
larger size class (Laurent et al., 1996). Off Lampedusa Island, Italy,
the average size of turtles caught by bottom trawlers was 51.8 cm CCL
(range 22-87 cm CCL; n=368), and approximately 10 percent of the
animals measured greater than 75 cm CCL (Casale et al., 2007a). For all
areas of the Mediterranean, Casale (2008) reported that medium to large
turtles are generally caught by bottom trawl gear (mean 53.9 cm CCL;
range 22-87 cm CCL; n=648).
While there is a notable interaction rate in the Mediterranean, it
appears that the mortality associated with trawling is relatively low.
Incidents of mortality have ranged from 3.3 percent (n=60) in Tunisia
(Jribi et al., 2007) and 3.3 percent (n=92) in France (Laurent, 1991)
to 9.4 percent (n=32) in Italy (Casale et al., 2004). Casale et al.
(2004) found that mortality would be higher if all comatose turtles
were assumed to die. It also should be noted that the mortality rate in
trawls depends on the
[[Page 12638]]
duration of the haul, with longer haul durations resulting in higher
mortality rates (Henwood and Stuntz, 1987; Sasso and Epperly, 2006).
Jribi et al. (2007) stated that the low recorded mortality in the Gulf
of Gab[egrave]s is likely due to the short haul durations in this area.
Based on available information from multiple areas of the
Mediterranean, and assuming that comatose animals die if released in
that condition, the overall average mortality rate for bottom trawlers
was estimated to be 20 percent (Casale, 2008). This results in at least
7,400 turtles killed per year by bottom trawlers in all of the
Mediterranean, but the number is likely more than 10,000 (Casale,
2008).
Mid-water trawling may have less total impact on sea turtles found
in the Mediterranean than some other gear types, but interactions still
occur. Casale et al. (2004) found that while no turtles were caught on
observed mid-water trawl trips in the North Adriatic Sea, vessel
captains reported 13 sea turtles captured from April to September.
Considering total fishing effort, these reports resulted in a minimum
total catch estimate of 161 turtles/year in the Italian mid-water trawl
fishery. Off Turkey, 71 loggerheads were captured in mid-water trawls
from 1995-1996, while 43 loggerheads were incidentally taken in bottom
trawls (Oru[ccedil], 2001). In this same study, of a total 320 turtles
captured in mid-water trawls (loggerheads and greens combined), 95
percent were captured alive and apparently healthy. While the total
catch numbers throughout the Mediterranean have not been estimated,
mid-water trawl fisheries do present a threat to loggerhead sea
turtles.
Other Gear Types
Seine, dredge, trap/pot, and hook and line fisheries operate in
Mediterranean waters and may affect loggerhead turtles, although
incidental captures in these gear types are largely unknown
(Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Artisanal fisheries using a variety of gear
types also have the potential for sea turtle takes, but the effects of
most artisanal gear types on sea turtles have not been estimated.
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic threats, such as interactions with recreational
and commercial vessels, marine pollution, and intentional killing, also
impact loggerheads found in the Mediterranean. Propeller and collision
injuries from boats and ships are becoming more common in sea turtles,
although it is unclear as to whether the events are increasing or just
the reporting of the injuries. Speedboat impacts are of particular
concern in areas of intense tourist activity, such as Greece and
Turkey. Losses of nesting females from vessel collisions have been
documented in Zakynthos and Crete in Greece (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). In
the Gulf of Naples, 28.1 percent of loggerheads recovered from 1993-
1996 had injuries attributed to boat strikes (Bentivegna and
Paglialonga, 1998). Along the Greece coastline from 1997-1999, boat
strikes were reported as a seasonal phenomenon in stranded turtles
(Kopsida et al., 2002), but numbers were not presented.
Direct or indirect disposal of anthropogenic debris introduces
potentially lethal materials into loggerhead foraging habitats.
Unattended or discarded nets, floating plastics and bags, and tar balls
are of particular concern (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Margaritoulis, 2007).
Monofilament netting appears to be the most dangerous waste produced by
the fishing industry (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). In the Mediterranean, 20
of 99 loggerhead turtles examined from Maltese fisheries were found
contaminated with plastic or metal litter and hydrocarbons, with crude
oil being the most common pollutant (Gramentz, 1988). Of 54 juvenile
loggerhead turtles incidentally caught by fisheries in Spanish
Mediterranean waters, 79.6 percent had debris in their digestive tracts
(Tomas et al., 2002). In this study, plastics were the most frequent
type of marine debris observed (75.9 percent), followed by tar (25.9
percent). However, an examination of stranded sea turtles in Northern
Cyprus and Turkey found that only 3 of 98 animals were affected by
marine debris (Godley et al., 1998b).
Pollutant waste in the marine environment may impact loggerheads,
likely more than other sea turtle species. Omnivorous loggerheads
stranded in Cyprus, Greece, and Scotland had the highest organochlorine
contaminant concentrations, as compared to green and leatherback
turtles (Mckenzie et al., 1999). In northern Cyprus, Godley et al.
(1999) found heavy metal concentrations (mercury, cadmium, and lead) to
be higher in loggerheads than green turtles. Even so, concentrations of
contaminants from sea turtles in Mediterranean waters were found to be
comparable to other areas, generally with levels lower than
concentrations shown to cause deleterious effects in other species
(Godley et al., 1999; Mckenzie et al., 1999). However, lead
concentrations in some Mediterranean loggerhead hatchlings were at
levels known to cause toxic effects in other vertebrate groups (Godley
et al., 1999).
As in other areas of the world, intentional killing or injuring of
sea turtles has been reported to occur in the Mediterranean. Of 524
strandings in Greece, it appeared that 23 percent had been
intentionally killed or injured (Kopsida et al., 2002). While some
turtles incidentally captured are used for consumption, it has been
reported that some fishermen kill the sea turtles they catch for a
variety of other reasons, including non-commercial use, hostility,
prejudice, recovery of hooks, and ignorance (Laurent et al., 1996;
Godley et al., 1998a; Gerosa and Casale, 1999; Casale, 2008).
Natural environmental events also may affect loggerheads in the
Mediterranean. Cyclonic storms that closely resemble tropical cyclones
in satellite images occasionally form over the Mediterranean Sea
(Emanuel, 2005). While hurricanes typically do not occur in the
Mediterranean, researchers have suggested that climate change could
trigger hurricane development in this area in the future (Gaertner et
al., 2007). Any significant storm event that may develop could disrupt
loggerhead nesting activity and hatchling production, but the results
are generally localized and rarely result in whole-scale losses over
multiple nesting seasons.
Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the Mediterranean.
Over the long term, Mediterranean turtle populations could be
threatened by the alteration of thermal sand characteristics (from
global warming), resulting in the reduction or cessation of female
hatchling production (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Further, a significant
rise in sea level would restrict loggerhead nesting habitat in the
eastern Mediterranean.
In summary, we find that the Mediterranean Sea DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Mediterranean Sea,
particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from pelagic and bottom
longline, set net, driftnet, and trawl fisheries, is a significant
threat to the persistence of this DPS. In addition, boat strikes are
becoming more common and are likely also a significant threat to the
persistence of this DPS.
[[Page 12639]]
South Atlantic Ocean DPS
A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the
South Atlantic result from coastal development and construction,
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting,
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction,
beach erosion, beach sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native
vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (D'Amato and
Marczwski, 1993; Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Naro-Maciel et al.,
1999; Marcovaldi et al., 2002b, 2005; Marcovaldi, 2007).
The primary nesting areas for loggerheads in the South Atlantic are
in the states of Sergipe, Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and Rio de
Janeiro in Brazil (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). These primary
nesting areas are monitored by Projeto TAMAR, the national sea turtle
conservation program in Brazil. Since 1980, Projeto TAMAR has worked to
establish legal protection for nesting beaches (Marcovaldi and
Marcovaldi, 1999). As such, human activities, including sand
extraction, beach nourishment, seawall construction, beach driving, and
artificial lighting, that can negatively impact sea turtle nesting
habitat, as well as directly impact nesting turtles and their eggs and
hatchlings during the reproductive season, are restricted by various
State and Federal laws (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Marcovaldi et
al., 2002b, 2005). Nevertheless, tourism development in coastal areas
in Brazil is high, and Projeto TAMAR works toward raising awareness of
turtles and their conservation needs through educational and
informational activities at their Visitor Centers that are dispersed
throughout the nesting areas (Marcovaldi et al., 2005).
In terms of non-native vegetation, the majority of nesting beaches
in northern Bahia, where loggerhead nesting density is highest in
Brazil (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007), have coconut plantations
dating back to the 17th century backing them (Naro-Maciel et al.,
1999). It is impossible to assess whether this structured habitat has
resulted in long-term changes to the loggerhead nesting rookery in
northern Bahia.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
Human activities that impact bottom habitat in the loggerhead
neritic and oceanic zones in the South Atlantic Ocean include fishing
practices, channel dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and
climate change (e.g., Ibe, 1996; Silva et al., 1997). General human
activities have altered ocean ecosystems, as identified by ecosystem
models (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). On the western side of the South
Atlantic, the Brazil Current LME region is characterized by the Global
International Waters Assessment as suffering severe impacts in the
areas of pollution, coastal habitat modification, and overexploitation
of fish stocks (Marques et al., 2004). The Patagonian Shelf LME is
moderately affected by pollution, habitat modification, and overfishing
(Mugetti et al., 2004). On the eastern side of the South Atlantic, the
Benguela Current LME has been characterized as moderately impacted in
the area of overfishing, with future conditions expected to worsen by
the Global International Waters Assessment (Prochazka et al., 2005).
Climate change also may result in future trophic changes, thus
impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
In summary, we find that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in its
marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not
available to assess the significance of these threats to the
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or
Educational Purposes
Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs
is reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. Limited
numbers of eggs are taken for human consumption in Brazil, but the
relative amount is considered minor when compared to historical rates
of egg collection (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Marcovaldi et al.,
2005; Almeida and Mendes, 2007). Use of sea turtles including
loggerheads for medicinal purposes occasionally occurs in northeastern
Brazil (Alves and Rosa, 2006). Use of bycaught loggerheads for
subsistence and medicinal purposes is likely to occur in southern
Atlantic Africa, based on information from central West Africa (Fretey,
2001; Fretey et al., 2007).
In summary, the harvest of loggerheads in Brazil for their meat,
shells, and eggs likely was a factor that contributed to the historic
decline of this DPS. However, current harvest levels are greatly
reduced from historic levels. Although harvest is known to still occur
in Brazil and southern Atlantic Africa, it no longer appears to be a
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact
loggerheads found in the South Atlantic Ocean. There have been five
confirmed cases of fibropapillomatosis in loggerheads in Brazil
(Baptistotte, 2007). There is no indication that this disease poses a
major threat for this species in the eastern South Atlantic (Formia et
al., 2007).
Eggs and nests in Brazil experience depredation, primarily by foxes
(Marcovaldi and Laurent, 1996). Nests laid by loggerheads in the
southern Atlantic African coastline, if any, likely experience similar
predation pressures to those on nests of other species laid in the same
area (e.g., jackals depredate green turtle nests in Angola; Weir et
al., 2007).
Loggerheads in the South Atlantic also may be impacted by harmful
algal blooms (Gilbert et al., 2005).
In summary, although disease and predation are known to occur,
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of
these threats on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the South Atlantic Ocean.
