Issue Number 102. October 2003.

Francisco “Gordo” Fischer, responsible for killing 2,000 sea turtles each year to supply the Tijuana
black market, holds his arrest papers. He spent 6 months in Mexican jail. Photo: Terri Garland (see
Rappoport & Nichols pp 14-15) .

IN THIS ISSUE:

Editorial:
Changes at the MTN.

Articles:
Satellite Tracking of the Post-nesting Migration of a Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas) from Hong Kong.
First Report of an Association Between Planes cyaneus (Decapoda:Grapsidae) and Loggerhead Sea Turtles
in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean.
Hawksbill Turtles in Seagrass Beds.
Loggerhead Nesting Effort and Conservation Initiatives at the Monitored Beaches of Greece during 2002.

Notes:
Loggerhead Sea Turtle Tagged in Brazil Caught by a Trawler in Waters of the Common Argentinian-
Uruguayan Fishing Area.

Meeting Reports
Announcements
Book Reviews
News & Legal Briefs
Recent Publications
ISSN 0839-7708
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page
MTN/NTM Online - The Marine Turtle Newsletter and Noticiero de Tortugas Marinas are both available at the
MTN web site: <http://www.seaturtle.org/mtn/>.

Noticiero de Tortugas Marinas (NTM) - This is the Spanish edition of the MTN and is produced in online format
only. Submissions should be made to the editors of the MTN, in English where possible.

Subscriptions and Donations - Subscriptions and donations towards the production of both the MTN and NTM
should be made online at <http://www.seaturtle.org/mtn/> or c/o SEATURTLE.ORG (see inside back cover for details).

Editors: Online Co-ordinator:

Brendan J. Godley & Annette C. Broderick Michael S. Coyne
Marine Turtle Research Group National Ocean Service
School of Biological Sciences 1305 East-West Highway
University of Exeter SSMC IV, Rm 9257
Exeter EX4 4PS UK Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA

E-mail: MTN@seaturtle.org, Fax: +44 1392 263700 E-mail: mcoyne@seaturtle.org Fax: +1 301 713 4384

Editorial Board:
Nicholas Mrosovsky (Founding Editor) Nicolas J. Pilcher
University of Toronto, Canada Marine Research Foundation, Malaysia

Karen L. Eckert (Editor Emeritus) Anders G. J. Rhodin

WIDECAST, USA Chelonian Research Foundation, USA

George H. Balazs Kartik Shanker

National Marine Fisheries Service, Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology & the Environment,
Hawaii, USA India

Matthew H. Godfrey Roldán Valverde

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, USA Xavier University, New Orleans, USA

Roderic B. Mast Jeanette Wyneken

Conservation International, USA Florida Atlantic University, USA

We are grateful to our major donors:

Marine©Turtle
Marine Turtle Newsletter
Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page
 Changes at the MTN
Brendan J. Godley1, Annette C. Broderick1 & Michael S. Coyne2
1
MTN Editors & 2On-line Co-ordinator
There are a number of changes at the MTN of which
you should be aware:
MTN Editors on the Move
Please note our new contact details on the inside front
cover. Although we will retain personal e-mail addresses
for other professional business we would ask that all
correspondence regarding MTN/NTM be directed
towards <MTN@seaturtle.org>.
New Editorial Board Members
In recent months a number of new board members have
joined us to replace those departing. We warmly
welcome George Balazs, Kartik Shanker and Jeanette
Wyneken to the editorial board and we look forward to
the benefit of their knowledge, insight and enthusiasm.
Departure of Angela Mast (NTM Co-ordinator)
We have recently heard that Angela Mast, who has
been carrying out the translation of the MTN into
Spanish for the past 9 years, will no longer be able to
continue, NTM 101 being her final issue. This is a sad
loss as Angela has given a great deal of service to the
MTN/NTM and the Spanish speaking marine turtle
conservation community. She will be missed and we
are sure that you join with us in offering our gratitude
for these efforts. We are happy to pass on any messages
that any of you would like to forward.
What is to be done with the NTM?
We recently discontinued the hardcopy of the NTM.
Surprisingly, few people contacted us either to comment
on the fact or to take us up on our offer of an alternate
MTN hardcopy following requests in both an insert and
a separate directed mailing. We have continued to
produce the NTM as an Adobe pdf file and this seems
to have received a reasonable level of use at a level of
some 10-15% of the MTN pdf’s.
At this juncture we are faced with a range of options
which include the discontinuation of the Spanish
language version altogether. We need to hear from you,
the readers and users of the Spanish version. Is there
any individual/group of Spanish speakers out there
prepared to consider taking over the translation of the
MTN? If so, we would be very keen to hear from you.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 1
Directed mailings
To reduce the number of unwanted MTNs, we have
undertaken a direct mailing to all readers in Europe.
Many have replied with new contact details, moved to
the online version or confirmed their details. Those that
have not responded have been removed from the mailing
list, saving both money and paper! Over the next few
months we also intend to mail our North American
colleagues, so please look out for your letter. If you
don’t receive one, do not panic, we will not mail recent
donors or those that have been in contact with us in the
past 12 months regarding their subscription.
Getting More Out of the MTN-Online
Every issue of the MTN is now available from the MTN-
Online in HTML format, more than 100 issues in all,
comprising more than 2000 individual documents. A
great number of important issues in sea turtle biology
and conservation were first raised in the pages of the
MTN. Problems related to the effects on sex ratios of
incubating eggs in styrofoam boxes (Mrosovsky 1978:
9:1-2); the incredible arribadas along the coast of Orissa,
India (Kar 1980: 15:2-3); and the potential dangers and
early signs of mass strandings (Moll et al. 1983:25:2-4).
Every issue of the MTN is fully searchable and
freely available to everyone. You can do a simple
keyword search on most pages (except individual
articles) from the left-hand menu by entering a term in
the search box. Or you can do more complex searches
by following the “advanced search” link:
<http://www.seaturtle.org/cgi-bin/search/search.pl?Realm=MTN>.
The advanced search page also includes tips for
refining your search, including how to search for words
or phrases, how to include or exclude specific words
from your search, how to use wildcards, or how to
specify searches in the title or text content. Searches
are case insensitive and accent insensitive. Some
examples:
To find articles about green turtles, not green and turtles,
try: “green turtle”
To find all articles about green turtles, exluding Pacific
greens try: “green turtle” –pacific
To find articles with strand or stranding try: strand*
To find articles with Kemp’s in the title try: title:kemp’s
Are you using this resource effectively?
 Satellite Tracking of the Post-nesting Migration of a Green Turtle
(Chelonia mydas) from Hong Kong

Simon K.F. Chan1, J.K. Chan1, L.T. Lo1 & George H. Balazs2
1
Agriculture, Fisheries and Conservation Department, Cheung Sha Wan Government Offices,
303 Cheung Sha Wan Road, Hong Kong (E-mail: kf_chan@afcd.gov.hk)
2
National Marine Fisheries Service, Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center, Honolulu Laboratory,
2570 Dole Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96822-2396, USA (E-mail:gbalazs@honlab.nmfs.hawaii.edu).

Four species of sea turtles have been recorded in
the waters of Hong Kong (Chan 2003) but only the
green turtle (Chelonia mydas) breeds locally, albeit in
very low numbers of one to several nesting individuals
per nesting season. The nesting site is located at a small
sandy beach of an offshore island called Lamma Island
(22.191°N, 114.139°E). This 0.5 ha beach is now the
only Hong Kong site where green turtles are known to
nest regularly. Dedicated conservation efforts have been
put in place to safeguard the nesting beach for this
population, including designation of the nesting site as a
protected area, regular warden patrols and site
management. However, there is no knowledge of the
migratory pathway and location of foraging grounds for
the green turtles nesting at this location. In the absence
of such information, it is impossible to draw up a
comprehensive protection strategy for this population.
Therefore, a study using the Argos satellite-based
system to describe the migratory pathway and the
location of the foraging grounds was started in August
2002.
A satellite transmitter was attached to a female after
nesting at Lamma Island. She measured 100cm in
straight carapace length. Her first nest of the season
was made on 13 June 2002 and she subsequently laid
four more clutches. She was the only green turtle
nesting in the 2002 season. On 9th August 2002, after
laying the final clutch of eggs, the turtle was temporarily
detained for attachment of the transmitter. A Platform
Transmitter Terminal (PTT) from Telonics Inc. (Model
ST-14, A-2400) was deployed using the attachment
procedures adopted by Balazs et al. (1996) and
Schroeder et al. (2000). The duty cycle of the PTT
was 24 hours on and 12 hours off. The turtle was
released on the same day at the nesting site.
After release, the turtle immediately headed offshore
and started its migration travelling at a distance of some
80 km from the southern coastline of South China (fig.
1). It travelled at an average speed of 1.5 to 2 km.hr-1
until it reached Qiongzhou Gulf (20.049°N 110.891°E)
of Hainan Island, China about 10 days later. During
this period, the turtle seemed to be travelling very
actively and continuously as shown by the short dive
time and frequent surfacing. The average dive time ±
SD was 5.6 ± 1.4 minutes (11 12-hour periods) and
average number of dives per 12-hour period was 130 ±
34 (11 12-hour periods).
From Qiongzhou Gulf onwards, the turtle seemed
to adopt a different migratory behaviour. It travelled at
a slower speed, about 0.5 km.hr-1, towards the eastern
part of Hainan Island, staying very close (within a few
kilometers) to the coastline. The turtle may have been
resting or feeding intermittently in the shallow coastal
waters as the mean number of dives reduced to 58 ±
16 per 12-hour period (15 12-hour periods) and the mean
dive time increased to 12.9 ± 3.7 minutes (15 12-hour
periods). Godley et al. (2002) have also found a similar
swimming pattern of reduced speed and increased dive
time in post-nesting green turtles during coastal
travelling. It was suggested that the turtles were feeding
during their coastal movements so as to reduce the
overall cost of migration. The turtle finally arrived at
the shallow coastal waters off Wanning City (18.928°N
110.534°E) of Hainan Island some 500 km away from
Hong Kong, on or around the 30th August 2002 (i.e. 21
days after leaving the nesting site). The turtle had
travelled a total distance of about 600 km during its trip,
first off the coastline of South China and then following
the coastline of Hainan Island, rather than taking the
shortest distance (about 500 km) in open waters (fig.1).
In the foraging ground, location data showed that
the turtle spent most of its time within a distinct home
range of about 8 km in diameter. It was interesting to
note that the turtle travelled to a northern site 45 km
away from the resident foraging ground in November
2002 and stayed there for about one month before
returning (fig. 2). In August 2003, at the time of
finalisation of this manuscript, the turtle travelled to the
north again but this time only travelled to an area 25 km
from the resident foraging ground. The reason for these
short-distance movements from its resident foraging
ground is unknown. It is possible that the turtle was in

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 2

Figure 1. Post-nesting migratory pathway of a green turtle from Hong Kong. The turtle arrived at its resident foraging ground
at the shallow waters of Hainan Island, China [Note: The migratory pathway was plotted with mostly positional data from LC
1-3 signals but large spatial gaps were filled using data points of LC 0, A and B following visual filtering for obvious
inaccurate points. Map produced with: SEATURTLE.ORG Maptool.].

Figure 2. Short-distance movements made by a green turtle at its resident foraging ground in Hainan Island. The turtle
travelled 43 km from the resident foraging ground to the north for a short stay before returning back. She travelled 25 km to
the north again 8 months later [Note: Only LC 1-3 positional data were used to create this map. Map produced with:
SEATURTLE.ORG Maptool].