The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.9.4. of the Status
Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002)
and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these
international instruments. The problems with existing international
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law
[[Page 12640]]
and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation
(Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Atlantic Ocean is
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch in
the South Atlantic, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future
because of the diversity and magnitude of the commercial and artisanal
fisheries operating in the South Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that
should address direct and incidental take of South Atlantic Ocean
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial
fisheries is a significant threat to the survivability of loggerheads
in the South Atlantic. Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and
demersal longlines, drift and set gillnets, bottom and mid-water
trawling, fishing dredges, pound nets and weirs, haul and purse seines,
pots and traps, and hook and line gear. In the western South Atlantic,
there are various efforts aimed at mitigating bycatch of sea turtles in
various fisheries. In Brazil, there is the National Action Plan to
Reduce Incidental Capture of Sea Turtles in Fisheries, coordinated by
Projeto TAMAR (Marcovaldi et al., 2006). This action plan focuses on
both artisanal and commercial fisheries, and collects data directly
from fishers as well as on-board observers. Although loggerheads have
been observed as bycatch in all fishing gear and methods identified
above, Marcovaldi et al. (2006) have identified longlining as the major
source of incidental capture of loggerhead turtles. Reports of
loggerhead bycatch by pelagic longlines come mostly from the southern
portion of the Brazilian Exclusive Economic Zone, between 20[deg] S and
35[deg] S latitude. Bugoni et al. (2008) reported a loggerhead bycatch
rate of 0.52 juvenile turtles/1000 hooks by surface longlines targeting
dolphinfish. Pinedo et al. (2004) reported seasonal variation in
bycatch of juvenile loggerheads (and other sea turtle species) by
pelagic longlines in the same region of Brazil, with the highest rates
(1.85 turtles/1000 hooks) in the austral spring. Kotas et al. (2004)
reported the highest rates of loggerhead bycatch (greater than 10
turtles/1000 hooks) by pelagic longlines in the austral summer/fall
months. A study based on several years found that the highest rate of
loggerhead bycatch in pelagic longlines off Uruguay and Brazil was in
the late austral summer month of February: 2.72 turtles/1000 hooks
(Lopez-Medilaharsu et al., 2007). Sales et al. (2008) reported a
loggerhead bycatch rate of 0.87/1000 hooks near the Rio Grande Elevacao
do Rio Grande, about 600 nautical miles off the coast of southern
Brazil. In Uruguayan waters, the primary fisheries with loggerhead
bycatch are bottom trawlers and longlines (Domingo et al., 2006).
Domingo et al. (2008) reported bycatch rates of loggerheads of 0.9-1.3/
1000 hooks by longline deployed south of 30[deg] S latitude. In waters
off Argentina, bottom trawlers also catch some loggerheads (Domingo et
al., 2006).
In the eastern South Atlantic, sea turtle bycatch in fisheries has
been documented from Gabon to South Africa (Fretey, 2001). Limited data
are available on bycatch of loggerheads in coastal fisheries, although
loggerheads are known (or strongly suspected) to occur in coastal
waters from Gabon to South Africa (Fretey, 2001; Bal et al., 2007; Weir
et al., 2007). Coastal fisheries implicated in bycatch of loggerheads
and other turtles include gillnets, beach seines, and trawlers (Bal et
al., 2007).
In the high seas, longlines are used by fishing boats targeting
tuna and swordfish in the eastern South Atlantic. A recent study by
Honig et al. (2008) estimates 7,600-120,000 sea turtles are
incidentally captured by commercial longlines fishing in the Benguela
Current LME; 60 percent of these are loggerheads. Petersen et al.
(2007, 2009) reported that the rate of loggerhead bycatch in South
African longliners was around 0.02 turtles/1000 hooks, largely in the
Benguela Current LME. In the middle of the South Atlantic, loggerhead
bycatch by longlines was reported to be low, relative to other regions
in the Atlantic (Mejuto et al., 2008).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or
entanglement in marine debris, also apply to loggerheads in the South
Atlantic. Bugoni et al. (2001) have suggested the ingestion of plastic
and oil may contribute to loggerhead mortality on the southern coast of
Brazil. Plastic marine debris in the eastern South Atlantic also may
pose a problem for loggerheads and other sea turtles (Ryan, 1996).
Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level rise
have the potential to impact loggerheads in the South Atlantic.
Oil reserve exploration and extraction activities also may pose a
threat for sea turtles in the South Atlantic. Seismic surveys in Brazil
and Angola have recorded sea turtle occurrences near the seismic work
(Gurjao et al., 2005; Weir et al., 2007). While no sea turtle takes
were directly observed on these surveys, increased equipment and
presence in the water that is associated with these activities also
increases the likelihood of sea turtle interactions (Weir et al.,
2007).
Natural environmental events may affect loggerheads in the South
Atlantic. However, while a rare hurricane hit Brazil in March 2004,
typically hurricanes do not occur in the South Atlantic (McTaggart-
Cowan et al., 2006). This is generally due to higher windspeeds aloft,
preventing the storms from gaining height and therefore strength.
In summary, we find that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS of the
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we
find that fishery bycatch, particularly bycatch mortality of
loggerheads from pelagic longline fisheries, is a significant threat to
the persistence of this DPS.
Extinction Risk Assessments
In addition to the status evaluation and listing factor analysis
provided above, the BRT conducted two independent analyses to assess
extinction risks of the nine identified DPSs. These analyses provided
additional insights into the status of the nine DPSs. The first
analysis used the diffusion approximation approach based on time series
of counts of nesting females (Lande and Orzack, 1988; Dennis et al.,
1991; Holmes, 2001; Snover and Heppell, 2009). This
[[Page 12641]]
analysis provided a metric (susceptibility to quasi-extinction or SQE)
to determine if the probability of a population's risk of quasi-
extinction is high enough to warrant a particular listing status
(Snover and Heppell, 2009). The term ``quasi-extinction'' is defined by
Ginzburg et al. (1982) as the minimum number of individuals (often
females) below which the population is likely to be critically and
immediately imperiled. The diffusion approximation approach is based on
stochastic projections of observed trends and variability in the
numbers of mature females at various nesting beaches. The second
approach used a deterministic stage-based population model that focused
on determining the effects of known anthropogenic mortalities on each
DPS with respect to the vital rates of the species. Anthropogenic
mortalities were added to natural mortalities and possible ranges of
population growth rates were computed as another metric of population
health. Because this approach is based on matrix models, the BRT
referred to it as a threat matrix analysis. This approach focused on
how additional mortalities may affect the future growth and recovery of
a loggerhead turtle DPS. The first approach (SQE) was solely based on
the available time-series data on the numbers of nests at nesting
beaches, whereas the second approach (threat matrix analysis) was based
on the known biology of the species, natural mortality rates, and
anthropogenic mortalities, independent of observed nesting beach data.
The BRT found that for three of five DPSs with sufficient data to
conduct the SQE analysis (North Pacific Ocean, South Pacific Ocean, and
Northwest Atlantic Ocean), these DPSs were at risk of declining to
levels that are less than 30 percent of the current numbers of nesting
females (quasi-extinction thresholds < 0.30). The BRT found that for
the other two DPSs with sufficient data to conduct the SQE analysis
(Southwest Indian Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean), the risk of
declining to any level of quasi-extinction is negligible using the SQE
analysis because of the observed increases in the nesting females in
both DPSs. There were not enough data to conduct the SQE analysis for
the North Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, Northeast
Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea DPSs.
According to the threat matrix analysis using experts' opinions in
the matrix model framework, the BRT determined that all loggerhead
turtle DPSs have the potential to decline in the future. Although some
DPSs are indicating increasing trends at nesting beaches (Southwest
Indian Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean), available information about
anthropogenic threats to juvenile and adult loggerheads in neritic and
oceanic environments indicate possible unsustainable additional
mortalities. According to the threat matrix analysis, the potential for
future decline is greatest for the North Indian Ocean, Northwest
Atlantic Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and South
Atlantic Ocean DPSs.
The BRT's approach to the risk analysis presented several important
points. First, the lack of precise estimates of age at first
reproduction hindered precise assessment of the status of any DPS.
Within the range of possible ages at first reproduction of the species,
however, some DPSs could decline rapidly regardless of the exact age at
first reproduction because of high anthropogenic mortality.
Second, the lack of precise estimates of anthropogenic mortalities
resulted in a wide range of possible status using the threat matrix
analysis. For the best case scenario, a DPS may be considered healthy,
whereas for the worst case scenario the same DPS may be considered as
declining rapidly. The precise prognosis of each DPS relies on
obtaining precise estimates of anthropogenic mortality and vital rates.
Third, the assessment of a population without the information on
natural and anthropogenic mortalities is difficult. Because of the
longevity of the species, loggerhead turtles require high survival
rates throughout their life to maintain a population. Anthropogenic
mortality on the species occurs at every stage of their life, where the
exact magnitude of the mortality is often unknown. As described in the
Status Review, the upper end of natural mortality can be computed from
available information.
Nesting beach count data for the North Pacific Ocean DPS indicated
a decline of loggerhead turtle nesting in the last 20 years. The SQE
approach reflected the observed decline. However, in the threat matrix
analysis, the asymptotic population growth rates ([lambda]) with
anthropogenic mortalities ranged from less than one to greater than
one, indicating a large uncertainty about the future of the DPS.
Fishery bycatch along the coast of the Baja Peninsula and the nearshore
waters of Japan are the main known sources of mortalities. Mortalities
in the high-seas, where a large number of juvenile loggerhead turtles
reside (Kobayashi et al., 2008), from fishery bycatch are still
unknown.
The SQE approach indicated that, based on nest count data for the
past 3 decades, the South Pacific Ocean DPS is at risk and thus likely
to decline in the future. These results were based on recently
published nesting census data for loggerhead turtles at index beaches
in eastern Australia (Limpus, 2009). The threat matrix analysis
provided uncertain results: in the case of the lowest anthropogenic
threats, the South Pacific Ocean DPS may recover, but in the worst-case
scenario, the DPS may substantially decline in the future. These
results are largely driven by the ongoing threats to juvenile and adult
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occur throughout the South
Pacific Ocean and the uncertainty in estimated mortalities.
For the North Indian Ocean DPS, there were no nesting beach data
available to conduct the SQE analysis. The threat matrix analysis
indicated a decline of the DPS in the future, primarily as a result of
fishery bycatch in neritic habitats. Cumulatively, substantial threats
may exist for eggs/hatchlings. Because of the lack of precise estimates
of bycatch, however, the range of possible [lambda] values was large.
Similar to the North Indian Ocean DPS, no nesting beach data were
available for the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS. The level of
anthropogenic mortalities is low for the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
DPS, based on the best available information, resulting in relatively
large P[lambda] (the proportion of [lambda] values greater
than 1) and a narrow range. The greatest threats for the Southeast
Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS exist for the first year of the life stages
(eggs and hatchlings).
For the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, the SQE approach, based on a
37-year time series of nesting female counts at Tongaland, South Africa
(1963-1999), indicated this segment of the population, while small, has
increased, and the likelihood of quasi-extinction is negligible. The
threat matrix analysis, on the other hand, provided a wide range of
results: in the best case scenario, the DPS would grow slowly, whereas
in the worst case scenario, the DPS would decline in the future. The
results of the threat matrix analysis were driven by uncertainty in
anthropogenic mortalities in the neritic environment and the eggs/
hatchlings stage.
Within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, four of the five
identified recovery units have adequate time series data for applying
the SQE analysis; these were the Northern, Peninsular Florida, Northern
Gulf of Mexico, and Greater Caribbean Recovery Units. The SQE analysis
indicated differences in SQEs
[[Page 12642]]
among these four recovery units. Although the Northern Gulf of Mexico
Recovery Unit indicated the worst result among the four recovery units
assessed the length of the time series was shortest (12 data points).
The other three recovery units, however, appeared to show similar
declining trends, which were also indicated through the SQE approach.
The threat matrix analysis indicated a likely decline of the DPS in the
future. The greatest threats to the DPS result from cumulative fishery
bycatch in neritic and oceanic habitats.
Sufficient nesting beach data for the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS
were not available to conduct the SQE analysis. The high likelihood of
the predicted decline of the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS from the
threat matrix analysis is largely driven by the ongoing harvest of
nesting females, low hatchling and emergence success, and mortality of
juvenile and adult turtles from fishery bycatch throughout the
Northeast Atlantic Ocean. The threat matrix analysis indicated a
consistently pessimistic future for the DPS.
Representative nesting beach data for the Mediterranean Sea DPS
were not available to conduct the SQE analysis. The threat matrix
analysis indicated the DPS is likely to decline in the future. The
primary threats are fishery bycatch in neritic and oceanic habitats.
The two approaches for determining risks to the South Atlantic
Ocean DPS provided different, although not incompatible, results. The
SQE approach indicated that, based on nest count data for the past 2
decades, the population was unlikely to decline in the future. These
results were based on recently published nesting beach trend analyses
by Marcovaldi and Chaloupka (2007) and this QET analysis was consistent
with their conclusions. However, the SQE approach was based on past
performance of the DPS, specifically only nesting beach data, and did
not address ongoing or future threats to segments of the DPS that might
not have been or might not yet be reflected by nest count data. The
threat matrix approach indicated that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS is
likely to decline in the future. These results were largely driven by
the ongoing mortality threats to juvenile turtles from fishery bycatch
that occurs throughout the South Atlantic Ocean. Although conservation
efforts by national and international groups in the South Atlantic are
currently working toward mitigating bycatch in the South Atlantic, it
is unlikely that this source of mortality can be greatly reduced in the
near future, largely due to inadequate funding and knowledge gaps that
together inhibit implementation of large-scale management actions
(Domingo et al., 2006).
Conservation Efforts
When considering the listing of a species, section 4(b)(1)(A) of
the ESA requires us to consider efforts by any State, foreign nation,
or political subdivision of a State or foreign nation to protect the
species. Such efforts would include measures by Native American Tribes
and organizations. Also, Federal, Tribal, State, and foreign recovery
actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)), and Federal consultation requirements (16
U.S.C. 1536) constitute conservation measures. In addition to
identifying these efforts, under the ESA and our policy implementing
this provision (68 FR 15100; March 28, 2003) we must evaluate the
certainty of an effort's effectiveness on the basis of whether the
effort or plan establishes specific conservation objectives; identifies
the necessary steps to reduce threats or factors for decline; includes
quantifiable performance measures for the monitoring of compliance and
effectiveness; incorporates the principles of adaptive management; is
likely to be implemented; and is likely to improve the species'
viability at the time of the listing determination.
North Pacific Ocean DPS
NMFS has formalized two conservation actions to protect foraging
loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean, both of which were implemented
to reduce loggerhead bycatch in U.S. fisheries. Prior to 2001, the
Hawaii-based longline fishery had annual interaction levels of 300 to
500 loggerhead turtles. The temporary closure of the shallow-set
swordfish fishery in 2001 in large part over concerns of turtle
interactions brought about the immediate need to develop effective
solutions to reduce turtle interactions while maintaining the viability
of the industry. Since the reopening of the swordfish sector in 2004,
the fishery has operated under strict management measures, including
the use of large circle hooks and fish bait, restricted annual effort,
annual caps on loggerhead interactions (17 annually), and 100 percent
onboard observer coverage (50 CFR 665.3). As a result of these
measures, loggerhead interactions in the swordfish fishery have been
reduced by over 90 percent (Gilman et al., 2007). Furthermore, in 2003,
NMFS implemented a time/area closure in southern California during
forecasted or existing El Ni[ntilde]o-like conditions to reduce the
take of loggerheads in the California/Oregon drift gillnet fishery (68
FR 69963, December 16, 2003). While this closure has not been
implemented since the passage of these regulations due to the lack of
conditions occurring in the area, such a closure is expected to reduce
interactions between the large-mesh gillnet fishery and loggerheads by
over 70 percent.
Loggerhead interactions and mortalities with coastal fisheries in
Mexico and Japan are of concern and are considered a major threat to
North Pacific loggerhead recovery. NMFS and U.S. non-governmental
organizations have worked with international entities to: (1) Assess
bycatch mortality through systematic stranding surveys in Baja
California Sur, Mexico; (2) reduce interactions and mortalities in two
bottom-set fisheries in Mexico; (3) conduct gear mitigation trials to
reduce bycatch in Japanese pound nets; and (4) convey information to
fishers and other stakeholders through participatory activities, events
and outreach.
In 2003, the Grupo Tortuguero's ProCaguama (Operation Loggerhead)
was initiated to partner directly with fishermen to assess and mitigate
their bycatch while maintaining fisheries sustainability in Baja
California, Mexico. ProCaguama's fisher-scientist team discovered the
highest turtle bycatch rates documented worldwide and has made
considerable progress in mitigating anthropogenic mortality in Mexican
waters (Peckham et al., 2007, 2008). As a result of the 2006 and 2007
tri-national fishermen's exchanges run by ProCaguama, Sea Turtle
Association of Japan, and the Western Pacific Fisheries Management
Council, in 2007 a prominent Baja California Sur fleet retired its
bottom-set longlines. Prior to this closure, the longline fleet
interacted with an estimated 2,000 loggerheads annually, with nearly
all (approximately 90 percent) of the takes resulting in mortalities
(Peckham et al., 2008). Because this fishery no longer exists,
conservation efforts have resulted in the continued protection of
nearly 2,000 juvenile loggerheads annually.
Led by the Mexican wildlife service (Vida Silvestre), a Federal
loggerhead bycatch reduction task force was organized in 2008 to ensure
loggerheads the protection they are afforded by Mexican law. The task
force is comprised of Federal and State agencies, in addition to non-
governmental organizations, to solve the bycatch problem, meeting
ProCaguama's bottom-up initiatives with complementary top-down
management and enforcement resources. In 2009, while testing a variety
of potential solutions, ProCaguama's fisher-scientist
[[Page 12643]]
team demonstrated the commercial viability of substituting bycatch-free
hook fishing for gillnet fishing. Local fishers are interested in
adoption of this gear because the technique results in higher quality
catch offering access to higher-value markets and potentially higher
sustainability with zero bycatch. From 2010 forward ProCaguama, in
coordination with the task force, will engineer a market-based bycatch
solution consisting of hook substitution, training to augment ex-vessel
fish value, development of fisheries infrastructure, linkage of local
fleets with regional and international markets, and concurrent
strengthening of local fisheries management.
The U.S. has also funded non-governmental organizations to convey
bycatch solutions to local fishers as well as to educate communities on
the protection of all sea turtles (i.e., reduce directed harvest). Over
3,500 coastal citizens are reached through festivals and local outreach
activities, over 45 local leaders and dozens of fishermen are empowered
to reduce bycatch and promote sustainable fishing, and 15 university
and high school students are trained in conservation science. The
effectiveness of these efforts is difficult to quantify without several
post-outreach years of documenting reductions in sea turtle strandings,
directed takes, or bycatch in local fisheries.
Due to concerns of high adult loggerhead mortality in mid-water
pound nets, as documented in 2006, Sea Turtle Association of Japan
researchers began to engage the pound net operators in an effort to
study the impact and reduce sea turtle bycatch. This work was expanded
in 2008 with U.S. support and, similar to outreach efforts in Mexico,
is intended to engage local fishermen in conservation throughout
several Japanese prefectures. Research opportunities will be developed
with and for local fishermen in order to assess and mitigate bycatch.
Since 2003, with the assistance of the U.S., the Sea Turtle
Association of Japan and, in recent years with the Grupo Tortuguero,
has conducted nesting beach monitoring and management at several major
loggerhead nesting beaches, with the intent of increasing the number of
beaches surveyed and protected. Due to logistical problems and costs,
the Sea Turtle Association of Japan's program had been limited to five
primary rookeries. At these areas, hatchling production has been
augmented through: (1) Relocation of doomed nests; and (2) protection
of nests in situ from trampling, desiccation, and predation. Between
2004 and 2008, management activities have been successful with over
160,000 hatchlings released from relocated nests that would have
otherwise been lost to inundation or erosion, with many more hatchlings
produced from in situ nests.
The U.S. plans to continue supporting this project in the
foreseeable future, increasing relocation activities at other high-
density nesting beaches, implementing predator control activities to
reduce predation by raccoon dogs and raccoons, and assessing the
effects of light pollution at a major nesting beach (Maehama Beach).
Determination of hatching success will also be initiated at several key
nesting beaches (Inakahama, Maehama, Yotsuse, and Kurio, all in
Yakushima) to provide information to support the removal of armoring
structures and to evaluate the success of relocation and other nest
protection activities. Outreach and education activities in coastal
cities will increase public awareness of problems with foot traffic,
light pollution, and armoring.
Egg harvest was common in Japan until the 1970s, when several of
the major nesting areas (notably Yakushima and Miyazaki) led locally
based efforts to ban or eliminate egg harvest. As a result, egg harvest
at Japanese nesting beaches was eliminated by the early 1980s.
The establishment of the Sea Turtle Association of Japan in 1990
created a network of individuals and organizations conducting sea
turtle monitoring and conservation activities in Japan for the first
time. The Sea Turtle Association of Japan also served to standardize
data collection methods (for tagging and measuring). The Association
greatly depends on its members around Japan to gather nesting data as
well as to conduct various conservation measures.
Shoreline erosion and bycatch are some of the major concerns dealt
by the Sea Turtle Association of Japan today. Much of Japan's coastline
is ``armored'' using concrete structures to prevent and minimize
impacts to coastal communities from natural disasters. These structures
have resulted in a number of nesting beaches losing sand suitable for
sea turtle nesting, and nests are often relocated to safe areas or
hatcheries to protect them from further erosion and inundation. In
recent years, a portion of the concrete structures at a beach in
Toyohashi City, Aichi Prefecture, was experimentally removed to create
better nesting habitat. The Sea Turtle Association of Japan, along with
various other organizations in Japan, are carrying out discussions with
local and Federal government agencies to develop further solutions to
the beach erosion issue and to maintain viable nesting sites. Beach
erosion and armament still remain one of the most significant threats
to nesting beaches in Japan.
While conservation efforts for the North Pacific Ocean DPS are
substantive and improving and may be reflected in the recent increases
in the number of nesting females, they still remain inadequate to
ensure the long-term viability of the population. For example, while
most of the major nesting beaches are monitored, some of the management
measures in place are inadequate and may be inappropriate. On some
beaches, hatchling releases are coordinated with the tourist industry
or nests are being trampled on or are unprotected. The largest threat
on the nesting beach, reduced availability of habitat due to heavy
armament and subsequent erosion, is just beginning to be addressed but
without immediate attention may ultimately result in the demise of the
highest density beaches. Efforts to reduce loggerhead bycatch in known
coastal fisheries off Baja California, Mexico, and Japan is
encouraging, but concerns remain regarding the mortalities of adult and
juvenile turtles in mid-water pound nets and the high costs that may be
involved in replacing and/or mitigating this gear. With these coastal
fishery threats still emerging, there has not yet been sufficient
time--or a nationwide understanding of the threat--to develop
appropriate conservation strategies or work to fully engage with the
government of Japan. Greater international cooperation and
implementation of the use of circle hooks in longline fisheries
operating in the North Pacific Ocean is necessary, as well as
understanding fishery related impacts in the South China Sea. Further,
it is suspected that there are substantial impacts from illegal,
unreported, and unregulated fishing, which we are unable to mitigate
without additional fisheries management efforts and international
collaborations. While conservation projects for this population have
been in place since 2004 for some important areas, efforts in other
areas are still being developed to address major threats, including
fisheries bycatch and long-term nesting habitat protection.
South Pacific Ocean DPS
The New Caledonia Aquarium and NMFS have collaborated since 2007 to
address and influence management measures of the regional fishery
management organization. Their intent is to reduce pelagic fishery
interactions with sea turtles through increased understanding of
pelagic habitat use by
[[Page 12644]]
South Pacific loggerheads using satellite telemetry, oceanographic
analysis, and juvenile loggerheads reared at the Aquarium. NMFS
augments this effort by supporting animal husbandry, education and
outreach activities coordinated through the New Caledonia Aquarium to
build capacity, and public awareness regarding turtle conservation in
general.