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 3

search of suitable alternate foraging areas.
The dive data in the foraging areas indicated that
the mean dive time was 20.9 ± 14.1 minutes (405 12-
hour periods) and the mean number of dives per 12-
hour period was 43 ± 19 minutes (405 12-hour periods)
at the foraging ground.
The PTT was still transmitting as of 21 August 2003
by which time the turtle had spent more than 12 months
at the coastal waters off Wanning City. A total of 1,821
transmissions were obtained during this period, of which
1.0% were Location Class (LC) 3, 2.6% LC 2, 5.6%
LC 1, 9.4% LC 0, 21.8% LC A, 56.1% LC B and 3.5%
in LC Z.
The post-nesting migratory pathway and the location
of foraging grounds for the Hong Kong nesting
population of green turtles were entirely unknown until
this study was undertaken. However, although only a
single individual was tracked in this study, insights were
obtained and this study proved that satellite tracking
was a useful and effective means to find out such
information. This is particularly true in this case when
traditional tagging practice carried out for 17 years in
the South China region has yielded no tag return data.
Other satellite tracking studies on the post-nesting
migration carried out for the green turtles in the South
China region by Song et al. (2002) and Cheng (2000)
revealed that nesting females from each population had
more than one migratory pathway and multiple foraging
grounds. Song et al. (2002) found that nesting females
from Mainland China either travelled off the South China
coastline or across open waters to foraging grounds at
Hainan Island, China and Okinawa Island, Japan.
Turtles from Taiwan had a more diverse migratory
pattern as reported by Cheng (2000), with their foraging
grounds included Hainan Island, Ryukyu Archipelago,
Taiwan and Japan. Further studies of other individuals
nesting in Hong Kong will provide useful additional
information.
The convergence of green turtles after nesting from
Mainland China, Taiwan and Hong Kong to the resident
foraging ground in Hainan Island indicates that the
waters just off the coastline of Hainan Island
represented an important foraging area. It is worth
considering long-term measures for safeguarding this
area for regional turtle stocks.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 4
Acknowledgements: We wish to acknowledge that this study
was supported by the Agriculture, Fisheries and
Conservation Department (AFCD), Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region Government of the People’s Republic
of China. We are grateful to Dr. Brendan Godley, Miss Denise
Parker and the two anonymous reviewers for their helpful
review and comments on the manuscript. We also thank Mr.
I.C. Choi and the Nature Wardens of the AFCD for their
logistical support.
BALAZS, G.H., R.K. MIYA, & S.C. BEAVERS. 1996.
Procedures to attach a satellite transmitter to the carapace
of an adult green turtle, Chelonia mydas. In: J.A. Keinath,
D.E. Barnard, J.A. Musick, and B.A. Bell (comps.),
Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Symposium on Sea
Turtle Biology and Conservation, February 20-25, 1995,
Hilton Head, South Carolina, p. 21-26. U.S. Dep. Commer.
NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFSC-387.
CHAN, S. 2003. Green turtles in Hong Kong. Agriculture,
Fisheries and Conservation Department & Friends of
the Country Parks. Cosmos Books Ltd., 104 pp.
CHENG, I. 2000. Post-nesting migrations of green turtles
(Chelonia mydas) at Wan-An Island, Penghu
Archipelago, Taiwan. Marine Biology 137:747-754.
GODLEY, B.J., S. RICHARDSON, A.C. BRODERICK, M.S.
COYNE, F. GLEN & G. HAYS. 2002. Long-term satellite
telemetry of the movements and habitat utilisation by
green turtles in the Mediterranean. Ecography 25: 352–
362.
SCHROEDER, B., G.H. BALAZS & M. ROGERS. 2000. ST-14
sea turtle satellite transmitter attachment instructions.
Prepared specifically for Pacific Region Hawksbill
Research – Satellite Tracking Project 2000 and Caribbean
Hawksbill Research – Satellite Tracking Project 1998/
1999/2000. National Marine Fisheries Service, USA.
SONG, X, H. WANG, W. WANG, H. GU, S. CHAN & H. JIANG.
2002. Satellite tracking of post-nesting movements of
green turtles Chelonia mydas from the Gangkou Sea
Turtle National Nature Reserve, China, 2001. Marine
Turtle Newsletter 97: 8-9.
 First Report of an Association Between Planes cyaneus (Decapoda:Grapsidae)
and Loggerhead Sea Turtles in the Southwestern Atlantic Ocean
Alvar Carranza1, Andrés Domingo2, Ana Verdi3, Rodrigo Forselledo4& Andrés Estrades5
1
Sección Oceanología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República, Uruguay.(Email: alvardoc@fcien.edu.uy)
2
Depto. Recursos Pelágicos, DI.NA.R.A., Uruguay
3
Sección Entomología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República, Uruguay
4
Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de la República, Uruguay
5
CID/ Proyecto Karumbé. J. Paullier 1198/101, Montevideo, Uruguay.(E mail: karumbe@adinet.com.uy)

Most grapsid crabs are common members of
intertidal or subtidal habitats in marine and estuarine
waters. However, other grapsid species, in particular
those belonging to the genus Planes, show different
life history traits. This genus comprises three species
which occur primarily in oceanic, pelagic habitats:
Planes minutus (Linnaeus 1758), Planes cyaneus
(Dana 1851) and Planes marinus (Rathbun 1914).
These crabs are often found living on a wide variety
of floating substrata, such as drifting algae
(Sargassum), scyphozoans (Velella), gastropods
(Janthina sp.) and the shells of Spirula cephalopods
(Chase 1951; Davenport 1992; Geiselman 1983).
Planes are also found on small pieces of polyurethane
foam, rope, logs and even from an old refrigerator
(Dellinger et al. 1997; Spivak & Bas 1999).
An association between loggerhead sea turtles
(Caretta caretta) and the oceanic, grapsid crab, Planes
minutus, has been well documented (see Frick et al.
2000 for a review). Comparatively, there is a paucity
of information concerning the occurrence of P. minutus’
congener, P. cyaneus, as an epibiont of sea turtles. Like
the other members of the same genus (P. minutus and
P. marinus), P. cyaneus is dependant upon flotsam for
survival. Planes cyaneus have been collected from the
Pacific Ocean (41ºN to 35ºS), Galapagos Islands, Indian
Ocean, South-western Atlantic (Uruguay and Brazil,
west coast of tropical Africa, Santa Helena Island), north
Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico (Chace 1951;
1966; Guess 1981; Juanicó 1976; Manning & Holthuis
1981; Rathbun 1902). In Uruguay, the only reports of
Planes come from specimens encountered on a piece
of rope that was found washed up on a beach (Spivak
& Bas 1999) and from an unspecified substratum
(Juanicó 1976).
Below is the first report on the association between
P. cyaneus and C. caretta in the south-western Atlantic
Ocean. Here we present data from several specimens
of P. cyaneus (n = 25) collected from loggerhead turtles
(n = 18) captured as by-catch by the Uruguayan long-
line fleet during March-November 2002. Data collection
was made by scientific observers of the DI.NA.R.A.
(Dirección Nacional de Recursos Acuáticos) in the
frame of the PNOFA (Programa Nacional de
Observadores de la Flota Atunera) conducted by the
Pelagic Resources Department. All the turtles were
captured in the area between 32º 16’ and 37º 01’ S (fig.
1). Once on board, turtles were inspected for crabs.
Crabs were removed from turtles, labeled and frozen;
turtles without crabs were also tallied to determine
percent occurrence. In the laboratory, crab specimens
were fixed in a 5% buffered formalin/seawater solution
for preservation. Two measurements were taken from
each crab using calipers to the nearest 0.1mm: carapace
maximum length (CL) and carapace maximum width
(CW). The relationship between both variables was
described by means of linear regression. The sex of
each crab was determined and each individual was
assigned to one of the following categories: immature
male, immature female, mature male, mature female

Males N Mean Min Max Std.Dev.

CML 10 17.58 13.2 24.35 3.41
CMW 10 17.05 13.0 22.65 3.10
Females N Mean Min Max Std.Dev.
CML 6 20.21 15.80 21.80 2.23
CMW 6 18.98 13.10 21.10 2.94

Table 1. Number of observations, mean, minimum, maximum and standard deviations of carapace maximum
length (CML) and carapace maximum width (CMW) of P. cyaneus.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 5

and ovigerous female. Mature males were those crabs
in which the first pair of gonopods was clearly visible.
Mature females were classified on the basis of pleon
width (i.e. females were considered immature if the
pleon did not reach the coxae of walking limbs).
Deviations from a hypothetical sex ratio of 1:1 were
tested using Chi- square test.
The morphometrics of each turtle collected were
recorded. Curved carapace length was recorded from
the nuchal notch to longest posterior tip (CCL) (Bolten
1999). Turtles were tagged using inconel tags provided
by the Cooperative Marine Turtle Tagging Program
(CMTTP) from the Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle
Research in Gainesville, Florida, USA. Turtles were
released near the site of initial capture.
Eighteen turtles ranging in size from 45.0 to 71.0
cm (CCL; mean = 58.8 ± 7.0 cm) were captured. In all
cases loggerheads were considered as juveniles based
on the mean size of nesting females at the closest major
rookery (103 cm CCL at Brazil; Marcovaldi & Laurent
1996). None of the turtles examined were heavily
colonized by epibionts, although isolated individuals of
Balanus barnacles were occasionally observed. In one
case two unidentified amphipods were collected from
Figure 1. Operation area of the Uruguayan longline fleet during 2002. All turtles were collected between 32º 16’
and 37º 01’ S.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 6
a loggerhead’s inguinal notches. Fifteen of eighteen
turtles (83%) were colonized by at least one individual
of P.cyaneus. In six cases only one crab was observed
(5 males, 1 female). Crab pairs were found on eight of
the turtles and only one turtle harbored three adult crabs
(2 males, 1 female).
All crabs were found situated in the inguinal notches,
the cavity above each hind limb, and the tail. Of the
crabs found on turtles as pairs (16 of 25 crabs), the
sample was dominated by males (n=10), but the sex
ratio for the overall sample (25 crabs) did not differ
significantly from the expected proportion of 1:1 (c2,
P>0.05). Three female crabs were classified as
immature, one as mature and two as ovigerous. All
collected males were considered mature. The largest
crab measured was a male of 24.35 mm (CL).
However, the mean CL was greater in females (20.21
± 2.23 mm) than in males (17.58 ± 3.40 mm). The same
was observed for CW (Table 1). Among females, the
maximum length registered was 21.80 mm.
Finally, 88 % of observed variance in CW was
explained by means of linear regression. The adjusted
model y=1.16x+0.98 was statistically significant
(P<0.05, n=16). Regression analysis included specimens
belonging to both sexes and all reproductive stages.
The present knowledge of the association between
C. caretta and grapsid crabs is largely restricted to
observations made on P. minutus (Davenport 1994;
Dellinger 1997; Frick et al. 2000). The observations of
P. cyaneus are all referred to its association with sea
turtles in the north Atlantic and Pacific Oceans (Chace
1951; Guess 1981; Steinbeck & Ricketts 1941). To our
knowledge, this is the first report on this interaction in
the south-western Atlantic.
P. cyaneus and P. minutus seem to have similar
traits when colonizing sea turtles. For instance, the
observed colonization percentage (83% of the captured
turtles) is similar to that reported by Dellinger et al.
(1997), who observed that 82% of Caretta caretta
were colonized by P. minutus near Madeira. Sex ratios
of crabs and number of crabs per turtle were also
similar, with the exception of the three mature crabs
coexisting on one turtle. The observed mean of CL and
CW shows that P. cyaneus are bigger than P. minutus
when colonizing sea turtles, a similar difference noted
between the two species when occupying substrates
other than turtles by Chace (1951).
Acknowledgements: We are grateful to M.G. Frick and other
anonymous reviewers for providing comments that greatly
improved the original manuscript. Special thanks to Peter
Eliazar (CMTTP, ACCSTR) for providing the inconel tags; to
the fishing companies, ship crews and scientific observers
who collected the material for this study. Karumbé Project is
supported by the British Petroleum Conservation Programme
and National Fish and Wildlife Foundation.
BOLTEN, A.B. 1999. Techniques for Measuring Sea Turtles.
pp. 110-114. In: ECKERT, K.L., BJORNDAL, K.A, F.A.
ABREU-GROBOIS & M. DONELLY. (Editors). Research and
Management Techniques for the Conservation of Sea
Turtles. IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group
Publication N° 4.
CHACE, F. 1951. The oceanic crabs of the genera Planes and
Pachygrapsus. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 101: 65-103.
CHACE, F.1966.Decapod crustaceans from St. Helena Island,
South Atlantic. Proceedings of the United States National
Museum 118:623-660.
CRANE, J. 1937. The Templeton Crocker expedition. III.
Brachygnathous crabs from the Gulf of California and the
west coast of lower California. Zoologica New York 22:
47-78.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 7
DAVENPORT, J. 1992. Observations on the ecology, behavior,
swimming mechanism and energetics of the neustonic
grapsid crab, Planes minutus. Journal of the Marine
Biological Association of the United Kingdom 72: 611-620.
DAVENPORT, J. 1994. A cleaning association between the
oceanic crab Planes minutus and the loggerhead sea turtle
Caretta caretta. Journal of the Marine Biological
Association of the United Kingdom 74: 735-737.
DELLINGER, T., J. DAVENPORT & P.WIRTZ. 1997.
Comparisons of social structure of Columbus crabs living
on loggerhead sea turtles and inanimate flotsam. Journal of
the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom
77: 185-194.
FRICK, M., K. WILLIAMS & D.VELJACIC. 2000. Additional
evidence supporting a cleaning association between
epibiotic crabs and sea turtles: How will the harvest of
sargassum seaweed impact this relationship? Marine Turtle
Newsletter 90:11-13
GEISELMAN, J.1983.The food web of the Sargassum
community. Special Publication. Bermuda Biological Station
22: 261-270.
GUESS, R.C. 1981. A Pacific Loggerhead captured of
California’s northern Channel Islands. Herpetological
Review 12: 15.
JUANICÓ, M. 1976. Sobre la distribución geográfica de
Planes minutus (L. 1758) y P.cynaeus Dana 1852 (Crustacea-
Decapoda). Dusenia Curitiba 9:145-150.
MANNING, R.B. & L.B.HOLTHUIS.1981.West African
brachyuran crabs (Crustacea:Decapoda). Smithsonian
Contributions to Zoology. 306:1-379.
MARCOVALDI, M.Â. & LAURENT, A., 1996. A six season
study of marine turtle nesting ay Praia do Forte, Bahia,
Brazil, with Implications for conservation and management.
Chelonian Conservation and Biology 2: 55-59.
RATHBUN, M.J. 1902. Papers from the Hopkins Stanford
Galapagos Expedition, 1898-1899, VIII: Brachyura and
Macrura. Proceeding of the Washington Academy of
Science 4: 275-292.
SPIVAK, E.D. & M.C.BAS .1999. First finding of the pelagic
crab Planes Marinus (Decapoda: Grapsidae) in the
southwestern Atlantic. Journal of Crustacean Biology 19:
72-76.
STEINBECK, J. & E.F. RICKETTS. 1941. Sea of Cortez.
Privately Published, New York, 598 pp.
 Hawksbill Turtles in Seagrass Beds

Carlos E. Diez1, Ximena Vélez-Zuazo2 & Robert P. van Dam2

1
Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales. P.O. Box 906600, San Juan, PR 00906-6000
(E-mail: cediez@caribe.net) 2Chelonia Inc. P.O. Box 9020708, San Juan, PR 00902-0708
(E-mail: xvz_1974@yahoo.com & rpvandam@yahoo.com)