The U.S. has collaborated on at-sea conservation of sea turtles
with Chile under the U.S.-Chile Fisheries Cooperation Agreement, and
with Peru under a collaboration with El Instituto del Mar del Peru and
local non-governmental organizations. Research from this collaboration
showed that loggerheads of southwestern Pacific stock origin interact
with commercial and artisanal longline fisheries off the South American
coast. NMFS has supported efforts by Chile to reduce bycatch and
mortality by placing observers on vessels who have been trained and
equipped to dehook, resuscitate, and release loggerheads. Chile also
has closed the northernmost sector since 2002, where the loggerheads
interactions occur, to longline fishing (Miguel Donoso, Pacifico Laud,
personal communication, 2009). Local non-governmental organizations,
such as Pacifico Laud (Chile), Associacion Pro Delphinus (Peru), and
Areas Costeras y Recursos Marinos (Peru), have been engaged in outreach
and conservation activities promoting loggerhead bycatch reduction,
with support from NMFS.
Coastal trawl fisheries also threaten juvenile and adult
loggerheads foraging off eastern Australia, particularly the northern
Australian prawn fishery (estimated to take between 5,000 and 6,000
turtles annually in the late 1980s/early 1990s). However, since the
introduction and requirement for these fisheries to use turtle excluder
devices in 2000, that threat has been drastically reduced, to an
estimated 200 turtles/year (Robins et al., 2002a). Turtle excluder
devices were also made mandatory in the Queensland East Coast trawl
fisheries (2000), the Torres Strait prawn fishery (2002), and the
Western Australian prawn and scallop fisheries (2002) (Limpus, 2009).
Predation of loggerhead eggs by foxes was a major threat to nests
laid in eastern Australia through the late 1970s, particularly on Mon
Repos and Wreck Rock. Harassment by local residents and researchers, as
well as baiting and shooting, discouraged foxes from encroaching on the
nesting beach at Mon Repos so that by the mid-1970s, predation levels
had declined to trivial levels. At Wreck Rock, fox predation was
intense through the mid-1980s, with a 90-95 percent predation rate
documented. Fox baiting was introduced at Wreck Rock and some adjacent
beaches in 1987, and has been successful at reducing the predation rate
to low levels by the late 1990s (Limpus, 2009). To reduce the risk of
hatchling disorientation due to artificial lighting inland of the
nesting beaches adjacent to Mon Repos and Heron Island, low pressure
sodium vapor lights have been installed or, where lighting has not been
controlled, eggs are relocated to artificial nests on nearby dark
beaches. Limpus (2009) reported that hatchling mortality due to altered
light horizons on the Woongara coast has been reduced to a handful of
clutches annually.
While most of the conservation efforts for the South Pacific Ocean
DPS are long-term, substantive, and improving, given the low number of
nesting females, the declining trends, and major threats that are just
beginning to be addressed, they still remain inadequate to ensure the
long-term viability of the population. The use of TEDs in most of the
major trawl fisheries in Australia has certainly reduced the bycatch of
juvenile and adult turtles, as has the reduction in fox predation on
important nesting beaches. However, the intense effort by longline
fisheries in the South Pacific, particularly from artisanal fleets
operating out of Peru, and its estimated impact on this loggerhead
population, particularly oceanic juveniles, remains a significant
threat that is just beginning to be addressed by most participating
countries, including the regional fishery management council(s) that
manage many of these fleets. Modeling by Chaloupka (2003) showed the
impact of this fleet poses a greater risk than either fox predation at
major nesting beaches (90 percent egg loss per year during unmanaged
periods) or past high mortalities in coastal trawl fisheries. The
recent sea turtle conservation resolution by the Western and Central
Pacific Fisheries Commission, requiring longline fleets to use specific
gear and collect information on bycatch, is encouraging but took effect
in January 2010, so improvement in the status of this population may
not be realized for many years. Potentially important pelagic foraging
habitat in areas of high fishing intensity remains poorly studied but
is improving through U.S. and international collaborations. While a
comprehensive conservation program for this population has been in
place for important nesting beaches, efforts in other areas are still
being developed to address major threats, including fisheries bycatch.
North Indian Ocean DPS
The main threats to North Indian Ocean loggerheads are fishery
bycatch and nesting beach habitat loss and degradation. Royal Decree
53/81 prohibits the hunting of turtles and eggs in Oman. The Ministry
of Environment and Climate Affairs (MECA) and Environmental Society of
Oman (ESO) are collaborating to carry out a number of conservation
measures at Masirah Island for the nesting loggerhead population. First
and foremost are standardized annual nesting surveys to monitor
population trends. Standardized surveys were first implemented in 2008.
Less complete nesting surveys have been conducted in some previous
years beginning in 1977, but the data have yet to be adequately
analyzed to determine their usefulness in determining population size
and trends. Nine kilometers of nesting habitat within the Masirah Air
Force Base is largely protected from tourist development but remains
subject to light pollution from military operations. The remaining 50
kilometers of loggerhead nesting beaches are not protected from egg
harvest, lighting, or beach driving. Currently, MECA is in the process
of developing a protected area proposal for Masirah Island that will
address needed protection of nesting beaches, including protection from
egg collection and beach driving. In the meantime, development is
continuing and it is uncertain how much, when, and if nesting habitat
will receive adequate protection. MECA is beginning to regulate
artificial lighting in new development. In 2010, a major outreach
effort in the form of a Turtle Celebration Day is planned at Masirah
Island to raise greater awareness of the local communities about the
global importance of the Masirah Island loggerhead nesting population
and to increase community involvement in conservation efforts. Nesting
surveys are also being conducted on the Halaniyat Islands. There are no
specific efforts underway to designate Halaniyat nesting beaches as
Protected Areas in the face of proposed development plans. Although
important management actions are underway on the nesting beaches, their
effectiveness has yet to be determined and the potential for strong
habitat protection and restoration of degraded nesting habitat remains
uncertain. At present, hatchling production is not measured.
The only research that has been conducted on the nesting population
to date was a study of internesting and post-nesting movements
conducted in 2006 when 20 nesting females were
[[Page 12645]]
instrumented with satellite transmitters. This research identified
important inter-seasonal foraging grounds but is considered incomplete,
and additional nesting females will be satellite tagged in 2010-2012 to
assess clutch frequency, interactions with local fisheries, and inter-
nesting and post-nesting movements. In 2009, efforts to investigate
loggerhead bycatch in gillnet fisheries at Masirah were initiated, and
some fisherman have agreed to cooperate and document bycatch in 2010.
While conservation efforts for the North Indian Ocean loggerhead
DPS are substantive and improving, they still remain inadequate to
ensure the long-term viability of the population. For example, there is
currently no assessment of hatchling production on the main nesting
beaches, no efforts underway to restore the largely degraded nesting
habitat on the major nesting beaches, and little understanding or
knowledge of foraging grounds for juveniles or adults and the extent of
their interactions with fisheries. There is no information on bycatch
from fisheries off the main nesting beaches other than reports that
this bycatch occurs. A comprehensive conservation program for this
population is under development, but is incomplete relative to
fisheries bycatch and long-term nesting habitat protection.
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS
The level of anthropogenic mortalities is low for the Southeast
Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, based on the best available information.
However, there are many known opportunities for conservation efforts
that would aid recovery. Some significant conservation efforts are
underway.
One of the principal nesting beaches for this DPS, Australia's Dirk
Hartog Island, is part of the Shark Bay World Heritage Area and was
recently announced to become part of Australia's National Park System.
This designation may facilitate monitoring of nesting beaches and
enforcement of prohibitions on direct take of loggerheads and their
eggs. Loggerheads are listed as Endangered under Australia's
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 1999.
Conservation efforts on nesting beaches have included invasive
predator control. On the North West Cape and the beaches of the
Ningaloo coast of mainland Australia, a long established feral European
red fox (Vulpes vulpes) population preyed heavily on eggs and is
thought to be responsible for the lower numbers of nesting turtles on
the mainland beaches (Baldwin et al., 2003). Fox populations have been
eradicated on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al.,
2003), and threat abatement plans have been implemented for the control
of foxes (1999) and feral pigs (2005).
The international regulatory mechanisms described in Section 5.1.4.
of the Status Review apply to loggerheads found in the Southeast Indo-
Pacific Ocean. In addition, loggerheads of this DPS benefit from the
Indian Ocean-South-East Asian Marine Turtle Memorandum of Understanding
(IOSEA). Efforts facilitated by IOSEA have focused on reducing threats,
conserving important habitat, exchanging scientific data, increasing
public awareness and participation, promoting regional cooperation, and
seeking resources for implementation. Currently, there are 30 IOSEA
signatory states.
In 2000, the use of turtle excluder devices in the Northern
Australian Prawn Fishery (NPF) was made mandatory. Prior to the use of
TEDs in this fishery, the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea
turtles as bycatch, with a mortality rate estimated to be 40 percent
(Poiner and Harris, 1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in
effect, the annual bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to
less than 200 sea turtles per year, with a mortality rate of
approximately 22 percent (based on recent years). Beginning progress
has been made to measure the threat of incidental capture of sea
turtles in other artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southeast
Indo-Pacific Ocean (Lewison et al., 2004; Limpus, 2009), however, the
data remain inadequate for stock assessment.
As in other DPSs, persistent marine debris poses entanglement and
ingestion hazards to loggerheads. In 2009, Australia's Department of
the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts published a threat
abatement plan for the impacts of marine debris on vertebrate marine
life.
In spite of these conservation efforts, considerable uncertainty in
the status of this DPS lies with inadequate efforts to measure bycatch
in the region, a short time-series of monitoring on nesting beaches,
and missing vital rates data necessary for population assessments.
Southwest Indian Ocean DPS
The Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is small but has experienced an
increase in numbers of nesting females. Although there is considerable
uncertainty in anthropogenic mortalities, especially in the water, the
DPS may have benefitted from important conservation efforts at the
nesting beaches.
All principal nesting beaches, centered in South Africa, are within
protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, nesting beaches
in the Maputo Special Reserve (approximately 60 kilometers of nesting
beach) and in the Paradise Islands are also within protected areas
(Baldwin et al., 2003; Costa et al., 2007).
The international regulatory mechanisms described in Section 5.1.4.
of the Status Review apply to loggerheads found in the Southwest Indian
Ocean. In addition, loggerheads of this DPS benefit from the Indian
Ocean-South-East Asian Marine Turtle Memorandum of Understanding
(IOSEA) and the Nairobi Convention for the Protection, Management and
Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern
African Region.
In spite of these conservation efforts, caution in the status of
this DPS lies with its small population size, inadequate efforts to
measure bycatch in the region, and missing vital rates data necessary
for population assessments.
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
The main threats to Northwest Atlantic Ocean loggerheads include
fishery bycatch mortality, particularly in gillnet, longline, and trawl
fisheries; nesting beach habitat loss and degradation (e.g., beachfront
lighting, coastal armoring); and ingestion of marine debris during the
epipelagic lifestage. In addition, mortality from vessel strikes is
increasing and likely also a significant threat to this DPS.
Mortality resulting from domestic and international commercial
fishing ranks among the most significant threats to Northwest Atlantic
loggerheads. Fishing gear types include gillnets, trawls, hook and line
(e.g., longlines), seines, dredges, and various types of pots/traps.
Among these, gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear collectively result in
tens of thousands of Northwest Atlantic loggerhead deaths annually
throughout their range (see for example, Lewison et al., 2004; NMFS,
2002, 2004).
Considerable effort has been expended since the 1980s to document
and reduce commercial fishing bycatch mortality. NMFS has implemented
observer programs in many Federally managed and some State-managed
fisheries to collect turtle bycatch data and estimate mortality. NMFS,
working with industry and other partners, has reduced bycatch in some
fisheries by developing technological solutions to prevent capture or
to allow most turtles to escape without harm (e.g., TEDs), by
[[Page 12646]]
implementing time and area closures to prevent interactions from
occurring (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing along the mid-Atlantic
coast during the periods of high loggerhead abundance), and by
modifying gear (e.g., requirements to reduce mesh size in the leaders
of pound nets to prevent entanglement, requirements to use large circle
hooks with certain bait types in segments of the pelagic longline
fishery). NMFS is currently working to implement a coastwide,
comprehensive strategy to reduce bycatch of sea turtles in State and
Federal fisheries in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. This
approach was developed to address sea turtle bycatch issues on a per-
gear basis, with a goal of developing and implementing coastwide
solutions for reducing turtle bycatch inshore, nearshore, and offshore.
The development and implementation of TEDs in the shrimp trawl
fishery is arguably the most significant conservation accomplishment
for Northwest Atlantic loggerheads in the marine environment since
their listing. In the southeast U.S. and Gulf of Mexico, TEDs have been
mandatory in shrimp and flounder trawls for over a decade. However,
TEDs are not required in all trawl fisheries, and significant
loggerhead mortality continues in some trawl fisheries. In addition,
enforcement of TED regulations depends on available resources, and
illegal or improperly installed TEDs continue to contribute to
mortality.
Gillnets of various mesh sizes are used extensively to harvest fish
in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. All size classes of
loggerheads in coastal waters are prone to entanglement in gillnets,
and, generally, the larger the mesh size the more likely that turtles
will become entangled. State resource agencies and NMFS have been
addressing this issue on several fronts. In the southeast U.S.,
gillnets are prohibited in the State waters of South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, and Texas and are restricted to fishing for pompano and mullet
in saltwater areas of Louisiana. Reducing bycatch of loggerheads in the
remaining State and Federally regulated gillnet fisheries of the U.S.
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico has not been fully accomplished. NMFS has
addressed the issue for several Federally managed fisheries, such as
the large-mesh gillnet fishery (primarily for monkfish) along the
Atlantic coast, where gillnets larger than 8-inch stretched mesh are
now regulated in North Carolina and Virginia through rolling closures
timed to match the northward migration of loggerheads along the mid-
Atlantic coast in late spring and early summer. The State of North
Carolina, working with NMFS through the ESA section 10 process, has
been making some progress in reducing bycatch of loggerheads in gillnet
fisheries operating in Pamlico Sound. The large mesh driftnet fishery
for sharks off the Atlantic coast of Florida and Georgia remains a
concern as do gillnet fisheries operating elsewhere in the range of the
DPS, including Mexico and Cuba.
Observer programs have documented significant bycatch of
loggerheads in the U.S. longline fishery operating in the Atlantic
Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. In recent years, NMFS has dedicated
significant funding and effort to address this bycatch issue. In
partnership with academia and industry, NMFS has funded and conducted
field experiments in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean to develop gear
modifications that eliminate or significantly reduce loggerhead
bycatch. As a result of these experiments, NMFS now requires the use of
circle hooks fleet wide and larger circle hooks in combination with
whole finfish bait in the Northeast Distant area (69 FR 40734, June 1,
2004).
The incidental capture and mortality of loggerheads by
international longline fleets operating in the North Atlantic Ocean and
Mediterranean Sea is of great concern. The U.S. has been attempting to
work through Regional Fisheries Management Organizations, such as the
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, to
encourage member nations to adopt gear modifications (e.g., large
circle hooks) that have been shown to significantly reduce loggerhead
bycatch. To date, limited success in reducing loggerhead bycatch has
been achieved in these international forums.
Although numerous efforts are underway to reduce loggerhead bycatch
in fisheries, and many positive actions have been implemented, it is
unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced
across the range of the DPS in the near future because of the diversity
and magnitude of the fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the
lack of comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies.
In the southeast U.S., nest protection efforts have been
implemented on the majority of nesting beaches, and progress has been
made in reducing mortality from human-related impacts on the nesting
beach. A key effort has been the acquisition of Archie Carr National
Wildlife Refuge in Florida, where nesting densities often exceed 600
nests per km (1,000 nests per mile). Over 60 percent of the available
beachfront acquisitions for the Refuge have been completed as the
result of a multi-agency land acquisition effort. In addition, 14
additional refuges, as well as numerous coastal national seashores,
military installations, and State parks in the Southeast where
loggerheads regularly nest are also provided protection. However,
despite these efforts, alteration of the coastline continues, and
outside of publicly owned lands, coastal development and associated
coastal armoring remains a serious threat.
Efforts are also ongoing to reduce light pollution on nesting
beaches. A significant number of local governments in the southeast
U.S. have enacted lighting ordinances designed to reduce the effects of
artificial lighting on sea turtles. However, enforcement of the
lighting ordinances varies considerably.
With regard to marine debris, the MARPOL Convention (International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as
modified by the Protocol of 1978) is the main international convention
that addresses prevention of pollution (including oil, chemicals,
harmful substances in packaged form, sewage, and garbage) of the marine
environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. However,
challenges remain to implementation and enforcement of the MARPOL
Convention, and on its own the Convention does not suffice to prevent
all instances of marine pollution.
The seriousness of the threat caused by vessel strikes to
loggerheads in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico cannot be overstated.
This growing problem is particularly difficult to address. In some
cases, NMFS, through section 7 of the ESA, has worked with the U.S.
Coast Guard in an attempt to reduce the probability of vessel strikes
during permitted offshore race events. However, most vessel strikes
occur outside of these venues and the growing number of licensed
vessels, especially inshore and nearshore, exacerbates the conflict.
A number of regulatory instruments at international, regional,
national, and local levels have been developed that provide legal
protection for loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northwest
Atlantic Ocean. The Status Review identifies and includes a discussion
of these regulatory instruments (Conant et al., 2009). The
[[Page 12647]]
problems with existing international treaties are often that they have
not realized their full potential, do not include some key countries,
do not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are
handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority to enforce
environmental regulations.
In summary, while conservation efforts for the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean loggerhead DPS are substantive and improving, they remain
inadequate to ensure the long-term viability of the population.
Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS
Since 2002, all sea turtles and their habitats in Cape Verde have
been protected by law (Decreto-Regulamentar n[deg] 7/2002). The
reality, however, is that the laws are not respected or enforced and
that in recent years until 2008 up to 25-30 percent of nesting females
were illegally killed for meat each year on the nesting beaches. Egg
collection is also a serious threat on some of the islands. Other major
threats include developments and commensurate light pollution behind
one important nesting beach on Boa Vista and the most important nesting
beach on Sal, as well as sand mining on many of the islands. Other
planned and potential developments on these and other islands present
future threats. Bycatch and directed take in coastal waters is likely a
significant mortality factor to the population given the importance of
the coastal waters as loggerhead foraging grounds and the extensive
fisheries occurring there. Adult females nesting in Cape Verde have
been found foraging along the mainland coast of West Africa as well as
in the oceanic environment, thereby making them vulnerable to impacts
from a wide range of fisheries (Hawkes et al., 2006). Unfortunately,
law enforcement on the nesting beaches and in the marine environment is
lacking in Cape Verde.
Conservation efforts in Cape Verde began in the mid 1990s and
focused on efforts to raise local, national, and international
awareness of the importance of the Cape Verdian loggerhead population
and the ongoing slaughter of nesting females. A field camp set up by
the non-governmental organization Natura 2000 in 1999 on the 10-
kilometer Ervatao Beach, the single most important nesting beach at Boa
Vista, grew out of this initial effort. This camp established a
presence to deter poaching and gather data on nesting and poaching
activity. In 2008, The Turtle Foundation, another non-governmental
organization began to work at Porto Ferreira Beach, the second most
important nesting area on Boa Vista. The non-governmental organization
SOS Tartarugas began conservation work on the important nesting beaches
of Sal in 2008. In May 2009, USFWS funded a workshop in Cape Verde to
bring together representatives from the three non-governmental
organizations and the universities involved with loggerhead
conservation in Cape Verde and government representatives from the
Ministry of Environment, Military and Municipalities to discuss the
threats, current conservation efforts, and priority actions needed. A
Sea Turtle Network was established to better coordinate and expand
conservation efforts throughout the Cape Verdean islands.
Natura 2000 has continued its efforts on Ervatao Beach and in 2009
assumed responsibility for work on Porto Ferreira Beach. Natura 2000
has reduced poaching to about 5 percent on these two important beaches,
which represent 75 percent of the nesting on Boa Vista. The Turtle
Foundation also conducts extensive public outreach on sea turtle
conservation issues. The Turtle Foundation covered four other important
beaches in 2009 with the assistance of the Cape Verdian military and
likewise believes poaching was reduced to about 5 percent of nesting
females on the beaches covered. The University of Algarve established a
research project on Santiago Island in 2007; activities included nest
monitoring and protection, collecting biological data and information
on poaching, and outreach through the media and to the government
representatives (Loureiro, 2008). This project minimized its efforts in
2009. The Turtle Foundation continued to focus its primary efforts on
patrolling beaches to protect nesting females on Boa Vista with the
assistance of the military. SOS Tartarugas has also been doing regular
monitoring of beaches with support from the military, extensive public
outreach on light pollution behind nesting beaches, and relocating
nests to a hatchery to alleviate hatchling disorientation and
misorientation, as well as assisting with training of turtle projects
on the islands of Maio and Sao Nicolau.
In the last 2 years, new efforts to better coordinate and expand
projects being conducted by the three non-governmental organizations,
as well as engage the national and municipal governments, are
dramatically decreasing the poaching of nesting turtles and with
sustained and planned efforts may be able to reduce it to less than 1
percent in the next few years. The issues of light pollution, sand
mining on nesting beaches, long-term protection of even the most
important nesting beaches, law enforcement, and bycatch have not even
begun to be addressed. While there is definite improvement in a once
gloomy situation as recent as 2 years ago, the future of the population
is tenuous.
Mediterranean Sea DPS
The main threats to Mediterranean Sea loggerheads include fishery
bycatch, as well as pollution/debris, vessel collisions, and habitat
destruction impacting eggs and hatchlings at nesting beaches. There are
a number of existing international regulatory mechanisms specific to
the Mediterranean Sea that contain provisions for the protection to sea
turtles. The most important with respect to sea turtles are the
Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea
against Pollution (and the associated Protocol Concerning Specially
Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean); the
Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural
Habitats (Bern Convention); the Convention on the Conservation of
Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) (Bonn Convention); and the
Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and
of Wild Fauna and Flora (EC Habitats Directive). More information on
these mechanisms can be found at Conant et al. (2009), but a few
specific applications are noted below.
Under the framework of the Barcelona Convention (to which all
Mediterranean countries are parties), the Action Plan for the
Conservation of Mediterranean Marine Turtles was adopted in 1989 and
updated in 1999 and 2007. The objective of the Action Plan is the
recovery of sea turtle populations through (1) appropriate protection,
conservation, and management of turtle habitats, including nesting,
feeding, wintering, and migrating areas; and (2) improvement of
scientific knowledge by research and monitoring. Coordination of this
Action Plan occurs through the Regional Activity Centre for Specially
Protected Areas (RAC/SPA). To help implement the Action Plan
objectives, the RAC/SPA has published guidelines for designing
legislation and regulations to protect turtles; developing and
improving rescue centers; and handling sea turtles by fishermen. To
assess the degree of implementation of the Action Plan, RAC/SPA sent a
survey to the National Focal Points for Specially Protected Areas
(Demetropoulos, 2007). Of the 16 country responses received, 14
countries have enacted some form of legislation protecting sea turtles
and more than half of the responders noted
[[Page 12648]]
their participation in tagging programs, development of public
awareness programs, and beach inventories. The area with the fewest
positive responses was the implementation of measures to reduce
incidental catch (n=5). The 2007 Action Plan includes a revised list of
important priority measures and an Implementation Timetable (UNEP MAP
RAC/SPA 2007). The deadline for many of the actions is as soon as
possible (e.g., enforce legislation to eliminate deliberate killing,
prepare National Action Plan), while others are 3 to 4 years after
adoption (e.g., restoration of damaged nesting habitats, implementation
of fishing regulations in key areas). If all parties adopt all of the
measures in the identified time period, there will be notable sea
turtle conservation efforts in place in the Mediterranean. However,
while priority actions for implementing the Action Plan have been
adopted to some extent at both regional and national levels, the degree
of expected implementation by each signatory and corresponding level of
sea turtle protection are still relatively uncertain. As such, these
efforts do not currently sufficiently mitigate the threats to and
improve the status of loggerheads in the Mediterranean, and without
specific commitment from each of the Barcelona Convention signatories,
it is difficult to determine if the efforts will do so in the near
future.