Coral reefs are often reported as prime habitat of
the hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata; Carr &
Stancyk 1975; León & Mota 1996). Several authors
(Van Dam & Diez 1996 & 1998; Witzell 1983) have
described sparse hard-bottom communities, cliff-wall
habitats with soft corals and invertebrates as important
benthic developmental habitat for hawksbills. Other
studies (Andares & Uchida 1994; Limpus 1992; Van
Dam & Diez 1997b; Vicente & Carballeira 1991) also
indicate the hawksbill’s preference for coral reef
ecosystems. Such habitat characterizations have led to
area estimates of potential habitat for hawksbill turtles
using the distribution of coral reefs (Buitrago & Guada
2002; Meylan et al. 1997; Prieto et al. 2001). Some
researchers, however, have also reported occasional
hawksbill sightings in other habitats, such as lagoons
with seagrass areas in the Bahamas (Bjorndal & Bolten
1988).
A similar pattern has often been observed with green
turtles (Chelonia mydas). For example, aggregations
of this species, which are usually associated with
seagrass beds as their main feeding grounds, are also
reported on coral reefs (Balazs 1979; Hirth 1992). As
with green turtles, it is probable that hawksbill turtles
frequently use habitats other than coral reefs for feeding
and development. Here we report on the results of a
preliminary in-water survey for marine turtles conducted
on June 2003, along the southeast coast of the
Dominican Republic, where we encountered a
significant aggregation of juvenile hawksbill turtles in a
shallow seagrass habitat.
Manglar Study Site is located at Saona Island on
the southeast coast of the Dominican Republic (fig. 1).
This site is characterized by seagrass beds protected
by a reef breaker forming a lagoon, where water depth
ranges from 0.5 to 2 meters. The dominant seagrass
species are turtle grass (Thalassia testudinum) and
manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme). Several
species of algae (i.e. Halimeda incrasssata, Penicillus
dumetosus and Udotea flabellum), and small colonies
of corals (i.e. Monastrea sp.and Diploria sp.) were
also found at scattered locations throughout the area
(Vega et al. 1997, pers.obs.). The chicken-liver sponge
(Chondrilla nucula) was also found encrusted among
the turtle grass.
Visual turtle surveys at the Manglar study site were
conducted with four observers using a small boat and
slowly navigating parallel to the shore. On some
occasions we made attempts to catch sighted turtles.
This was mostly accomplished by following a sighted
animal until it tired and then by diving onto it from the
bow of the boat (following Ehrhart & Ogren 1999).
The survey transects start and end points, and turtle
capture locations were recorded using a GPS receiver.
The relative sighting frequency (RSF) of sea turtles
at the Manglar site was evaluated by dividing the number
of turtles captured or sighted by the time spent
surveying, with surveys typically lasting one hour for a
total of three sessions. One session was conducted
during morning hours and two sessions in the afternoon,
for two days. The estimated size of all turtles was
recorded together with species. All turtles handled were
measured, weighed and marked on both front flippers
with 681c style inconel tags. Individuals were also
checked for the presence of internal passive integrated
transponder (PIT) tags.
A total of 23 hawksbills and four green turtles were
sighted during the boat surveys totaling three hours.
Nine of the 27 turtles were captured. The resulting
mean RSF for Manglar is 7.7 hawksbills per hour. The
size range of the hawksbills captured was 29 to 41 cm
curved carapace length (nuchal notch to posteriormost
tip; CCLn-t; n=8), and sighted turtles were all estimated
to be from 25 to 50 cm carapace length. Four green
turtles were seen and one captured (measuring 33.3
cm CCLn-t). All green turtles observed were thought
to be approximately 30 cm CCL.
Although our survey at Saona Island was far from
complete, we note that a significant number of juvenile
turtles are present, and specifically that hawksbill turtles
inhabit this seagrass community. Whereas other reports
of sporadic hawksbills residing in seagrass habitats exist,
we believe the Manglar site is one of the first
documented seagrass communities demonstrating a
large abundance of hawksbill turtles. The high RSF of
hawksbills recorded compares with study sites of
important aggregations of this species. For example, a
catch per unit effort of 3.4 and 4.7 hawksbills per hour
have been recorded at Mona-Monito Island and Jaragua,
Dominican Republic, respectively (Diez & Van Dam

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 8

2001; León & Diez 1999). We regard that this area is a
developmental habitat, from the size range of turtles
observed and captured in the area. Even though we did
not conduct stomach content analyses, we speculate
that these hawksbills are feeding on sponges such as
chicken liver sponge (C. nucula), which is a common
prey item for Caribbean juvenile hawksbills elsewhere
(Andares & Uchida 1994; Leon & Bjorndal 2002;
Meylan 1988; Van Dam & Diez 1997a).
In conclusion, juvenile hawksbill turtles living in
habitats other than coral reefs may be more common
than suspected. Further examination of other benthic
communities for the presence of hawksbill turtles may
widen the scope of characteristic habitats recognized
for this species in the Caribbean. We caution that not
only the most characteristic habitat type should be
examined in any determination of the conservation status
of sea turtle species.
Figure 1. Map of surveyed area at Saona Island, Parque Nacional del Este, Dominican Republic.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 9
Acknowledgements: To all the staff of Ecoparque, Inc. and
the Comandancia de la Marina de Guerra de Bayahibe, Rep.
Dominicana for the logistical and human support provided
in the field. We would like to especially thank Kelvin Guerrero
and our field assistants: Pedro Javier Santana, Félix Soto,
Bienvenido, Chichi, El Negro Milady and El Toro. Also, we
want to thanks Matilde Mota from the Ministerio del Medio
Ambiente de la República Dominicana for arranging the
research permit and Karen Bjorndal for kindly reviewing this
manuscript. Project support came from Japan Bekko
Association, Ecoparque Inc., Chelonia, Inc., and
Departamento de Recursos Naturales y Ambientales de
Puerto Rico.
ANDARES, B.L. & I. UCHIDA. 1994. Study of hawksbill turtle
(Eretmochelys imbricata) stomach contents in Cuban
Waters. In: Study of the hawksbill turtle in Cuba (I).
Ministry of Fishing Industry, Cuba. pp. 27-40.
BALAZS, G.H. 1979. Growth, food sources and migrations
of immature Hawaiian Chelonia mydas. Marine Turtle
Newsletter 10:1-3.
BJORNDAL, K.A. & A.B. BOLTEN. 1988. Growth rates cubanas. 1er Dialogo de CITES sobre tortuga carey en el
of immature green turtles, Chelonia mydas, on feeding Caribe. Ministerio de la Industria Pesquera, República de
grounds in the southern Bahamas. Copeia 1988: 555-564 Cuba. 18 pp.

BUITRAGO, J. & H.J. GUADA. 2002. La tortuga carey VAN DAM, R.P. & C.E. DIEZ.1996. Diving behavior of
(Eretmochelys imbricata) en Venezuela. Interciencia. 27: immature hawksbills (Eretmochelys imbricata) in a
392-399. Caribbean cliff wall habitat. Marine Biology 127:170-178.

CARR, A. & S. STANCYK. 1975. Observations on the
ecology and survival outlook of the hawksbill turtle.
Biological Conservation 8:161-172.
DIEZ, C.E. & R.P. VAN DAM. 2001. Mona and Monito
Island Hawksbill Research Project: Report for 2000.
Technical Report. US National Marine Fisheries Service.
17 pp.
VAN DAM, R. & C.E. DIEZ. 1997a. Predation by hawksbill
turtles on sponges at Mona Island, Puerto Rico. In:
Proceedings of the 8th International Coral Reef Symposium
2: 1421-1426.
VAN DAM, R.P. & C.E. DIEZ. 1997b. Diving behavior of
immature hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) in a
Caribbean reef habitat. Coral Reefs 16: 133-138.

EHRHART, L.M. & L.H. OGREN. 1999. Studies in Foraging
Habitats: Capturing and Handling Turtles. In: Eckert, K.L.
K.A. Bjorndal, F.A. Abreu-Grobois & M. Donnelly
(Editors). Research and Management Techniques for
Conservation of Sea Turtles. IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle
Specialist Group Publication No. 4. pp. 61-64.
HIRTH, H. 1992. A natural assemblage of immature green
(Chelonia mydas) and hawksbill (Eretmochelys
imbricata) turtles on the fringing reef of Wuvulu Island,
Papua New Guinea. Micronesica 25: 145-153.
LEON, Y.M. & K.A.Bjorndal. 2002. Selective feeding in the
hawksbill turtle, an important predator in coral reef
ecosystems. Marine Ecology Progress Series 245: 249-
258.
LEÓN Y.M & C.E. DIEZ. 1999. Population structure of
hawksbill turtles on a foraging ground in the Dominican
Republic. Chelonian Conservation Biology 3: 230-236.
LEÓN, Y. & M.J. MOTA. 1996. Unpublished Thesis. Aspectos
de la Ecología y Estructura Poblacional de la tortuga
marina carey (Eretmochelys imbricata) en el área del
Parque Nacional Jaragua. Dept. de Biología, UASD. Santo
Domingo. 98 pp.
VAN DAM, R.P. & C.E. DIEZ.1998. Monito Island- Prime
habitat for the hawksbill turtle. In: Epperly, S.P.(compiler)
Proceedings of the 17th InternationalSymposium of Sea
Turtle Biology and Conservation. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-415.
VEGA, M, M. CHIAPPONE; G. A. DELGADO; R. WRIGHT; &
K. M. SULLIVAN. 1997. Evaluación Ecológica Integral del
Parque Nacional del Este, República Dominicana. Tomo 2:
Recursos Marinos. The Nature Conservancy 93 pp.
VICENTE, V.P. & N.M. CARBALLEIRA. 1991. Studies on the
feeding ecology of the hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys
imbricata, in Puerto Rico. In: Salmon, M. and Wyneken,
J. (Compliers). Proceedings of the 11th Annual Workshop
on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-302. Miami, Fl. pp. 117-120.
WITZELL, W.N. 1983. Synopsis of biological data on
hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys imbricata (Linnaeus, 1766).
FAO Fisheries synopsis 137. 78 pp.

LIMPUS, C.J. 1992. The hawksbill turtle, Eretmochelys

imbricata, in Queensland: Population structure within a
southern Great Barrier Reef feeding ground. Wildlife
Research 19: 489-506.

MEYLAN, A.B. 1988. Spongivory of hawksbill turtles: a diet

of glass. Science 239: 393-395.

MEYLAN, A.B., A. BASS, D.T. CROUSE, M.DONNELLY,

K.L.ECKERT & R. MARQUEZ. 1997. Biology and Status
of the Hawksbill in the Caribbean. IUCN/SSC Marine
Turtle Specialist Group. Washington, DC USA. 53 pp.

PRIETO, A.; F. MONCADA, G. WEBB, C. MANOLIS, R.

GÓMEZ. 2001. Aspectos biológicos y ecológicos
relacionados con la población de tortuga carey en aguas

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 10

 Loggerhead Nesting Effort and Conservation Initiatives at
the Monitored Beaches of Greece during 2002
Dimitris Margaritoulis & Alan F. Rees
ARCHELON, the Sea Turtle Protection Society of Greece, Solomou 57, GR-10432 Athens, Greece
(E-mail: margaritoulis@archelon.gr)

Approximately 99% of the documented nesting
effort of the loggerhead turtle, Caretta caretta, in the
Mediterranean occurs in Greece (60.6%), Turkey
(27.1%) and Cyprus (11.4%) (Margaritoulis et al. in
press). Libya may host large numbers of nests (Laurent
et al. 1997) but this has not yet been quantified by a
monitoring programme.
Following nesting data from several seasons, nesting
areas in Greece have been classified as “major” or
“moderate” (Margaritoulis 2000). “Major” nesting areas
are those hosting on average more than 100 nests/season
and over 6 nests/km/season. Five areas in Greece fulfill
the requirements for “major” areas: Laganas Bay
(Zakynthos island), Kyparissia Bay (western
Peloponnesus), Rethymno (Crete), Lakonikos Bay
(southern Peloponnesus) and the Bay of Chania (Crete
island) (Margaritoulis 2000). The above locations are
monitored each season by ARCHELON as part of a
systematic and standardised long-term monitoring
project. However, of the 44-km Kyparissia Bay, only
the southernmost 9.5 km are monitored as they host
83.9% of the total nesting effort along the entire Bay
(Margaritoulis & Rees 2001). Further, whenever
resources permit, some “moderate” areas are also
monitored. During the 2002 nesting season, besides the
above five “major” areas, two “moderate” areas were
also monitored: Bay of Messara (Crete) and Koroni
(southern Peloponnesus) (Fig. 1).
During 2002, a total of 9991 emergences, of which
2496 (25.0%) resulted in nests, were recorded in the
above seven nesting areas, totaling in length 73.2 km
(tab. 1). The five “major” areas hosted in total 9575
emergences, of which 2380 (24.9%) resulted in nests.
The number of nests per area, during 2002, was within
the range of values recorded during previous seasons
(Table 2) and nesting density varied correspondingly
(from 7.5 nests/km in the Bay of Messara to 213.6 nests/
km in Laganas Bay) thus each nesting area maintained
its ranking according to Margaritoulis (2000).
Nesting success varied from area to area; the
lowest nesting success was recorded in Lakonikos Bay
(21.1%) and the highest in southern Kyparissia Bay
(33.2%) (Table 1). Inter-area variation in nesting
success is generally caused by diversity of nesting
habitat. Highest success is generally recorded on
extensive beaches with ample sand and lower success
for more narrow or pebbly beaches. Anthropogenic
disturbances can further reduce the nesting success on
all beach types.
Loggerhead nesting in Greece is highly seasonal.
The nesting season usually extends from end of May
to late August (Margaritoulis & Rees 2001). For 2002,
the duration of the nesting season (from first to last
nest) ranged from 70 days in Rethymno to 94 days in
southern Kyparissia Bay (Table 3).
Conservational aspects
All five “major” nesting areas in Greece plus the Bay
of Messara are included in the proposed network of
protected areas entitled NATURA 2000, as part of the
Habitats Directive of the European Union. Further, the
nesting beaches in Laganas Bay and surrounding
marine and terrestrial areas were declared a National
Marine Park in 1999 (Dimopoulos 2001). The nesting
areas of southern Kyparissia Bay, Rethymno,

Nesting
Beach length Number of Overall nesting
Nesting area Number of nests density
(km) emergences success (%) (nests/km)
Laganas Bay (Zakynthos) 5.5 5123 1175 22.9 213.6
Southern Kyparissia Bay 9.5 1784 593 33.2 62.4
Rethymno 10.8 1347 325 24.1 30.1
Lakonikos Bay 23.5 888 187 21.1 8.0
Bay of Chania 13.1 433 100 23.1 7.6
Bay of Messara 8.1 227 61 26.9 7.5
Koroni 2.7 189 55 29.1 20.4

Total 73.2 9991 2496 25.0 34.1

Table 1. Main nesting data for seven areas monitored during 2002 in Greece.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 11
Figure 1. Sketch map of Greece, showing the approximate position of the seven nesting areas, monitored during 2002. Map
produced with: SEATURTLE.ORG Maptool

Lakonikos Bay and Bay of Chania feature specific 2001).