Under the Bern Convention, sea turtles are on the ``strictly
protected'' list. Article 6 of this Convention notes the following
prohibited acts for these strictly protected fauna species: all forms
of deliberate capture and keeping and deliberate killing; the
deliberate damage to or destruction of breeding or resting sites; the
deliberate disturbance of wild fauna; and the deliberate destruction or
taking or keeping of eggs from the wild. Most Mediterranean countries,
with the exception of Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, and
Syria, are parties to this Convention, so these international
protection measures are in place.
It is apparent that the international framework for sea turtle
protection is present in the Mediterranean, but the efficacy of these
actions is uncertain. The measures in most of these Conventions have
been in place for years, and the threats to loggerhead turtles remain.
As such, while laudable, the enforcement and follow up of many of these
articles needs to occur before the sea turtle protection goals of the
Conventions are achieved.
Most Mediterranean countries have developed national legislation to
protect sea turtles and/or nesting habitats (Margaritoulis, 2007).
These initiatives are also likely captured in the country responses to
the survey detailed in Demetropoulos (2007) as discussed above.
National protective legislation generally prohibits international
killing, harassment, possession, trade, or attempts at these
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Some countries have site specific
legislation for turtle habitat protection. In 1999, a National Marine
Park was established on Zakynthos in western Greece, with the primary
aim to provide protection to loggerhead nesting areas (Dimopoulos,
2001). Zakynthos represents approximately 43 percent of the average
annual nesting effort of the major and moderate nesting areas in Greece
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003) and about 26 percent of the documented
nesting effort in the Mediterranean (Touliatou et al., 2009). It is
noteworthy for conservation purposes that this site is legally
protected. While park management has improved over the last several
years, there are still some needed measures to improve and ensure
sufficient protection at this Park (Panagopoulou et al., 2008;
Touliatou et al., 2009).
In Turkey, five nesting beaches (Belek, Dalyan, Fethiye, Goksu
Delta, and Patara) were designated Specially Protected Area status in
the context of the Barcelona Convention (Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
Based on the average annual number of nests from the major nesting
sites, these five beaches represent approximately 56 percent of nesting
in Turkey (World Wildlife Fund, 2005). In Cyprus, the two nesting
beaches of Lara and Toxeftra have been afforded protection through the
Fisheries Regulation since 1989 (Margaritoulis, 2007), and Alagadi is a
Specially Protected Area (World Wildlife Fund, 2005). Of the major
Cyprus nesting sites included in the 2005 World Wildlife Fund Species
Action Plan, the nesting beaches afforded protection represent 51
percent of the average annual number of nests in Cyprus. Note, however,
that the annual nesting effort in Cyprus presented in Margaritoulis et
al. (2003) includes additional sites, so the total proportion of
protected nesting sites in Cyprus is much lower, potentially around 22
percent. In Italy, a reserve to protect nesting on Lampedusa was
established in 1984 (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). In summary,
Mediterranean loggerhead nesting primarily occurs in Greece, Libya,
Turkey, and Cyprus, and a notable proportion of nesting in those areas
is protected through various mechanisms. It is important to recognize
the success of these protected areas, but as the protection has been in
place for some time and the threats to the species remain (particularly
from increasing tourism activities), it is unlikely that the
conservation measures discussed here will change the status of the
species as outlined in Conant et al. (2009).
Protection of marine habitats is at the early stages in the
Mediterranean, as in other areas of the world. Off Zakynthos, the
National Marine Park established in 1999 also included maritime zones.
The marine area of Laganas Bay is divided into three zones controlling
maritime traffic from May 1 to October 31: Zone A--no boating activity;
Zone B--speed limit of 6 knots, no anchoring; Zone C--speed limit of 6
knots. The restraints on boating activity are particularly aimed at
protecting the internesting area surrounding the Zakynthos Laganas Bay
nesting area. However, despite the regulations, there has been
insufficient enforcement (especially of the 6 knot speed limit), and a
high density of speedboats and recorded violations within the marine
area of the Park have been reported. In 2009, 13 of 28 recorded
strandings in the area of the National Marine Park bore evidence of
watercraft injuries and fishing gear interactions, and four live
turtles were found with fishing gear lines/hooks. Another marine zone
occurs in Cyprus; off the nesting beaches of Lara and Toxeftra, a
maritime zone extends to the 20 meter isobath as delineated by the
Fisheries Regulation (Margaritoulis, 2007).
The main concern to loggerheads in the Mediterranean includes
incidental capture in fisheries. While there are country specific
fishery regulations that may limit fishing effort to some degree (to
conserve the fishery resource), little, if anything, has been
undertaken to reduce sea turtle bycatch and associated mortality in
Mediterranean fisheries. Given the lack of conservation efforts to
address fisheries and the limited in-water protection provided to
turtles to reduce the additional impacts of vessel collisions and
pollution/debris interactions, it is unlikely that the status of the
species will change given the measures discussed here.
It should be reiterated that it appears that international and
national laws are not always enforced or followed. This minimizes the
potential success of these conservation efforts. For example, in Egypt,
international and national measures to protect turtles were not
immediately adhered to, but in recent years, there has been a notable
effort to enforce laws and regulations that prohibit the trade of sea
turtles at fish markets. However, the illegal trade of turtles in the
Alexandria fish market has
[[Page 12649]]
persisted and a black market has been created (Nada and Casale, 2008).
This is an example of ineffective sea turtle protection and continuing
threat to the species, even with conservation efforts in place.
South Atlantic Ocean DPS
The only documented and confirmed nesting locations for loggerhead
turtles in the South Atlantic occur in Brazil, and major nesting
beaches are found in the states of Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo,
Bahia, and Sergipe (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). Protection of
nesting loggerheads and their eggs in Brazil is afforded by national
law that was established in 1989 and most recently reaffirmed in 2008.
Illegal practices, such as collecting eggs or nesting females for
consumption or sale, are considered environmental crimes and are
punishable by law. Other State or Federal laws have been established in
Brazil to protect reproductive females, incubating eggs, emergent
hatchlings, and nesting habitat, including restricting nighttime
lighting adjacent to nesting beaches during the nesting/hatching
seasons and prohibiting vehicular traffic on beaches. Projeto TAMAR, a
semi-governmental organization, is responsible for sea turtle
conservation in Brazil. In general, nesting beach protection in Brazil
is considered to be effective and successful for loggerheads and other
species of nesting turtles (e.g., Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007; da
Silva et al., 2008; Thome et al., 2008). Efforts at protecting
reproductive turtles, their nests, hatchlings and their nesting beaches
have been supplemented by the establishment of Federally mandated
protected areas that include major loggerhead nesting populations:
Reserva Biologica de Santa Isabel (established in 1988 in Sergipe) and
Reserva Biologica de Comboios (established in 1984 in Espirto Santo);
at the State level, Environmental Protection Areas have been
established for many loggerhead nesting beaches in Bahia and Espirito
Santo (Marcovaldi et al., 2005). In addition, Projeto TAMAR has
initiated several high-profile public awareness campaigns, which have
focused national attention on the conservation of loggerheads and other
marine turtles in Brazil.
Loggerhead turtles of various sizes and life stages occur
throughout the South Atlantic, although density/observations are more
limited in equatorial waters (Ehrhart et al., 2003). Within national
waters of specific countries, various laws and actions have been
instituted to mitigate threats to loggerheads and other species of sea
turtles; less protection is afforded in the high seas of the South
Atlantic. Overall, the principal in-water threat to loggerheads in the
South Atlantic is incidental capture in fisheries. In the southwest
Atlantic, the South Atlantic Association is a multinational group that
includes representatives from Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, and meets
biannually to share information and develop regional action plans to
address threats including bycatch (http://www.tortugasaso.org/). At the
national level, Brazil has developed a national plan for the reduction
of incidental capture of sea turtles that was initiated in 2001
(Marcovaldi et al., 2002a). This national plan includes various
activities to mitigate bycatch, including time-area restrictions of
fisheries, use of bycatch reduction devices, and working with fishermen
to successfully release live-captured turtles. In Uruguay, all sea
turtles are protected from human impacts, including fisheries bycatch,
by presidential decree (Decreto presidencial 144/98). The Karumbe
conservation project in Uruguay has been working on assessing in-water
threats to loggerheads and marine turtles for several years (see http:/
/www.seaturtle.org/promacoda), with the objective of developing
mitigation plans in the future. In Argentina, various conservation
organizations are working toward assessing bycatch of loggerheads and
other sea turtle species in fisheries, with the objective of developing
mitigation plans for this threat (see http://www.prictma.com.ar).
Overall, more effort to date has been expended on evaluating and
assessing levels of fisheries bycatch of loggerhead turtles, than
concretely reducing bycatch in the Southwest Atlantic, but this
information is necessary for developing adequate mitigation plans. In
the southeastern Atlantic, efforts have been directed toward assessing
the distribution and levels of bycatch of loggerheads in coastal waters
of southwestern Africa (Weir et al., 2007; Petersen et al., 2007,
2009). Bycatch of loggerheads has been documented in longline fisheries
off the Atlantic coasts of Angola, Namibia, and South Africa (Petersen
et al., 2007), and several authors have highlighted the need to develop
regional mitigation plans to reduce bycatch of loggerheads and other
sea turtle species in coastal waters (Formia et al., 2003; Weir et al.,
2007; Petersen et al., 2009). On the high seas of the South Atlantic,
little is known about exact bycatch levels, but there are some areas of
higher concentration of longline effort that are likely to result in
loggerhead bycatch (Lewison et al., 2004).
Overall, conservation efforts for loggerhead turtles in the South
Atlantic are dichotomous. On the nesting beaches (almost exclusively in
Brazil), conservation actions are successful at protecting nesting
females and their clutches, resulting in large numbers of hatchlings
being released each year. In contrast, fisheries bycatch in coastal and
oceanic waters remains a serious threat, despite regional emphasis on
assessing bycatch rates in various fisheries on both sides of the South
Atlantic. Comprehensive management actions to reduce or eliminate
bycatch mortality are lacking in most areas, which is likely to result
in a decline of this DPS in the future.
Finding
Regarding the petitions to (1) reclassify loggerhead turtles in the
North Pacific Ocean as a DPS with endangered status and designate
critical habitat and (2) reclassify loggerhead turtles in the Northwest
Atlantic as a DPS with endangered status and designate critical
habitat, we find that both petitioned entities qualify as DPSs (North
Pacific Ocean DPS and Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, respectively) as
described in this proposed rule. We also find that seven additional
loggerhead sea turtle DPSs exist. We have carefully considered the best
scientific and commercial data available regarding the past, present
and future threats faced by the these nine loggerhead sea turtle DPSs.
We believe that listing the North Pacific Ocean, South Pacific Ocean,
North Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, Northwest Atlantic
Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea DPSs of the
loggerhead sea turtle as endangered and the Southwest Indian Ocean and
South Atlantic Ocean DPSs as threatened is warranted for the reasons
described below for each DPS.
North Pacific Ocean DPS
In the North Pacific, loggerhead nesting is essentially restricted
to Japan where monitoring of loggerhead nesting began in the 1950s on
some beaches, and expanded to include most known nesting beaches since
approximately 1990. While nesting numbers have gradually increased in
recent years and the number for 2009 is similar to the start of the
time series in 1990, historical evidence indicates that there has been
a substantial decline over the last half of the 20th century. In
addition, based on nest count data for nearly the past 2 decades, the
North Pacific population of loggerheads is small. The
[[Page 12650]]
SQE approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested
that the North Pacific Ocean DPS appears to be declining, is at risk,
and is thus likely to decline in the future. The stage-based
deterministic modeling approach suggested that the North Pacific Ocean
DPS would grow slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model
indicates that the population would be likely to substantially decline
in the future. These results are largely driven by the mortality of
juvenile and adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs
throughout the North Pacific Ocean, including the coastal pound net
fisheries off Japan, coastal fisheries impacting juvenile foraging
populations off Baja California, Mexico, and undescribed fisheries
likely affecting loggerheads in the South China Sea and the North
Pacific Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported
fisheries, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive
bycatch reduction technologies. In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal
development and coastal armoring on nesting beaches in Japan continues
as a substantial threat (Factor A). Coastal armoring, if left
unaddressed, will become an even more substantial threat as sea level
rises. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the
Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we
believe that the North Pacific Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as
endangered.