Management Plans, which are implemented by In all seven areas there is a strong public awareness
ARCHELON in cooperation with local authorities and component operated through seasonal information
stakeholders (Irvine et al. 2000, Margaritoulis & Rees stations, slide presentations mainly given at tourist

Minimum Maximum Number of

Nesting area number of number of monitoring Data source
nests/season nests/season seasons
Laganas Bay (Zakynthos) 857 2018 14 Margaritoulis 2000
Southern Kyparissia Bay 331 779 8 Margaritoulis & Rees 2001, Rees et
al . 2002
Rethymno 316 516 8 Margaritoulis 2000
Lakonikos Bay 107 220 6 Margaritoulis 2000
Bay of Chania 77 192 6 Margaritoulis 2000
Bay of Messara 15 80 8 Margaritoulis et al. in press
Koroni 35 66 8 Margaritoulis & Rees in press
Table 2. Maximum and minimum annual numbers of nests recorded per monitored area in Greece during previous seasons.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 12

 Nesting area
Laganas Bay (Zakynthos)
Southern Kyparissia Bay
Rethymno
Lakonikos Bay
Bay of Chania
Bay of Messara
Koroni
* Estimated at first survey (4 June)
Table 3. Start/end dates and duration of nesting season per monitored area in Greece during 2002
installations, on-site instructions provided to visitors
and participation in various local cultural events. It is
estimated that over 165,000 visitors were provided
turtle information during 2002 in the seven nesting
areas. Further, in the course of projects co-funded by
the European Commission, two permanent
Environmental Centres have recently been created in
strategic locations in Lakonikos Bay and in southern
Kyparissia Bay (Margaritoulis & Rees 2001; Rees et
al. 2002). These Centres, established in collaboration
with local communities, feature residential facilities for
researchers and exhibitions for visitors; they also offer
guided tours to nearby ecosystems (e.g. coastal forest,
dunes). The Centres operate throughout the year and
are mostly visited by Greek schoolchildren.
Acknowledgements: Permits were provided by the Ministry
of Agriculture and the Ministry of Environment. We thank
ARCHELON’s personnel for organizing and supporting the
project. Many thanks go to project coordinators Andreas
Koutsodendris (Peloponnesus), Aliki Panagopoulou (Crete)
and Harris Strantzalos (Zakynthos). The project would not
have succeeded without the dedicated work of several
hundred volunteers from many countries. Special thanks to
field leaders and assistants Andrew Bishop, Phil Bradshaw,
Filipa Braganca, Owen Brown, Christina Davy, Marina Dias,
Lana Emo, Maria Georgomitrou, Alexander Kazantzis, Sandra
Mueller, Susana Pereira, Lawrence Roberts, Freya St John,
Michael Sturt, Lu Young and Judith Zbinden. Finally, we
would like to thank three anonymous reviewers who provided
comments on a previous version of this manuscript.
DIMOPOULOS, D. 2001. The National Marine Park of
Zakynthos: A refuge for the Loggerhead Turtle in the
Mediterranean. Marine Turtle Newsletter 93: 5-9.
IRVINE, C., D. MARGARITOULIS & T. ARAPIS. 2000.
The role of a non-governmental organization in sea turtle
conservation and management planning in Greece. In: H.
Kalb & T. Wibbels (compilers). Proceedings of the
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 13
Date of first Date of last nest Duration of
nest nesting (days)
23 May 22 August 92
25 May 26 August 94
1 June 9 August 70
3 June 14 August 73
30 May 18 August 81
4 June 21 August 79
31 May* 16 August 78
Nineteenth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle
Conservation and Biology. NOAA Technical
Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-443. National Marine
Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries Science Center,
Miami, USA. pp. 49-52.
LAURENT, L., M.N. BRADAI, D.A. HADOUD & H.M.
EL GOMATI. 1997. Assessment of sea turtle nesting
activity in Libya. Marine Turtle Newsletter 76: 2-6.
MARGARITOULIS, D. 2000. An estimation of the overall
nesting activity of the loggerhead turtle in Greece. In:
F.A. Abreu-Grobois, R. Briseño-Dueñas, R. Márquez-
Millán & L. Sarti-Martinez (compilers). Proceedings of
the Eighteenth International Sea Turtle Symposium.
NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-436.
National Marine Fisheries Service, Southeast Fisheries
Science Center, Miami, USA. pp. 48-50.
MARGARITOULIS, D., & A.F. REES. In Press. Loggerhead
nesting in Koroni, southern Peloponnesus, Greece:
Nesting data 1995-2002. Proceedings of the Twenty Third
International Sea Turtle Symposium. 17 - 21 March 2003,
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
MARGARITOULIS, D., & A.F. REES. 2001. The
Loggerhead Turtle, Caretta caretta, population nesting
in Kyparissia Bay, Peloponnesus, Greece: Results of
beach surveys over seventeen seasons and determination
of the core nesting habitat. Zoology in the Middle East
24: 75-90.
MARGARITOULIS, D., R. ARGANO, I. BARAN, F.
BENTIVEGNA, M. N. BRADAI, J. A. CAMINAS, P.
CASALE, G. DE METRIO, A. DEMETROPOULOS, G.
GEROSA, B. J. GODLEY, D. A. HADDOUD, J.
HOUGHTON, L. LAURENT & B. LAZAR. In press.
Loggerhead turtles in the Mediterranean: Present
knowledge and conservation perspectives. In A.B. Bolten
& B.E. Witherington (editors). Loggerhead Sea Turtles.
Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., USA.
REES, A.F., E. TZOVANI & D. MARGARITOULIS. 2002.
Conservation activities for the protection of the
loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta) in Kyparissia Bay,
during 2001. Testudo 5: 45-54.
 Loggerhead Sea Turtle Tagged in Brazil Caught by a Trawler in Waters of the
Common Argentinian-Uruguayan Fishing Area
Martín Laporta1 & Gustave Lopez2
1
C.I.D., Proyecto Karumbé, Tortugas Marinas del Uruguay J. Paullier 1198/101, Montevideo, Uruguay, (E-mail:
karumbe@adinet.com.uy) 2Projeto TAMAR-IBAMA. Caixa Postal 2219 Salvador, Bahia, CEP 40223-970 Brazil
(E-mail: protamar@tamar.org.br)
On March 22, 2002 the trawler Besugo II Currently, TAMAR and Karumbé are developing an
incidentally caught an adult female loggerhead sea turtle “Action Plan for the Reduction of Incidental Sea Turtle
(Caretta caretta) in waters of the common Argentinian- Capture in Fisheries”. The cooperation between both
Uruguayan Fishing Area (36º10’S and 56º05’W), near projects is extremely important to achieve success in
Rouen Bank, southwest of Montevideo. The turtle was the conservation of sea turtles in Brazil, Uruguay and
dead when the net was hauled and it had only one tag elsewhere.
with the number BR12309 (Monel 681 tag, National
Acknowledgements: Karumbé Project is supported by the
Band Co., Newport, KY, USA). The turtle was tagged British Petroleum Conservation Programme, and National Fish
on October 21, 1995 at one of Projeto TAMAR’s and Wildlife Foundation. TAMAR is supported by Petrobras,
stations in Arembepe, Bahia (12o45’S 38o10’W), and affiliated with IBAMA and co-administrated by the Pró-
had not been observed in the seven intervening years. TAMAR Foundation. We thank the fisherman Andres Vidal
At the time of tagging, the turtle measured 107.5 cm for collecting the turtle and contacting Karumbé Project, and
CCLn-t. and 95.5 cm CCW. Measurements taken by Neca Marcovaldi and Philip Miller for their comments.
the Karumbé Project seven years later were identical.
Both projects use the measurement methods outlined ALMEIDA, A.P, C. BAPTISTOTTE & J.A. SCHINEIDER.
by Bolten (1999). 2000. Loggerhead turtle tagged in Brazil found in Uruguay.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 87:10.
This is the first loggerhead turtle tagged in Bahia
and then recaptured by an Uruguayan fishing vessel. BOLTEN, A. B. 1999. Techniques for measuring sea turtles.
Almeida et al. (2000) registered a case in which a In: Eckert, K.L., Bjorndal, K.A., Abreu-Grobois, F.A. &
loggerhead sea turtle tagged in the Brazilian state of Donnelly, M. (Editors). Research and Management
Espírito Santo, was found stranded in Uruguay. Together Techniques for the Conservation of Sea Turtles. IUCN/
these data suggest that some Brazilian loggerhead sea SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group Publications Nº 4 pp.
turtles may migrate to Uruguayan waters to feed. 110-114.

MEETING REPORTS
Report on the Fifth Annual Meeting of the
Sea Turtle Conservation Network of the Californias
Zoe Rappoport & Wallace J. Nichols
WiLDCOAST International Conservation Team, Post Office Box 324, Davenport, California, 95017 USA
(E-mail: zrappoport@wildcoast.net)

The 5th Annual meeting of the Grupo Tortuguero de
las Californias (Sea Turtle Conservation Network of
the Californias) was held in Loreto, B.C.S., Mexico
from January 24-26, 2003. The network is comprised
of a growing sea turtle conservation constituency
including fishermen, their families, nonprofit
organizations, government agencies, scientists, students,
and interested community members. The theme of this
year’s meeting was “Saving Sea Turtles, One Person
at a Time”.
Attendance has grown from 45 people in 1999 to
more than 240 this year, with sea turtle interests
represented from the United States, Mexico, Nicaragua,
Japan, Guatemala, Peru, and New Zealand. Participants
attended multi-media presentations on turtle health,
nesting, sea turtle reserves, and protection. Network
members from the entire Baja California peninsula
shared community reports on the progress of their
monitoring and protection efforts. Smaller groups
attended workshops on communicating conservation

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 14

messages to the media, ecotourism, monitoring
techniques, and analyzing turtle health.
This year’s highlights included an original sea turtle
protection song performed by the Mulege student club
and a viewing of new marine protection video footage.
Also in attendance was Francisco “Gordo” Fischer (see
front cover), a former sea turtle poacher responsible
for killing as many as 2,000 turtles a year to supply the
black market demand. After serving jail time for
poaching, Francisco has joined the Grupo Tortuguero’s
international campaign to halt the slaughter of turtles,
and he is speaking out publicly about his experiences.
The Fourth Annual Premio Orantes, given to an
individual or group who has contributed greatly to sea
turtle recovery in the region, was awarded to the
community of Punta Abreojs, BCS, for their efforts to
curb sea turtle consumption in their community and halt
turtle hunting in their coastal waters.
The 2003 meeting also included the region’s first
workshop on bycatch reduction, led by Raquel Briseño.
Topics included identifying hotspots of bycatch,
modifying fishing gear, and the effects of bycatch on
turtle survival.
The meeting met its goal of providing a regional
forum for sharing information, working through difficult
situations, making friends and partners, learning new
techniques, and comparing experiences – all part of
the community-based effort to recover endangered sea
turtles along the coast of the Californias.
The Sixth Annual Meeting of the Grupo Tortuguero
de las Californias will be held in Los Cabos, BCS,
Mexico on 23-25th of January 2004 (location to be
arranged). Please contact: Zoe Rappoport:
<zrappoport@wildcoast.net> or Graciela Tiburcio
<gtiburcio@hotmail.com> for additional information, or
visit <http://baja.seaturtle.org/>.
Acknowledgements: The meeting was made possible with
support from the David and Lucile Packard Foundation,
Defenders of Wildlife, Global Green Grant Fund, GEA, NFWF,
Ocean Planet Research, Pronatura, SEMARNAT, UABCS,
UNAM-Mazatlan, IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group,
Underwater Images Competition, Hotel Camino Real, and
Budget-Loreto.

African Reunion at the Second International Congress on Chelonian

Conservation, Saly, Senegal (June 18-22, 2003)
Manjula Tiwari1, Jacques Fretey2 & Angela Formia3
1
Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle Research, University of Florida, Gainesville,
FL 32611 USA (E-mail: mtiwari@zoo.ufl.edu)
2
UICN-France, Laboratoire d’Evolution, Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, 36 rue Geoffroy St. Hilaire,
Paris 75005, France (E-mail: jfretey@imatech.fr)
3
School of Biosciences, Cardiff University, Cardiff CF10 3TL, UK (E-mail: formia@cardiff.ac.uk)

This reunion on sea turtle research and conservation
in Africa was a small gathering of 14 people
representing eight countries, of which four were African
countries. Important highlights from the meeting are:
Changes within the CMS (Convention for Migratory
Species, Bonn, Germany) affecting the African sea turtle
programme were announced. Douglas Hykle, Deputy
Executive Secretary of the CMS who was spearheading
the West African sea turtle programme has moved to
Bangkok, Thailand. The program has been transferred
to Marco Barbieri at the CMS.
The use of PIT tags was suggested, and the
possibility of acquiring flipper tags and applicators from
France and the Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle
Research in Florida was discussed. It was also
emphasized that projects be very careful not to duplicate
flipper tag numbers.
Location of the regional office for the Memorandum
of Abidjan (Memorandum of Understanding Concerning
Conservation Measures for Marine Turtles of the
Atlantic Coast of Africa) was discussed. Initially, the
Ivory Coast had been envisioned as the site of the
regional office. However, due to political instability in
the country since 1999, the regional office has been
housed within the European program ECOFAC in
Libreville, Gabon. Currently, discussions are underway
with the University of Dakar, Senegal, to permanently
install the regional office in an old malacology laboratory
belonging to IFAN (Institut Fondamental d’Afrique
Noir) on the island of Gorée (opposite Dakar). Senegal
was chosen because of its leadership in conservation
and environmental issues, its role within NEPAD (New
Partnership for Africa’s Development), and its general
political stability.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 15

 Two Resolutions that were being written at the
Congress by Jacques Fretey, Jack Frazier, Angela
Formia and Manjula Tiwari were briefly mentioned at
this meeting, and presented to all Congress participants
on the last day, which was dedicated to marine turtles.
The first resolution encourages the European Union,
and the governments of the United Kingdom, Spain,
and Portugal that have territories in the region
(Ascension Island, St. Helena, Canary Islands, and the
Azores and Madeira) and the government of France
that has been involved financially and logistically with
the African sea turtle program, to sign the Memorandum
of Abidjan. The second resolution is addressed to the
FAO, encouraging it to support the development and
implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding
for the Atlantic coast of Africa, by co-operating with
the Secretariat of the CMS, within the context of the
FAO Special Programme for Food Security (SPFS) and
the FAO International Plan of Action on Illegal,
Unreported and Unregulated Fishing (IPOA-IUU).

IUCN-SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group, Annual General Meeting

21st March 2003
Perran Ross
Interim Administrator, MTSG, Florida Museum of Natural History, Box 117800, University of Florida,
Gainesville, FL 32611, USA (E-mail: prosscsg@flmnh.ufl.edu)

The meeting was convened at the conclusion of the
23rd Annual Sea Turtle Symposium, held in Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia, and was attended by some 30
MTSG members and a similar number of observers.
The agenda included discussions regarding recent
interactions between the MTSG and SSC-IUCN and
CITES on the hawksbill turtle issue which resulted in
the resignation of the MTSG chairman and a breakdown
of confidence between MTSG and SSC, and addressed
the mission and goals of MTSG, examined the changes
needed in structure to achieve that mission,
communication within the MTSG, and the issue of new
leadership.
The MTSG Mission Statement
Developed and published in 1995 in five languages,
many members are still unfamiliar with the document,
and several felt it was of broad coverage and not
adequately responsive to current situations. The
participants felt there was a need for a review of the
mission statement to ensure it properly identifies and
directs the current and future niche and activities. The
role of the MTSG within and among other organizations
(e.g. Sea Turtle Society, SEATURTLE.ORG, Marine
Turtle Newsletter, WIDECAST and numerous other
regional and national networks), through which there is
potential for strongly synergistic and complementary
joint activities, also needs clarification. The mission
statement should be compatible with the existing mission
and policy of SSC-IUCN, and must clarify the role of
the MTSG in connection with conservation and resource
use. The issue of ‘use’ needs to be addressed within
the SSC-IUCN context, and appropriate activities,
technical advice and advocacy defined.
The participants agreed on the need for mission re-
definition through a structured ‘retreat’ or workshop
which was completely transparent and involved
consultation of the whole membership to address the
mission. This process would also enhance the
development of appropriate structure, communication
and leadership. As it is not feasible or effective to have
the whole membership meet, the group suggested a
process of inviting comments, circulation and review
of drafts, and inputs through representatives of the full
diversity of opinion in MTSG.
MTSG Structure
It was agreed that while membership in the MTSG
confers significant prestige on members, a balance is
needed between number of members, diversity of views
and effective operation. The current membership does
not completely reflect either diversity of views or
geographic distribution of experts and needs updating,
and the diversity of views and regions represented in
the executive should be expanded. The importance of
allowing and recognizing diverse views and minority
opinions and giving these effective voice was
emphasized, in particular scientific, political and socio-
cultural influences in effective conservation. Finally, the
group indicated that effective group function would be
enhanced by a full time program officer.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 16

Communication within the MTSG
It was noted that communication was a two way
process and that members needed to initiate contact
with regional coordinators and the leadership directly
to raise issues or express alternative views. Openness,
principled discussion and respectful tolerance of dissent
would dissuade a polarity of views in the long-run. The
participants indicated that communication from the
leadership and executive to the general membership
needed enhancing. Tools to achieve improved
communication are already in place through web pages
(http://www.seaturtle.org/, http://www.iucn-mtsg.org/
) and a dedicated list server (mtsg-l@lists.iucn-
mtsg.org) and an offer of regular space in the Marine
Turtle Newsletter. The new leadership should develop
and use these as a matter of urgency.
Leadership of MTSG
Many members expressed deep dismay and concern
at recent events surrounding MTSG leadership changes.
The interim administrator, new leadership, executive and
SSC leadership need to recognize that constructive
discussion and action on these matters are crucial to
restoring the confidence of the group. The concept of
sharing leadership roles, which would reduce the
administrative burden on the chairs and allow
representation of divergent views at the highest level
and responsibilities, was widely supported, provided
there was transparent mechanisms to ensure full
communication and conflict resolution between co-
chairs.
In conclusion, the meeting clearly supported the
concept of examination of the MTSG mission through
a workshop-retreat process. Diverse representation in
the executive, and wide consultation with the
membership are recommended. Improving
communication throughout MTSG must be implemented
and the identification of candidates recommended to
SSC for appointment to the chair is an integral part of
these processes.
Note added in proof: After extensive consultation, Rod
Mast and Nick Pilcher were invited by the SSC chair
to take over as co-chairs of the MTSG and are now
reviewing and implementing these recommendations
(see Pilcher & Mast MTN 102: 18-19).

ANNOUNCEMENTS

Marine Turtle Nesting Site Evaluation Survey, Turkey 2003

Hanneke Nijland & Ayse Oruç
WWF Turkey - Marine and Coast Section, Büyük Posthane Caddesi no: 43-45 kat: 5-6 Bahçekapi
Istanbul, Turkey (E-mail: Aoruc@wwf.org.tr, Hnijland@wwf.org.tr)

Seventeen beaches along the Turkish Mediterranean
coast, designated as ‘Marine Turtle Nesting Beaches’
by the Ministry of Environment, host regionally
important numbers of Caretta caretta and Chelonia
mydas. Since the comprehensive surveys of 1988 and
1994, although universities have monitored some
particular nesting sites regularly, the complete status
assessment has not been undertaken. To provide this
update, WWF Turkey is carrying out a comprehensive
evaluation of marine turtle nesting sites in Turkey during
the summer of 2003.
Nesting sites are to be monitored for presence of
marine turtle tracks and nests. Threats by recent and
ongoing development activities are to be reassessed,
the practicability and priority of the measures taken for
the conservation of marine turtles in the area will be
evaluated and recommendations formulated. At the
same time marine turtle conservation efforts and
initiatives at local, national and international level are to
be promoted. The situation report produced will be sent
to all relevant authorities to be used as a site-
safeguarding guide for better management of marine
turtle nesting sites. It will be available in print in Turkish
from December 2003 and in English as PDF-file on the
WWF Turkey website: <http://www.wwf.org.tr/>
To provide a review of marine turtle projects and
distribute information on effective conservation
techniques, promote successful examples, facilitate a
draft National Species Action Plan for Marine Turtles
and support existing networks on local, national and
international basis a First Turkish National Symposium
on Marine Turtles will take place on 4-5 December
2003 in Istanbul, Turkey.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 17

 IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group News
Nicolas J. Pilcher1 & Roderic B. Mast2
1
Marine Research Foundation, 1-3A-7 The Peak, Lorong Puncak 1, 88400 Kota Kinabalu, Sabah Malaysia,
Tel/Fax ++ 60 88 243000, (Email: pilcher@tm.net.my)
2
CI Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, 1919 M Street NW, Washington, DC 20037 USA,
Tel ++ 202 912-1216, (Email: r.mast@conservation.org)

It has been a few months now since our appointment
as Co-Chairs of the IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist
Group (MTSG), and while things may appear to be quiet,
reality is far from that. Taking on the responsibility for
a large and diverse group such as the MTSG in the
wake of the successful and productive leadership of
Alberto Abreu has proven to be daunting, and we now
wonder how one person alone ever managed to hold
down the fort! To Alberto, past Chairs Karen Bjorndal
and Neca Marcovaldi, and Interim Chair, Perran Ross,
we herewith offer a heartfelt thank-you, and tip our
hats to you for having done so well. Though we may
have said it before in other fora, it is worth repeating
here again that we are grateful for this opportunity to
serve, and we commit to do our best for the membership,
the IUCN/SSC and, of course, for the turtles.
The two of us held our first face-to-face meeting as
Co-Chairs in Costa Rica in July, where Rod has been
working on preparations for the upcoming 24th Annual
Sea Turtle Symposium. We reviewed together the list
of concerns that had arisen from within the Group and
the SSC Leadership to that point, and discussed
strategies for addressing the most important of them.
Topics that we had been tasked to address included: 1)
improved communication; 2) MTSG staffing, structure
and membership, and; 3) MTSG vision and strategy, to
name a few.
This marks the first time in recent history that the
MTSG has been headed by Co-Chairs rather than a
single Chairperson, and this arrangement presents
challenges in terms of information flow, particularly in
light of the fact that Rod is in Washington and Nick in
Borneo. Thus to assure that nothing falls through the e-
cracks, we have created a joint e-mail account at:
<mtsg.co-chairs@conservation.org>, that we
encourage you to use for all direct communication with
us as relates to MTSG issues.
Furthermore, we herein announce that the MTSG
has agreed to provide a quarterly update here in the
Marine Turtle Newsletter, for which we most gratefully
acknowledge the support of the MTN Editors and
Board. Given the MTN’s reputation as the principle
means of networking and information sharing among
the world’s far-flung turtle conservationists, it only makes
sense to use this tool to assure that news of the MTSG’s
activities reaches you all. The MTSG has recently
provided financial support to the seaturtle.org website
as well, which continues to provide people, governments
and organizations around the world with current and
newsworthy information and scientific data on marine
turtles, and also serves as the host of the soon-to-be
re-vamped MTSG website. These are just a few of a
number of initiatives to assure effective communications
among MTSG members; you’ll be hearing more about
the website, upcoming meetings and other advances in
the near future.
Most importantly, do not be shy about
communicating with us. Communications is not a one-
way street, remember, and we need to hear from the
membership, so do keep in touch regularly please, with
issues of concern to the MTSG. This has already begun
with regard to items such as the IAC deliberations, the
South Africa program, Red Lists, turtle conservation
issues in Puerto Rico, the hawksbill trade, and a few
other themes.
On the heels of “improved communication”, the most
oft-repeated piece of advice to us from past MTSG
Chairs and other SSC Group Chairs was, “hire a
competent Program Officer as soon as possible,” so
we wasted no time. Though it is tough to fill the shoes
of Marydele Donelly, whom we thank profusely for her
years of service to the MTSG, we have appointed Brian
Hutchinson as acting Program Officer as of August
1st. Brian studied Zoology at Connecticut College in
New London, CT, specializing in tropical amphibian
studies and general tropical biology. He has worked
with the Shedd Aquarium in Chicago, and in Ecuador
for the Jatun Sacha Foundation. Brian will be handling
regular communication with the membership (in English
or Spanish) and liaising with individuals and organizations
around the world who seek assistance from the MTSG.
He will be based with Rod in Washington, DC and can
be contacted at <b.hutchinson@conservation.org>.
We have also begun an effort to expand MTSG
membership to assure the greatest possible geographic
and thematic expertise of the Group. As such, we would

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 18

like to announce the recent appointment of new
members Grahame Webb, Charlie Manolis, Mark
Hamman, Maria Jose Barragan and Mario Boza. We
take this opportunity to welcome them to the fold, and
we look forward to their input. Moreover, we are
revising the New Member Guidelines and Terms of
Reference for MTSG members, which will be circulated
in the near future.
At the last general meeting of the MTSG hosted by
Perran Ross in Kuala Lumpur (MTN 102:16-17), it was
agreed that paying some attention to strategic planning
at this point in the MTSG’s evolution would be a
worthwhile effort, and we both agree heartily with this.
SSC Head David Bracket has encouraged this as well,
and Rod has volunteered to use the experience of CI in
these matters to host a meeting in DC to review the
MTSG’s Vision, Mission, Values and Strategic Plan.
Our hope is to convene a gathering in early December
of this year, among a core group of MTSG members to
re-create (or re-validate) the 1995 Global Strategy for
the Conservation of Marine Turtles. The results of this
effort would be presented formally at the next Annual
General Meeting of the MTSG in San Jose Costa Rica
next February.
We have made a number of other noteworthy strides
since our appointment in May that we would like to
mention here. MTSG has formed a partnership with
the Chelonian Research Foundation for financial
management of MTSG funds, and we wish to extend a
word of thanks to MTSG member Anders Rhodin for
his willingness to assist us in this endeavor. Rod had a
productive meeting with Alberto Abreu in Mexico City,
along with that country’s new Head of Wildlife (and
MTSG member), Georgita Ruiz, to discuss past and
future performance of the MTSG. Alberto’s guidance
and support has proven invaluable to us (thank you
again), and we congratulate Georgita on her new
position as well. It is fitting that a mega-sea turtle
diversity country like Mexico, have at the helm of its
Wildlife Agency someone as dedicated to the
conservation of sea turtles as Georgita.
With regard to the state of the Red List evaluations
currently being undertaken by the MTSG, we are
pleased to report that the Green Turtle assessment
being prepared by Jeff Seminoff is completed and will
soon be available for review by the membership. Hats-
off to Jeff for this labor of love that has taken countless
hours of his valuable time – we are most grateful.
Lastly, the next full MTSG meeting will take place
in San Jose, Costa Rica, on the 29th of February, 2004,
following the 2004 International Sea Turtle Symposium
at the Hotel Herradura, San Jose, Costa Rica (MTN
102:20-23). Please add it to your calendars, and we
look forward to seeing many of you there.