South Pacific Ocean DPS
In the South Pacific, loggerhead nesting is almost entirely
restricted to eastern Australia (primarily Queensland) and New
Caledonia. In eastern Australia, there has been a marked decline in the
number of females breeding annually since the mid-1970s, with an
estimated 50 to 80 percent decline in the number of breeding females at
various Australian rookeries up to 1990 and a decline of approximately
86 percent by 1999. Comparable nesting surveys have not been conducted
in New Caledonia, however. Information from pilot surveys conducted in
2005, combined with oral history information collected, suggest that
there has been a decline in loggerhead nesting (see the Status of the
Nine DPSs section above for additional information). Similarly, studies
of eastern Australia loggerheads at their foraging areas revealed a
decline of 3 percent per year from 1985 to the late 1990s on the coral
reefs of the southern Great Barrier Reef. A decline in new recruits was
also measured in these foraging areas. The SQE approach described in
the Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count
data for the past 3 decades, the population is at risk and thus likely
to decline in the future. The stage-based deterministic modeling
approach provided a wide range of results: In the case of the lowest
anthropogenic mortality rates (or the best case scenario), the
deterministic model suggests that the South Pacific Ocean DPS will grow
slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model indicates that the
population is likely to substantially decline in the future. These
results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and adult
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South
Pacific Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported
fisheries, the continued expansion of artisanal fleets in the
southeastern Pacific, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive
bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the
actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section above will be
fully implemented in the near future or that they will be sufficiently
effective. Therefore, we believe that the South Pacific Ocean DPS is in
danger of extinction throughout all of its range, and propose to list
this DPS as endangered.
North Indian Ocean DPS
In the North Indian Ocean, nesting occurs in greatest density on
Masirah Island. Reliable trends in nesting cannot be determined due to
the lack of standardized surveys at Masirah Island prior to 2008.
However, a reinterpretation of the 1977-1978 and 1991 estimates of
nesting females was compared to survey information collected since 2008
and results suggest a significant decline in the size of the nesting
population, which is consistent with observations by local rangers that
the population has declined dramatically in the last three decades.
Nesting trends cannot be determined elsewhere in the northern Indian
Ocean where loggerhead nesting occurs because the time series of
nesting data based on standardized surveys is not available. The SQE
approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on
nesting data; however, an adequate time series of nesting data for this
DPS was not available. Therefore, we could not use this approach to
evaluate extinction risk. The stage-based deterministic modeling
approach indicated the North Indian Ocean DPS is likely to decline in
the future. These results are driven by cumulative mortality from a
variety of sources across all life stages. Threats to nesting beaches
are likely to increase, which would require additional and widespread
nesting beach protection efforts (Factor A). Little is currently being
done to monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and oceanic fisheries
in the range of the North Indian Ocean DPS; this mortality is likely to
continue and increase with expected additional fishing effort from
commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E). Reduction of mortality
would be difficult due to a lack of comprehensive information on
fishing distribution and effort, limitations on implementing
demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is
highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the Conservation
Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the near future or
that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we believe that
the North Indian Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction throughout all of
its range, and propose to list this DPS as endangered.
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS
In the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, loggerhead nesting is
restricted to
[[Page 12651]]
western Australia, with the greatest number of loggerheads nesting on
Dirk Hartog Island. Loggerheads also nest on the Muiron Islands and
North West Cape, but in smaller numbers. Although data are insufficient
to determine trends, evidence suggests the nesting population in the
Muiron Islands and North West Cape region was depleted before recent
beach monitoring programs began. The SQE approach described in the
Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on nesting data; however, an
adequate time series of nesting data for this DPS was not available;
therefore, we could not use this approach to evaluate extinction risk.
The stage-based deterministic modeling approach provided a wide range
of results: In the case of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates,
the deterministic model suggests that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
DPS will grow slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model
indicates that the population is likely to substantially decline in the
future. These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and
adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the
region, as can be inferred from data from Australia's Pacific waters
(Factor E). Although national and international governmental and non-
governmental entities are currently working toward reducing loggerhead
bycatch, and some positive actions have been implemented, it is
unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in
the near future due to the challenges of mitigating illegal,
unregulated, and unreported fisheries, the continued expansion of
artisanal fleets, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive
bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the
actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section above will be
fully implemented in the near future or that they will be sufficiently
effective. Therefore, we believe that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean
DPS is in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, and propose
to list this DPS as endangered.
Southwest Indian Ocean DPS
In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the highest concentration of nesting
occurs on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, where surveys and
management practices were instituted in 1963. A trend analysis of index
nesting beach data from this region from 1965 to 2008 indicates an
increasing nesting population between the first decade of surveys and
the last 8 years. These data represent approximately 50 percent of all
nesting within South Africa and are believed to be representative of
trends in the region. Loggerhead nesting occurs elsewhere in South
Africa, but sampling is not consistent and no trend data are available.
Similarly, in Madagascar, loggerheads have been documented nesting in
low numbers, but no trend data are available. The SQE approach
described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section, based on a 37-year
time series of nesting female counts at Tongaland, South Africa (1963-
1999), indicated this segment of the population, while small, has
increased, and the likelihood of quasi-extinction is negligible. We
note that the SQE approach we used is based on past performance of the
DPS (nesting data from 1963-1999) and does not fully reflect ongoing
and future threats to all life stages within the DPS. The stage-based
deterministic modeling approach provided a wide range of results: In
the case of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates, the deterministic
model suggests that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS will grow slightly,
but in the worst-case scenario, the model indicates that the population
is likely to substantially decline in the future. These results are
largely driven by mortality of juvenile loggerheads from fishery
bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian Ocean (Factor E).
This mortality is likely to continue and may increase with expected
additional fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries.
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. We have
determined that although the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is likely not
currently in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, the
extinction risk is likely to increase in the future. Therefore, we
believe that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is likely to become an
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all of its
range, and propose to list this DPS as threatened.
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS
Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of
North America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles,
and The Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern U.S. and on
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico. The results of comprehensive analyses
of the status of the nesting assemblages within the Northwest Atlantic
Ocean DPS using standardized data collected over survey periods ranging
from 10 to 23 years and using different analytical approaches were
consistent in their findings--there has been a significant, overall
nesting decline within this DPS. The SQE approach described in the
Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count
data for the past 2 decades, the population is at risk and thus likely
to decline in the future. These results are based on nesting data for
loggerheads at index/standardized nesting survey beaches in the USA and
the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. The stage-based deterministic modeling
indicated the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to decline in the
future, even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality
rates. These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and
adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North
Atlantic Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced across the range of the
DPS in the near future because of the diversity and magnitude of the
fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is
highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the Conservation
Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the near future or
that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we believe that
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as endangered.
Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS
In the Northeast Atlantic Ocean, the Cape Verde Islands support the
only
[[Page 12652]]
large nesting population of loggerheads in the region. Nesting occurs
at some level on most of the islands in the archipelago with the
largest nesting numbers reported from the island of Boa Vista where
studies have been ongoing since 1998. Due to limited data available, a
population trend cannot currently be determined for the Cape Verde
population; however, available information on the directed killing of
nesting females suggests that this nesting population is under severe
pressure and likely significantly reduced from historic levels. In
addition, based on interviews with elders, a reduction in nesting from
historic levels at Santiago Island has been reported. Elsewhere in the
northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead nesting is non-existent or occurs at
very low levels. The SQE approach described in the Status of the Nine
DPSs section is based on nesting data. However, we had insufficient
nest count data over an appropriate time series for this DPS and could
not use this approach to evaluate extinction risk. The stage-based
deterministic modeling approach indicated the Northeast Atlantic Ocean
DPS is likely to decline in the future, even under the scenario of the
lowest anthropogenic mortality rates. These results are largely driven
by the ongoing directed lethal take of nesting females and eggs (Factor
B), low hatching and emergence success (Factors A, B, and C), and
mortality of juveniles and adults from fishery bycatch (Factor E) that
occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic Ocean. Currently, conservation
efforts to protect nesting females are growing, and a reduction in this
source of mortality is likely to continue in the near future. Although
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities
in the Northeast Atlantic are currently working toward reducing
loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions have been implemented, it
is unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced
across the range of the DPS in the near future because of the lack of
bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries operating within the range of
this DPS, lack of bycatch reduction in coastal fisheries in Africa, the
lack of comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we
believe that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS is in danger of
extinction throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as
endangered.
Mediterranean Sea DPS
Nesting occurs throughout the central and eastern Mediterranean in
Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai,
Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia. In addition, sporadic nesting has been
reported from the western Mediterranean, but the vast majority of
nesting (greater than 80 percent) occurs in Greece and Turkey. There is
no discernible trend in nesting at the two longest monitoring projects
in Greece, Laganas Bay and southern Kyparissia Bay. However, the
nesting trend at Rethymno Beach, which hosts approximately 7 percent of
all documented loggerhead nesting in the Mediterranean, shows a highly
significant declining trend (1990-2004). In Turkey, intermittent
nesting surveys have been conducted since the 1970s with more
consistent surveys conducted on some beaches only since the 1990s,
making it difficult to assess trends in nesting. A declining trend
(1993-2004) has been reported at Fethiye Beach, which represents
approximately 10 percent of loggerhead nesting in Turkey. The SQE
approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on
nesting data; however, region-wide nesting data for this DPS were not
available. Therefore, we could not use this approach to evaluate
extinction risk. The stage-based deterministic modeling approach
indicated the Mediterranean Sea DPS is likely to decline in the future,
even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates.
These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and adult
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the
Mediterranean Sea (Factor E), as well as anthropogenic threats to
nesting beaches (Factor A) and eggs/hatchlings (Factors A, B, C, and
E). Although conservation efforts to protect some nesting beaches are
underway, more widespread and consistent protection is needed. Although
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities
in the Mediterranean Sea are currently working toward reducing
loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in commercial and artisanal
fisheries operating within the range of this DPS, the lack of
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort,
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we
believe that the Mediterranean Sea DPS is in danger of extinction
throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as
endangered.
South Atlantic Ocean DPS
In the South Atlantic nesting occurs primarily along the mainland
coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro. Prior to 1980,
loggerhead nesting populations in Brazil were considered severely
depleted. More recently, a long-term, sustained increasing trend in
nesting abundance has been observed over a 16-year period from 1988
through 2003 on 22 surveyed beaches containing more than 75 percent of
all loggerhead nesting in Brazil. The SQE approach described in the
Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count
data for the past 2 decades, the population is unlikely to decline in
the future. These results are consistent with Marcovaldi and
Chaloupka's (2007) nesting beach trend analyses. We note that the SQE
approach is based on past performance of the DPS (nesting data) and
does not fully reflect ongoing and future threats to all life stages
within the DPS. The stage-based deterministic modeling approach
indicated the South Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to decline in the
future, even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality
rates. This result is largely driven by mortality of juvenile
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South
Atlantic Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch in
the South Atlantic, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future
because of the diversity and magnitude of the commercial and artisanal
fisheries operating in the South Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical
complexities,
[[Page 12653]]
limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of
comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain
whether the actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section
above will be fully implemented in the near future or that they will be
sufficiently effective. We have determined that although the South
Atlantic Ocean DPS is not currently in danger of extinction throughout
all of its range, the extinction risk is likely to increase
substantially in the future. Therefore, we believe that the South
Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to become an endangered species within the
foreseeable future throughout all of its range, and propose to list
this DPS as threatened.