Marine Turtle Sightings Program launched in Western Canada

Carla Sbrocchi
Coordinator, Sea Turtle Conservation Group, Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre,
PO Box 3232 Vancouver BC Canada V6B 3X8 (Email: sbroccc@vanaqua.org)

A sea turtle sightings program has been launched as
part of a greater family of Sea Turtle Conservation
programs at the Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science
Centre in Vancouver, Canada. The sightings program
aims to increase awareness on marine turtles, especially
leatherbacks, on the coast of British Columbia and the
tangible stewardship-based conservation activities
communities can involve themselves in. Past and present
reports of sea turtle sightings are encouraged in order
to achieve a broader idea of the animal’s visitation
patterns in these waters.
Awareness is being raised through school visits,
developing contacts with commercial fishermen and
other stakeholders and educational organizations, and
producing educational displays and materials. Residents
of coastal communities are encouraged to participate
in a variety of programs including a national Shoreline
Cleanup event, in response to the prevalence of aquatic
debris and the threat it poses to sea turtles and other
wildlife.
For further information on the Sightings program or
other activities of the Sea Turtle Conservation Group,
please contact Carla Sbrocchi <turtles@vanaqua.org>
or visit the Vancouver Aquarium’s website <http://
www.vanaqua.org/>.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 19

 SECOND ANNOUNCEMENT

24th Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation

(San Jose, Costa Rica, February 22-29, 2004)

Roderic B. Mast1 & Brian Hutchinson2

1
President, International Sea Turtle Society, 2Acting Program Officer, IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist
Group, c/o Center for Applied Biodiversity Science, Conservation International, 1919 M Street NW, Washington, DC
20037 USA, (Email: r.mast@conservation.org and b.hutchinson@conservation.org)

Update on Preparations
Planning for the 24th Symposium is in full swing,
gracias to the help of many people, most notably Clara
Padilla, our Costa Rica-based Symposium Coordinator.
Also, special thanks to James Norman for his volunteer
weeks over the summer months (plus to Jim Richardson
for sending James to us). In addition to the usual
negotiations of blocking hotel rooms, booking a
Conference Center, and arranging logistics for feeding
and transporting the expected 600-1000 participants,
some noteworthy strides have been made in the past
few months. To begin, we have secured a Decreto de
Interes Publico, or Public Interest Decree, signed by
both Costa Rica’s Minister of Environment and the
country’s President, Abel Pacheco, declaring that the
24th Symposium is in the Country’s national interest;
this decree will do a great deal to open doors within the
Costa Rican government to facilitate such things as
reductions in sales tax (and hence room rates), as well
as assuring smooth procedures for foreign visitors
requiring visas. We have partnered with a local travel
firm, Neotropical Expeditions, to provide a number of
reasonably priced pre and post-Symposium travel
opportunities for participants, and we have arranged
for a full time travel advisor to be present at the
Symposium to assist with tickets and excursions for
those interested in seeing more of Costa Rica.
Furthermore, we have selected an international travel
partner, Manaca.com, to assist participants with their
global travel needs; Manaca will provide the Symposium
with the convenience of web-based travel planning via
a link from <http://www.seaturtle.org/>.
Symposium Theme and Sessions
As mentioned in the first announcement, the theme
of the 24th Symposium is Sea Turtle Lifescapes, and
we ask presenters to consider this as they prepare their
abstracts for submission over the coming months; for a
more detailed description of the theme see Mast (2003;
MTN 101: 42-44). With the help of Dr. Nat Frazer, and
based partially on his article Concerning those Things
Which We Ought to Have Done: Reflections on the
Future of Sea Turtle Research (MTN 100: 5-8), seven
sessions have been designed for the 24th Symposium,
as described below. Chairpersons will be selected for
each session, and each session will be comprised of
presentations drawn from both submitted abstracts and
invited speakers. The agenda proposed herein will be
finalized once all abstracts are received and all invited
papers and poster sessions are confirmed (remember
that the deadline for submissions is November 15,
2003).
Sea Turtles in Costa Rica – Mini Symposium
Half-day: First half of Day 1 (Feb. 23),
Session Chair: Mario Boza and Roldán Valverde
Costa Rica has a rich history in sea turtle
conservation and research, and has always served as a
leader in the field. Presentations for the mini-symposium
on sea turtles in Costa Rica will highlight these
accomplishments and demonstrate why Costa Rica
remains at the forefront. Presentations in this session
may encompass all topic areas related to sea turtle
research, conservation and history that pertain to Costa
Rica.
Sea Turtles and Socio-Economics
Full day: Second half of Day 1/first half of Day 2 (Feb
23-24),
Session Chair: To be arranged.
This session will include all presentations that analyze
the cultural interactions that take place between humans
and sea turtles, as well as the role or value of sea turtles
in human economic activities. This includes
investigations regarding the perception, treatment, and
utilization of sea turtles by specific cultures or
populations for subsistence, ceremonial and other
purposes, as well as the role that sea turtles play in

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 20

local and global economic activities and the associated
conservation challenges. In previous years,
presentations falling under this category have been
placed in sessions with titles such as ‘Human-Sea Turtle
Interactions’ (2001), and have included projects related
to ecotourism and other economic alternatives,
consumptive use of sea turtles, indigenous cultural
practices/beliefs, sustainable use of sea turtles, and
economic valuation of sea turtles.
Sample titles from presentations at previous symposia
that would fit into this session include: Researching
the utilization of marine turtle eggs; Sea turtles and
the indigenous culture of Palau; The sea turtle in
the magical-religious beliefs of the indigenous
Wayúu; Conservation and sustainable use: Some
principles and problems; Turtles and tourists in a
global economy: The future of ecotourism as a
conservation tool, and; Assessing the socio-
economic value of marine turtle use in the UK
Overseas Territories in the Caribbean:
Methodological challenges.
Sea Turtle Assessment and Monitoring
Full day: Second half of Day 2/first half of Day 3 (Feb.
24-25),
Session Chair: To be arranged
This session will include results of long-term
monitoring reports, (assessments of management and
conservation programs), findings of laboratory studies
in genetics, toxicology, disease and physiological
mechanisms, human impact assessments, behavior/life-
cycle studies, population biology, and other studies that
assess or monitor the lives or conservation status
of sea turtles. In previous years, presentations in this
category have been placed in a variety of sessions with
titles such as, ‘Physiology and Behavior’, ‘Ecology’,
‘Genetics’, and ‘Conservation, Management and
Policy’.
Sample titles of presentations from previous
symposia that would fit into this session include:
Metabolic rates, dive duration and buoyancy
regulation: Why sea turtles beat any other diver in
breatholding; Trace elements accumulation and
tissue distribution in loggerhead turtles (Caretta
caretta) from the western Mediterranean Sea; 17
years of monitoring and management of leatherback
sea turtle nesting population in the northeastern
coast of Puerto Rico (1986-2002); Underwater noise
and anthropogenic disturbance in critical sea turtle
habitats.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 21
Global and Regional Sea Turtle Conservation &
Research
Half-day: Second half of Day 3 (Feb. 25),
Session Chair: To be arranged
This session will include presentations that deal with
large-scale sea turtle conservation and research efforts,
international or intercontinental partnerships, broad
regional agreements, multi-national regimes, and regional
and global policy initiatives. Presentations could
encompass environmental education, broad
communications efforts, and regional/global strategies
for sea turtle research or conservation, policy initiatives,
treaties, and trade regimes and agreements.
In the past, presentations that fit under this session
would have been placed in sessions like ‘Education
and Community-Based Conservation’ or
‘Conservation Management and Policy’. Sample
titles of presentations from previous symposia that
would fit into this session include: Turtle
conservation and fishery management in the U.S.
Western Pacific; Sea turtle protection across
frontiers: Exchange of expertise between the
Netherlands, Benin, and Costa Rica, and; A regional
conservation program for the Guianas.
Sea Turtle Modeling and Prediction
Half-day: First half of Day 4 (Feb. 26),
Session Chair: To be arranged
This session is intended to include presentations that
discuss implementation, testing, development, or revision
of population, behavior or ecosystem models that aim
to predict fluctuations in sea turtle populations as well
as the impacts of anthropogenic alteration to their
natural ecosystems. This may include work on models
that predict the course and impact of pollutants, the
spread of disease, natural variation in population sizes,
and responses of turtle populations to environmental
changes or conservation efforts. This session is intended
for those presentations that deal specifically with
developing or improving research geared specifically
for use in modeling. In previous years, presentations
falling under this category have been placed in sessions
with titles such as ‘Ecology’. Because this is such a
recently developing area of research, we expect new
and unique contributions to this session from a variety
of sectors of sea turtle research.
Sample titles of presentations from previous
symposia include: Estimating productivity and the risk
of hatchling loss to near shore predators at a high-
density loggerhead nesting beach on southeast
Florida; Sand temperatures and sea turtle nests: Tri-
dimensional computational fluid dynamics modeling
of heat flux; New developments in the population
dynamics of pacific leatherbacks: What can
population models tell us; Assessment of the
Tortuguero, Costa Rica green turtle populations
using deterministic matrix models, and; Predicting
the magnitude of cold-stunning events in Cape Cod
Bay, Massachusetts using classification and
regression tree modeling.
Technology and Sea Turtles
Half-day: Second half of Day 4 (Feb. 26),
Session Chair: To be arranged
The technology session is intended to present
advancements and developments in equipment,
technology, and methodology associated with all aspects
of sea turtle conservation and research (excluding those
dealing with prediction and modeling). This includes
improvements, advancements, and trials in research
equipment such as tagging and transmitting devices, as
well as studies of TEDs, long-line hooks, and other
fishing gear. Additionally, developments in software
applications related to sea turtle conservation, along with
improvements, revisions, and developments in the
methodologies associated with both laboratory and field
research techniques. In the past, presentations that fit
under this category have been grouped with the sector
for which the technology or methodology was designed,
and have often been presented as posters. This category
will also involve both a trade show and workshops that
will take place at the 24th Symposium. A separate
session on technology is being created this year due to
both the increasing role of technology in conservation
efforts and the recognition that certain technologies are
applicable in multiple sectors.
Sample titles of presentations from previous
symposia include: Satellite tracking marine turtles:
An assessment of data analysis options; The ARGOS
global satellite tracking and data collection system
for sea turtles; Dead without a TED: Turtles
drowning in U.S. “certified shrimp nets”; Satellite
tracking of green turtles, Chelonia mydas, at
Tortuguero, Costa Rica; Methods aimed to reduce
marine turtle interactions with longline fishing gear;
Results of an experiment to evaluate effects of hook
type on sea turtle bycatch in the swordfish longline
industry, and; Genomics meets ecology: The use of
molecular tools for the study of ecology, evolution,
behavior and conservation.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 22
Novel Insights in Sea Turtle Research &
Conservation
Half-day: First half of Day 5 (Feb. 27),
Session Chair: Nat Frazer
The novel insights session will be the final session
of the 24th Annual Symposium. Its purpose is to inspire
the audience to consider the future of sea turtle research
and conservation in a progressive way by presenting
novel ideas or practices related to sea turtle biology or
conservation. This session will likely involve only a limited
number of presentations on ideas and/or innovative
approaches for future research projects, focusing on
key issues or areas of sea turtle biology and conservation
that either 1) have not yet been successfully addressed;
or 2) would benefit from novel techniques or
methodologies. This may consist of new discoveries in
areas of biology such as physiology, genetics,
development, or behavior, as well as successful
developments in conservation techniques, policies, or
agreements. During this session there will be ample
time set aside for discussion. We hope that ending on
such a note will leave us all with a positive outlook and
a progressive attitude towards sea turtle conservation.
Presenters will be asked to submit abstracts within
one of the above sessions if possible, and will be
contacted prior to the Symposium by their Session Chair
to assure that standard criteria are met for presentation
length, quality and consistency within each Session.
1st Annual Global Sea Turtle Datafest
The ISTS, IUCN/MTSG and Conservation
International are organizing the 1st Annual Global Sea
turtle Datafest in Conjunction with the 24th Annual Sea
Turtle Symposium, and we hope to make this activity
an annual event thereafter. It is well known that
effective conservation of sea turtles can only be
achieved through broad regional and global efforts that
endeavor to conserve turtles throughout all of their life
stages and during all the spatial wanderings of their
long lives.
Sea turtles have been the target of substantial
scientific investigation over the past fifty years, research
that has yielded a plethora of valuable data for
conservation planning. Yet the vast majority of this
research has been highly localized. Data are not lacking
at the level of specific beaches, countries or in rare
cases basins (like the Caribbean), but there is a
desperate paucity of useful global-scale presentations
of accurately geo-referenced data. Regrettably, it is
precisely these types of data that are most needed in
undertaking GIS-based analyses for the development
of broad regional conservation strategies, and for
building alliances across national borders and among
multiple partner communities that represent both the
turtles and the threats to their survival.
The Data-Fest will piggy-back on the 24th STS using
the forum and its human scientific resource as the data-
gathering nexus for advancing the evolution of a high
quality, consensus driven, geo-referenced database on
various aspects of global sea turtle biology.
Techniques for consensus-driven expert analyses of
global conservation priorities have been perfected and
utilized by CI since the late 1980’s, and CI’s Center for
Applied Biodiversity Science (CABS) will provide the
technical expertise for designing and executing the
Data-Fest on-site in San Jose.
Data types and sources will be identified in advance
and base maps created from “best available
information”. These base maps will serve as the
centerpieces of consensus workshops to be facilitated
by CI/CABS, ISTS and MTSG experts at the
Symposium.
Stay tuned for more information about this exciting
initiative in upcoming notices about the 24th Symposium
both here (MTN) and at the official website of the
Symposium at <http://www.seaturtle.org/>. If you are
interested in contributing data or participating in the
Data-Fest, please contact Brian Hutchinson at
<b.hutchinson@conservation.org>.
Reminders to Participants in the 24 th Annual
Symposium
Registration: You must register to attend the
Symposium. The preferred registration method is to visit
the Symposium’s web site (http://www.seaturtle.org/
symposium/). There you will find everything you need
to know in a user-friendly interface.
Lodging: Participants at the Symposium will stay at
the Herradura Hotel in San Jose, where a block of
discounted rooms has been reserved for the Symposium.
Reserve your room by e-mail to
<gventas@hotelherradura.com>, or call (+506) 239-
0033. Be sure to make reference to the Sea Turtle
Symposium.
International travel and pre & post-Symposium
excursions: Learn about the offerings, and register
through Manaca.com, which can be accessed directly
on the web, or from <http://www.seaturtle.org/>.
Submission of abstracts and Resolutions: Abstracts
for oral papers or posters presentations must be received
by November 15, 2003. This deadline applies also to
resolutions for consideration by the by the ISTS Board.
Travel Assistance: Those who wish to apply for Travel
grants, please refer to travel announcement (MTN 101:
45), and again note the deadline of November 15, 2003
applies.
Visas: If you are from Colombia, South Africa or if you
envision that you may have difficulty obtaining a visa in
your home nation, please seek advice from the
Symposium Organizing Committee, c/o Clara Padilla
(Clarits@hotmail.com) as soon as possible.

New National Marine Fisheries Service Webpage

The National Marine Fisheries Service Southeast Fisheries Science Center is proud to announce its new sea
turtle webpage <http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/seaturtlesprogram.jsp> The webpage posts a variety of sea turtle
publications, such as NOAA Technical Memoranda, NMFS contract and unpublished reports, and peer-reviewed
articles from the Center’s staff. Moreover, the webpage lists the sea turtle employees from all NMFS Southeast
Laboratories and offers links to their projects and to other interesting sites, such as the Sea Turtle Stranding and
Salvage Network. All the information posted on the webpage can be downloaded for free. Visit our new
webpage and let us know how we can improve it!

Myrto Argyropoulou, Lloyd Muccio, and Sheryan Epperly, Southeast Fisheries Science Center , 75 Virginia
Beach Drive Miami, Florida 33149, USA (E-mail: Sheryan.Epperly@hqmail.nmfs.noaa.gov).

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 23

 Satellite Tracking on the World Wide Web

SEATURTLE.ORG recently introduced a new satellite tracking resource, in collaboration with the Marine
Turtle Research Group and a consortium of conservation organizations and donors, that provides sea turtle
researchers with an easy-to-use tool for collecting, managing and sharing their satellite telemetry data in near
real-time. The public interface, available on SEATURTLE.ORG at <http://www.seaturtle.org/tracking/>, currently
includes 12 turtles from three projects that have been tagged and are being actively tracked on the web from
nesting beaches in the Cayman Islands, North Carolina and South Carolina. It is expected that other projects will
join soon. Visitors to the site are able to find background information on each project and turtle and can register
to receive daily e-mail updates about the movements of turtles in each of the active projects. All track maps are
also updated daily. Behind the scenes is a data management system that takes most of the drudgery out of
handling satellite telemetry data by automating data retrieval and archiving from the ARGOS system. A number
of data filtering and management tools are in development, including a direct link to SEATURTLE.ORG’s Maptool
<http://www.seaturtle.org/maptool/> providing data owners with on-the-fly mapping of their satellite telemetry
data. If you are interested in adding a project to the Satellite Tracking resource on SEATURTLE.ORG, or have
any questions, comments or suggestions, please contact Michael Coyne <mcoyne@seaturtle.org>.

Where Will Shelby, Myles, and Samia Go? Students, supporters in the community, and others worldwide are
following the migrations of these post-nesting green and loggerhead sea turtles from the Cayman Islands. The
turtles’ positions are updated daily on SEATURTLE.ORG <http://www.seaturtle.org/tracking/>.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 24

 BOOK REVIEWS
Title: Oceans of Noise: A WDCS Science Report
Year: 2003
Editors: Mark Simmonds, Sarah Dolman and Lindy
Weilgart
Publisher: Whale and Dolphin Conservation Society
Pages: 165 pp (PDF is 1.2mb)
Price: free
To order:URL: http://www.wdcs.org/
Anthropogenic noise is an insidious form of pollution
in the world’s oceans. It is also an issue of continuously
growing concern for scientists, non-governmental
organizations, and the general public, heightened most
recently by the highly publicized mass strandings of
beaked whales in the Bahamas. While the report’s title
suggests that it will address noise issues for all marine
species, it actually primarily focuses on cetaceans
(whales, dolphins, and porpoises). This should not
dissuade the individual who is concerned with undersea
noise issues, especially since sea turtles are likely
affected by human-made noise. This report certainly
will serve as a useful reference.
Oceans of Noise begins with a brief primer on the
physics of underwater sound. Granted, the topic of
marine acoustics is complicated, and unfortunately, this
primer will not be the easiest to follow or understand
by the average reader. The reader who is interested in
the mechanics of sound propagation would be better
served by referring to other materials for this type of
tutorial. This report highlights the many sources of noise
pollution in the marine environment today, including (but
not limited to) commercial ship traffic, oil and gas
exploration and production, ocean experiments involving
acoustics, military sources, acoustic harassment devices,
dredging, and marine wind farms. This report section
commences by sketchily mentioning biologically
important sounds, but then neglects to develop the
presentation by not discussing the importance of these
sounds (except in the case of wind and wave-generated
noise and listing some basic characteristics of natural
noise sources). It is obvious at this point, that the report’s
focus is directed towards human-made noise sources.
This is a spot in the report where the concept of
passively listening by dolphins for sounds produced by
fish could have been introduced; this would also have
served as part of a good foundation for the next
chapter’s discussion on why we should be concerned
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 25
about the masking of biological sounds by human-made
noise. There has been very interesting progress along
these lines, which suggests that passive listening is
employed by bottlenose dolphins occurring in estuaries,
to locate their prey. These shallow waters also happen
to be the nosiest in terms of anthropogenic sounds (e.g.,
boat traffic).
A few omissions were noted for the before-
mentioned chapter, though it is important to understand
that a comprehensive review of anthropogenic noise
sources in the ocean is a massive undertaking. For
example, it would have been interesting to see an
inclusion of information on sounds produced during
fishery operations. In the case of trawling vessels,
animals may respond to cues, such as sounds produced
by boat operations (e.g., winches operating) and nets
as they move through the water. The report attempts
to be broad in geographic terms, however, it is obviously
biased primarily to information from the eastern North
Atlantic Ocean (where the Whale and Dolphin
Conservation Society [WDCS] incidentally is based).
For example, seismic surveys occur to a high degree in
the northern Gulf of Mexico and studies are underway
to assess the impacts to cetaceans in that part of the
world, however, no referral to this area or studies is
provided. For this to be a thorough review of
anthropogenic noise sources, the section on vessel traffic
should have touched upon whale-watching and research
survey efforts by scientists involving ships, as well as
small boats. These topics are somewhat addressed in
the appendices, as a list of responses of cetaceans to
boat traffic and guidelines for whale-watching (in the
Mediterranean), but could have been more directly
addressed in the front of the report. This would have
been a nod to the concerns of scientists, particularly in
the U.S., who have long complained about the restrictions
imposed on them for studying dolphins, but the lack of
such compliance by or enforcement of the shipping
industry, which is probably the biggest of the ocean’s
noise makers. It is here that we see that the primary
targets of the WDCS are noise sources such as the oil
and gas industry and the military, and to a lesser degree,
the fishing and shipping industries. Equally noteworthy
is that there is no discussion of the effects of noise
from aircraft as a contributor to ocean noise (this is
only listed under oil and gas production-related noise
sources in a table), and responses by cetaceans to these
sound sources.
 The report progresses to discuss noise as a problem
for cetaceans. It was disappointing to see the cursory
discussions in this section, since this would seem to be
the section in the report that warrants the most
information, and it essentially forms the foundation for
the need of management of anthropogenic noise
sources. Understandably, this would have been a huge
undertaking. A number of key articles and reports were
missed in this section, particularly relating to the issue
of stress, which is a major concern in terms of multiple
sound sources over the course of time, since sublethal
impacts of noise have the potential to cumulatively result
in lethal impacts to animals.
A review of relevant international marine pollution
laws is provided in addition to recommendations for an
urgent action plan to provide essential information
regarding these acoustic sources and how to possibly
mitigate impacts. Defining what types of sounds could
potentially harass marine mammals and endangered
species, and cause “takes”1, is the single most pressing
need in acoustics (and assessing impacts to marine
species), particularly in term of defining “harassment”
(e.g., disruption of behavioral patterns) to animals. The
report appendix provides what is reputed to be a
comprehensive list of recorded examples of disturbance
Title: The Atlas of Endangered Species
Year: 2002
Author: Richard Mackay
Publisher: Earthscan Publications, London, UK
ISBN: 1-85383-874-8
Pages: 128pp (softback)
Price: £11.99 GBP
To order: <http://www.earthscan.co.uk/>
The back cover of this little book describes itself as,
“a fully illustrated and comprehensive guide to the
world’s endangered plants and animals.” Quite a tall
order for 128 small pages, but it manages to touch on a
great deal of topics nevertheless. However, marine
turtles don’t feature, which is ironic given how much
debate and importance is given to their status and
conservation within our community of marine turtle
biologists/conservationists/managers!
This publication is an unusual hybrid of atlas, popular
science and coffee-table picture book. It has an
educational leaflet feel. There is little text but many
colour rich figures, maps and photographs which are
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 26
of cetaceans by vessels (hint: a comprehensive listing
of such responses by sea turtles to both vessels and
aircraft would be an invaluable contribution to sea turtle
biologists and regulatory agencies alike). As noted
earlier, the marine mammal biologist well-versed in
reactions to boats by cetaceans will immediately realize
that this is a summary of such information for some
geographic locations, but is by no means a complete
listing.
In conclusion, this is an admirable attempt to review
a volatile topic. This report will hopefully prompt readers
to understand that, as noted by Mark Simmonds, the
WDCS Director of Science, “Despite the many
unknowns that remain, it is apparent that noise pollution
in the seas should be regarded as a fundamental threat
to marine wildlife in general….”. “It is important that
this is recognized at both national and international levels
and that every effort be made to address it.”
1
The term “take” is statutorily defined to mean “to harass, hunt,
capture, or kill, or attempt to harass, hunt, capture or kill”.
Dagmar Fertl, Geo-Marine, Inc., 550 East 15th Street,
Plano, TX 75074, USA. (E-mail: dfertl@geo-
marine.com).
appealing to browse through, may be a useful teaching
resource/reference school teachers and environmental
educators of other sorts but it is not a true reference
book. It covers so much in its few pages that nothing is
covered in any detail. Topics covered include overviews
of: I extinction and evolution; II sensitive ecosytems;
III fragile regions; IV endangered plants and animals
(with a couple of pages on each of primates, cats,
pachyderms, bears, rodents, bats, cetaceans, reptiles
and amphibians, invertebrates, fish and plants); V
endangered birds; and VI Issues of conservation. How
reliable/accurate/up to date the information will be is
hard to tell, as sources of information are scant and
dominated by other overviews and URL’s.
Undoubtedly books like this have a place, perhaps
as an educational tool or as a gift to an interested young
person. Its place, however, is not likely to be in the
scientific libraries of individuals and institutions.
Reviewer: Brendan J. Godley, Co-editor Marine
Turtle Newsletter
Title: Marine Mammal Biology: An Evolutionary
Approach
Editors: A. Rus Hoelzel
Year: 2002
Publisher: Blackwell Publishing Ltd., Oxford, UK
ISBN: 0-632-053-25
Pages: 432pp (softback)
Price: £29.95 GBP
To order: <http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/>
The marine mammals of orders Cetacea, Sirenia
and Carnivora (including pinnapeds, sea otters and polar
bears) have many common aspects with the small group
of sea turtle species on which many of us focus. In
their biology, many species migrate extensively, breed
colonially and have evolved amazing mechanisms of
coping with life in the aquatic realm. They fascinate
the scientists and layman alike. They are often large,
charismatic species and this, allied to the fact that many
species and populations have had extreme food and
material value mean that they have been subject to
indigenous, artisanal and industrialised exploitation. This
has lead to, often highly politicized, conservation interest
in these species.
There are approximately 20-fold more marine
mammal species than there are marine turtle species.
Many marine mammal species are prevalent in the seas
of the wealthier industrialized nations and their oceanic
Title: The Biology of Sea Turtles: Volume II
Year: 2003
Editors: Peter Lutz, John A. Musick and Jeanette
Wyneken
Publisher: CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA
ISBN: 0-8493-1123-3
Pages: 455pp (hardback)
Price: $99.95 USD
To order: <http://www.crcpress.com/>
There have already been reviews of Biology of Sea
Turtles: Volume II (BST II) in several other publications
(see e.g. Mrosovsky 2003 Nature 423:225; Robins 2003
Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and
Ecology 294: 257-258) which have criticized several
aspects of this book including: the marked geographical
bias of the authorship; the brevity and largely descriptive
nature of some chapters; the fact that cross-chapter
editorial harmony and formatting are relatively minimal;
and the repetition of plates which are relatively few as
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 27
protectorates and thus they have been studied for longer
and with more resources. These and other factors have
combined to result in a much greater knowledge base
about the biology of this mammalian group than of the
sea turtles and this is evidence by this impressive, yet
affordable, volume.
Fourteen independently authored chapters take an
“evolutionary approach” to reviewing: Diversity and
Zoogeography; Evolution; Anatomy and Physiology;
Neural Morphology; Sensory Systems; Communication;
Movement Patterns; Feeding Ecology; Energetics;
Reproductive Strategies; Population Genetics; Ecology
of Group Living; Problem Solving and Memory; and
what always seems, for such books, an obligatory final
chapter on Conservation and Management.
Each chapter is backed by a moderately
comprehensive although far from exhaustive reference
list. I could find no cross-referencing between the
chapters although a number were closely aligned.
Figures and plates are produced simply in greyscale
but are very clear and would be ideal for teaching
purposes.
I can see this being an excellent resource for
teachers and professional students of marine vertebrate
biology and for these individuals a purchase may be
adviseable. A recommendation to the institutional
librarian is most certainly in order.
Reviewer: Brendan J. Godley, Co-editor Marine
Turtle Newsletter
it is. To this I might add: a rather limited index; the
erroneous citation of references detected with minimal
checking; and a distinct lack of standardisation of quality
and format of graphics. Hopefully, the editors and the
publisher will take these criticisms onboard for the third
volume.
However, to be honest, most of these negative points
are relatively minor and do not significantly detract from
the fact that BST II is undoubtedly a key reference
text for those involved closely with sea turtle research
and an essential purchase for institutional libraries that
service those involved with marine biology, especially
when this focuses on our chosen taxon. It has not
bridged such an enormous breach in the literature as
BST I, but could we ever have expected it to?
As in volume one, the topics covered are highly
diverse and in some cases, it could be argued, extend
beyond the realms of what would normally be
considered biology, with chapters being presented on:
Prehistoric and ancient human-turtle interactions;
Contemporary culture, use and conservation; and Social
and economic aspects of sea turtle conservation.
However, in my opinion, these chapters are both thought-
provoking and welcomed and have much to offer
biologists involved with marine turtle conservation,
allowing a wider more holistic perspective of what can
be gained by straying into non-biological disciplines such
as archaeology and some of the social sciences.
Perhaps promotion of an interdisciplinary approach
could be furthered by having more authors who are
actually from the non-biological disciplines in question?
With regard to anatomy and physiology, rather
complete reviews are presented on External morphology,
musculoskeletal system and neuro-anatomy; Sensory
biology; Reproductive cycles; Responses to
environmental stress; and Gonadal ontogeny.
More classically ecological topics subject to review
to varying degrees of detail are: Sex determination, Adult
migrations and habitat use; Developmental life stages;
Population ecology; and the Role of sea turtles in
ecosystems.
A final category of chapters are more practically
orientated discussing: Practical approaches to studying
health and disease; Sea turtle husbandry; and Fisheries
related mortality and TED’s.
Given the increasingly diverse focus of this second
volume, I would like to suggest a few topics that might
be worthy of consideration in future volumes: An
overview of rehabilitation techniques and a critique and
the ethics of both rehabilitation and release; More critical
single subject overviews of the many “threats” so often
listed by marine turtle biologists, including a pragmatic
analysis of their actual impact by species/ocean basin
and the effectiveness of currently employed mitigation
methods; An overview of what is known of global
directed harvest and a critical analysis of the likely
efficacy of current regulatory mechanisms employed
to promote sustainability; We definitely need more up
to date detailed overviews into the methodology and
biological insights gained from molecular techniques and
telemetry.
Readers of the MTN constitute an important portion
of the intended readership for these books. Perhaps
you might also like to proffer your suggestions and
additional practical criticism. Please forward your
comments and suggestions to MTN@seaturtle.org and
we will collate and forward to editors/publishers on
behalf of all.
Reviewer: Brendan J. Godley, Co-editor Marine
Turtle Newsletter