Critical Habitat
Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us to designate critical
habitat for threatened and endangered species ``on the basis of the
best scientific data available and after taking into consideration the
economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other
relevant impact, of specifying any particular area as critical
habitat.'' This section grants the Secretary of the Interior or of
Commerce discretion to exclude an area from critical habitat if he
determines ``the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of
specifying such area as part of the critical habitat.'' The Secretary
may not exclude areas if exclusion ``will result in the extinction of
the species.'' In addition, the Secretary may not designate as critical
habitat any lands or other geographical areas owned or controlled by
the Department of Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject
to an integrated natural resources management plan under section 101 of
the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing
that such a plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation (see section 318(a)(3) of the
National Defense Authorization Act, Pub. L. 108-136).
The ESA defines critical habitat under section 3(5)(A) as: ``(i)
the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed * * *, on which are found those
physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of
the species and (II) which may require special management
considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed * *
*, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential
for the conservation of the species.''
Once critical habitat is designated, section 7 of the ESA requires
Federal agencies to ensure they do not fund, authorize, or carry out
any actions that will destroy or adversely modify that habitat. This
requirement is in addition to the other principal section 7 requirement
that Federal agencies ensure their actions do not jeopardize the
continued existence of listed species.
The Services have not designated critical habitat for the
loggerhead sea turtle. Critical habitat will be proposed, if found to
be prudent and determinable, in a separate rulemaking.
Peer Review
In December 2004, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued
a Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, establishing
minimum peer review standards, a transparent process for public
disclosure of peer review planning, and opportunities for public
participation. The OMB Bulletin, implemented under the Information
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554), is intended to enhance the quality and
credibility of the Federal government's scientific information, and
applies to influential or highly influential scientific information
disseminated on or after June 16, 2005. We obtained independent peer
review of the scientific information compiled in the 2009 Status Review
(Conant et al., 2009) that supports this proposal to list nine DPSs of
the loggerhead sea turtle as endangered or threatened.
On July 1, 1994, the Services published a policy for peer review of
scientific data (59 FR 34270). The intent of the peer review policy is
to ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and commercial
data available. Prior to a final listing, we will solicit the expert
opinions of three qualified specialists, concurrent with the public
comment period. Independent specialists will be selected from the
academic and scientific community, Federal and State agencies, and the
private sector.
References
A complete list of the references used in this proposed rule is
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).
Classification
National Environmental Policy Act
Proposed ESA listing decisions are exempt from the requirement to
prepare an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA) (NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.03(e)(1); Pacific Legal
Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th Cir. 1981)). Thus, we have
determined that the proposed listing determinations for the nine
loggerhead DPSs described in this notice are exempt from the
requirements of NEPA.
Information Quality Act
The Information Quality Act directed the Office of Management and
Budget to issue government wide guidelines that ``provide policy and
procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including
statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies.'' Under the
NOAA guidelines, this action is considered a Natural Resource Plan. It
is a composite of several types of information from a variety of
sources. Compliance of this document with NOAA guidelines is evaluated
below.
Utility: The information disseminated is intended to
describe a management action and the impacts of that action. The
information is intended to be useful to State and Federal agencies,
non-governmental organizations, industry groups and other interested
parties so they can understand the management action, its effects, and
its justification.
Integrity: No confidential data were used in the analysis
of the impacts associated with this document. All information
considered in this document and used to analyze the proposed action, is
considered public information.
Objectivity: The NOAA Information Quality Guidelines
standards for Natural Resource Plans state that plans be presented in
an accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased manner. NMFS and USFWS
strive to draft and present proposed management measures in a clear and
easily understandable manner with detailed descriptions that explain
the decision making process and the implications of management measures
on natural resources and the public. This document was reviewed by a
variety of biologists, policy analysts, and attorneys from NMFS and
USFWS.
Administrative Procedure Act
The Federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) establishes
procedural requirements applicable to informal rulemaking by Federal
agencies. The purpose of the APA is to ensure public access to the
Federal rulemaking process and to give the public notice and an
opportunity to comment before
[[Page 12654]]
the agency promulgates new regulations.
Coastal Zone Management Act
Section 307(c)(1) of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of
1972 requires that all Federal activities that affect any land or water
use or natural resource of the coastal zone be consistent with approved
State coastal zone management programs to the maximum extent
practicable. NMFS and FWS have determined that this action is
consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable
policies of approved Coastal Zone Management Programs of Maine, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, California,
Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Letters documenting our determination, along with the proposed rule,
are being sent to the coastal zone management program offices of these
States. A list of the specific State contacts and a copy of the letters
are available upon request.
Executive Order 13132 Federalism
Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, otherwise known as the Federalism
E.O., was signed by President Clinton on August 4, 1999, and published
in the Federal Register on August 10, 1999 (64 FR 43255). This E.O. is
intended to guide Federal agencies in the formulation and
implementation of ``policies that have Federal implications.'' Such
policies are regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation,
and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. In addition,
E.O. 13132 requires Federal agencies to have a process to ensure
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. A
Federal summary impact statement is also required for rules that have
federalism implications.
Pursuant to E.O. 13132, the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and
Intergovernmental Affairs will provide notice of the proposed action
and request comments from the appropriate official(s) in Maine, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, California,
Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Environmental Justice
Executive Order 12898 requires that Federal actions address
environmental justice in decision-making process. In particular, the
environmental effects of the actions should not have a disproportionate
effect on minority and low-income communities. The proposed listing
determinations are not expected to have a disproportionate effect on
minority or low-income communities.
Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Paperwork
Reduction Act
As noted in the Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the
ESA, economic impacts shall not be considered when assessing the status
of a species. Therefore, the economic analysis requirements of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the listing process.
In addition, this rule is exempt from review under E.O. 12866. This
proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information requirement
for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
List of Subjects
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
50 CFR Part 223
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
50 CFR Part 224
Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.
Dated: March 8, 2010.
Eric C. Schwaab,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
Dated: March 3, 2010.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 17, 223, and
224 are proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 17.11(h) remove the entry for ``Sea turtle,
loggerhead'', and add nine entries for ``Sea turtle, loggerhead'' in
its place, to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
-------------------------------------------------------- population where Critical Special
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta..... Mediterranean Sea Mediterranean Sea E ........... NA NA
Mediterranean Sea. Basin.. east of 5[deg]36'
W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, North Caretta caretta..... North Indian Ocean North Indian Ocean E ........... NA NA
Indian Ocean. Basin.. north of the
equator and south
of 30[deg] N. Lat.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, North Caretta caretta..... North Pacific Ocean North Pacific north E ........... NA NA
Pacific Ocean. Basin.. of the equator and
south of 60[deg]
N. Lat.
[[Page 12655]]
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Northeast Caretta caretta..... Northeast Atlantic Northeast Atlantic E ........... NA NA
Atlantic Ocean. Ocean Basin.. Ocean north of the
equator, south of
60[deg] N. Lat.,
east of 40[deg] W.
Long., and west of
5[deg]36' W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Northwest Caretta caretta..... Northwest Atlantic Northwest Atlantic E ........... NA NA
Atlantic Ocean. Ocean Basin.. Ocean north of the
equator, south of
60[deg] N. Lat.,
and west of
40[deg] W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, South Caretta caretta..... South Atlantic South Atlantic T ........... NA NA
Atlantic Ocean. Ocean Basin.. Ocean south of the
equator, north of
60[deg] S. Lat.,
west of 20[deg] E.
Long., and east of
67[deg] W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, South Caretta caretta..... South Pacific Ocean South Pacific south E ........... NA NA
Pacific Ocean. Basin.. of the equator,
north of 60[deg]
S. Lat., west of
67[deg] W. Long.,
and east of
139[deg] E. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Southeast Caretta caretta..... Southeast Indian Southeast Indian E ........... NA NA
Indo-Pacific Ocean. Ocean Basin; South Ocean south of the
Pacific Ocean equator, north of
Basin as far east 60[deg] S. Lat.,
as 139[deg] E and east of
Long.. 80[deg] E. Long.;
South Pacific
Ocean south of the
equator, north of
60[deg] S. Lat.,
and west of
139[deg] E. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Southwest Caretta caretta..... Southwest Indian Southwest Indian T ........... NA NA
Indian Ocean. Ocean Basin.. Ocean north of the
equator, south of
30[deg] N. Lat.,
west of 20[deg] E.
Long., and east of
80[deg] E. Long.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PART 223--THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
3. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 1543; subpart B, Sec. 223.201-202
also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for
Sec. 223.206(d)(9).
4. Amend the table in Sec. 223.102 by redesignating paragraph
(b)(3) as paragraph (b)(4), and by removing the existing paragraph
(b)(2), and by adding a new paragraph (b)(2) and (b)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 223.102 Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species \1\ Citation(s)
---------------------------------------------------- Citation(s) for for critical
Where listed listing habitat
Common name Scientific name determination(s) designation(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
(2) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... South Atlantic Ocean [INSERT FR NA
South Atlantic Ocean DPS. south of the equator, CITATION WHEN
north of 60[deg] S. PUBLISHED AS A
Lat., west of 20[deg] FINAL RULE].
E. Long., and east of
67[deg] W. Long..
(3) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... Southwest Indian Ocean [INSERT FR NA
Southwest Indian Ocean DPS. north of the equator, CITATION WHEN
south of 30[deg] N. PUBLISHED AS A
Lat., west of 20[deg] FINAL RULE].
E. Long., and east of
80[deg] E. Long..
[[Page 12656]]
* * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement,
see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56
FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
PART 224--ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES
5. The authority citation for part 224 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.
6. Amend Sec. 224.101 by revising paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
Sec. 224.101 Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous species.
* * * * *
(c) Sea turtles. The following table lists the common and
scientific names of endangered sea turtles, the locations where they
are listed, and the citations for the listings and critical habitat
designations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species \1\ Citation(s)
---------------------------------------------------- Citation(s) for for critical
Where listed listing habitat
Common name Scientific name determination(s) designation(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... Mediterranean Sea east [INSERT FR NA
Mediterranean Sea DPS. of 5[deg]36[min] W. CITATION WHEN
Long. PUBLISHED AS A
FINAL RULE].
(2) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... North Indian Ocean [INSERT FR NA
North Indian Ocean DPS. north of the equator CITATION WHEN
and south of 30[deg] PUBLISHED AS A
N. Lat. FINAL RULE].
(3) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... North Pacific north of [INSERT FR NA
North Pacific Ocean DPS. the equator and south CITATION WHEN
of 60[deg] N. Lat. PUBLISHED AS A
FINAL RULE].
(4) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... Northeast Atlantic [INSERT FR NA
Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS. Ocean north of the CITATION WHEN
equator, south of PUBLISHED AS A
60[deg] N. Lat., east FINAL RULE].
of 40[deg] W. Long.,
and west of
5[deg]36[min] W. Long.
(5) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... Northwest Atlantic [INSERT FR NA
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS. Ocean north of the CITATION WHEN
equator, south of PUBLISHED AS A
60[deg] N. Lat., and FINAL RULE].
west of 40[deg] W.
Long.
(6) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... South Pacific south of [INSERT FR NA
South Pacific Ocean DPS. the equator, north of CITATION WHEN
60[deg] S. Lat., west PUBLISHED AS A
of 67[deg] W. Long., FINAL RULE].
and east of 139[deg]
E. Long.
(7) Sea turtle, loggerhead, Caretta caretta... Southeast Indian Ocean [INSERT FR NA
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean south of the equator, CITATION WHEN
DPS. north of 60[deg] S. PUBLISHED AS A
Lat., and east of FINAL RULE].
80[deg] E. Long.;
South Pacific Ocean
south of the equator,
north of 60[deg] S.
Lat., and west of
139[deg] E. Long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement,
see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56
FR 58612, November 20, 1991).
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-5370 Filed 3-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P