NEWS AND LEGAL BRIEFS

This section is compiled by Kelly Samek. You can submit news items at any time online at <http://
www.seaturtle.org/news/>, via e-mail to news@seaturtle.org, or by regular mail to Kelly Samek, 2811 SW
Archer Road G-49, Gainesville FL, 32608, USA. Many of these news items and more can be found at http://
www.seaturtle.org/news/, where you can also sign up for news updates by email.

AFRICA THEAMERICAS

Biodiversity Day Focuses on Turtles
Although the global theme of World Biodiversity Day was
“Biodiversity and Poverty Alleviation: Challenges for
Sustainable Development,” Seychelles took its own topic
and focused instead on one animal, the turtle. Attended by
representatives of the Ministry of Environment, a talk entitled
“Sea Turtle Conservation Issues in Seychelles” was held at
the National Institute of Education and reached a wide-
ranging and important audience, both for addressing
contemporary conservation issues and for forming future
policy. In her presentation, Dr. Jeanne Mortimer spoke on
the life history of the turtle, the causes of endangerment to
them, how and why to protect them. Source: Seychelles
Nation, 27 May.
Florida Turtle Deaths a Concern During Nesting
The sea turtle nesting season began amid concern over the
high rate of sick and dead turtles found on the beaches this
year. About 460 turtles have washed up in Florida since
January—double the normal rate. The reason for the increase
has not been determined. Most of the turtles have been
emaciated young loggerhead and green turtles covered with
barnacles. Source: UPI, 1 May.
Florida’s Sea Turtle Grants Program to be
Managed by CCC
Florida lawmakers just approved bills that transfer
administrative responsibility for the Florida Sea Turtle Grants
Program, funded by a portion of revenues from Florida’s sea
turtle specialty license plate, from the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWCC) to the private Caribbean
Conservation Corporation. Source: CCC press release, 1 July.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 28

 State Department List Unchanged for
Shrimp Exports to US
The State Department has left unchanged its list of countries
that can export wild shrimp to the US market because their
harvest practices pose no danger to endangered sea turtles.
In a May 2 media note, the department said it had certified 39
countries plus Hong Kong for shrimp exports. Among the
potential exporters not certified are Bangladesh, Haiti,
Honduras, India and Venezuela although any shrimp raised
by aquaculture from those countries would still be eligible
for export to the US. Source: US Dept. of State press release,
2 May.
State Department List Unchanged for Shrimp Exports to US
The State Department has left unchanged its list of countries
that can export wild shrimp to the US market because their
harvest practices pose no danger to endangered sea turtles.
In a May 2 media note, the department said it had certified 39
countries plus Hong Kong for shrimp exports. Among the
potential exporters not certified are Bangladesh, Haiti,
Honduras, India and Venezuela although any shrimp raised
by aquaculture from those countries would still be eligible
for export to the US. Source: US Dept. of State press release,
2 May.
Six Butchered Turtles Found on Panhandle Beaches
The butchered carcasses of six loggerhead turtles have
washed ashore on Florida Panhandle beaches, state wildlife
officials say. Four of the carcasses have washed up on
Panama City Beach, the other two washed up in Gulf County
to the east and Walton County to the west. All had wounds
indicating a knife was used to remove the meat. Source:
Associated Press, 21 May.
Why Are Many Turtles Dying?
Since January, nearly 80 sea turtles - 28 in June - have washed
ashore in South Carolina either dead or dying. Many of them
have been “Barnacle Bills,” sickened turtles with rotting
flippers, parasite-riddled bodies and encrusted shells, said
Sally Murphy, a sea turtle biologist with the S.C. Department
of Natural Resources. Wildlife biologists and turtle experts
aren’t sure what’s causing dead turtles to wash up on S.C.
beaches, but they have some ideas, such as hypothermia
and pollution. Whatever the cause, the effects have been
the same. Source: Myrtle Beach Sun News, 1 July.
ASIA
Davao City is Home to Endangered Turtles
A nesting ground of the endangered hawksbill and green
turtle was reported in Punta Dumalag and is now the subject
of a resolution proposing the proclamation of the area as a
“Marine Turtle Conservation Area.” This is the first reported
turtle nesting site in a highly urbanized city in the Philippines.
Source: MindaNews, 15 July.
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 29
Safeguarding Olive Ridley along Tamil Nadu coast
While all attention on the need for preservation of rare Olive
Ridley turtle is hogged by Orissa, which is a major nesting
ground for sea turtles, the sporadic nesting beaches of these
turtles in Chennai have gone unnoticed. The region has
shown a drastic decline in the nesting population due to
urbanisation, predation of eggs and hatchlings by dogs,
crows and poaching by man. It is in this context that TREE
(Trust for Environment Education) initiated its sea turtle
conservation programme on the Chennai coast. Its mission
is to foster symbiotic and harmonious existence between
nature and man with the target being the fishing communities
along the east coast on the Bay of Bengal to Marakanam in
Chengalpet district of Tamil Nadu, covering about 30 villages.
Source: The Hindu, 15 May.
UAE, Bahrain Sign Pact on Wildlife
The UAE and Bahrain signed an agreement on June 17th to
strengthen cooperation in the field of environment and wildlife
protection. The Abu Dhabi Environmental Research and
Wildlife Development Agency (Erwda) and the Bahraini
General Commission for the Protection of Marine Resources,
Environment and Wildlife, cooperated to build capacities,
conduct research and hold meetings to protect environment
and maintain biodiversity. The two parties agreed to protect
endangered species such as dugong, sea turtle, houbara
bustard and Arabian oryx. According to the MoU the two
organisations are committed to protect wild plants and
support sustainable management of fisheries and fish stock
assessment. Source: Gulf News, 18 June.
Onna-Village Seawall Threatens Sea Turtle Survival
Every year, many turtles return to the Okinawan islands to
lay their eggs. But, due to modernization and carelessness,
sea turtles have been on the decline. For thousands of years,
one beach in Onna village has been used as a breeding
ground for loggerhead sea turtles. But, two years ago, a
massive sea wall was built along the beach. This has had a
negative effect on the loggerheads. The turtles head up and
down the wall looking for a place to lay their eggs and since
much of the beach has been taken away from them, they lay
their eggs in the most convenient place. But, because the
wall has taken away so much of the beach, when high tide
comes, the water rises up over the eggs killing every one of
the baby turtles before they even have a chance to hatch.
Source: Japan Update, 10 July.
China Launches Campaign to
Protect Aquatic Wild Animals
China will launch a large campaign to crack down on illegal
hunting, killing, purchasing, selling, importing and exporting
aquatic wild animals, Chinese fishery authorities said. The
campaign will focus on illegal hunting and the trading of rare
and endangered aquatic wild animals including the Chinese
sturgeon, giant salamander and sea turtle, said officials from
the Fishery Bureau. China will ban any activities that utilize
aquatic wild animals under state protection, and any activities
that may pose harm to the animals, except for scientific
research approved by the government. Source: People’s Daily,
25 June.
Indonesian Police Arrest Poachers of
Endangered Green Turtles
Police on the Indonesian island of Bali say they have arrested
five poachers and rescued 120 endangered green turtles. The
five, from Madura island off eastern Java, have confessed
that they wanted to sell the turtles to a local dealer. They face
a maximum sentence of five years in jail and a fine of 100
million rupiah or more than $US12,000 dollars if convicted.
The turtles have been released into the sea. A Bali police
spokeswoman says overseas groups have asked Indonesian
police to crack down on the poaching of endangered species.
Source: ABC Radio Australia News, 27 June.
OCEANIA
Human Activities Put Pressure on Great Barrier Reef
The world’s longest reef is losing its nesting sea
turtles at a rapid rate, according to the first comprehensive
assessment of the Great Barrier Reef since 1998. Australian
Environment Minister Dr. David Kemp released the “2003
State of the Reef Report” last week at a reef conference in
Townsville, Queensland. Kemp told delegates, “The numbers
of nesting loggerhead turtles have declined between 50 and
80 percent.” Kemp said the Australian government is working
with the Queensland Fisheries Service to develop a new
sustainable line fisheries management plan for the reef and
to introduce mandatory use of turtle excluder devices and
bycatch reduction devices to stop turtles from dying in trawl
nets. Source: Environment News Service, 10 July.

RECENT PUBLICATIONS
This section is compiled by the Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle Research (ACCSTR), University of Florida.
The ACCSTR maintains the Sea Turtle On-line Bibliography: (http://accstr.ufl.edu/biblio.html).

It is requested that a copy of all publications (including technical reports and non-refereed journal articles) be
sent to both:

1) The ACCSTR for inclusion in both the on-line bibliography and the MTN. Address: Archie Carr Center
for Sea Turtle Research, University of Florida, PO Box 118525, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA.
2) The editors of the Marine Turtle Newsletter to facilitate the transmission of information to colleagues
submitting articles who may not have access to on-line literature reviewing services.

ALKINDI, A.Y.A. & I.Y. MAHMOUD. 2002. A new method of
sampling arterial blood from large sea turtles.
Herpetological Review 33: 281-82. (Sultan Qaboos Univ,
College of Science, Dept Biology, P.O. Box 36, Muscat,
Oman. (E-mail: aakindy@squ.edu.om)
AVENS, L., J.H. WANG, S. JOHNSEN, P. DUKES & K.J.
LOHMANN. 2003. Responses of hatchling sea turtles to
rotational displacements. Journal of Experimental Marine
Biology and Ecology 288: 111-24. (NOAA, NMFS, 101
Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, NC 28516, USA. E-
mail:lavens@email.unc.edu)
BHUPATHY, S. & R. KARUNAKARAN. 2003. Conservation
of olive ridley sea turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Reptilia/
Chelonia) along the Nagapattinam coast, southeast coast
of India. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences 32: 168-71.
(Salim Ali Ctr Ornithol & Nat Hist, SACON, Anaikatti P.O.,
Coimbatore 641108, Tamil Nadu, India. E-mail:
sb62in@yahoo.co.uk)
BJORNDAL, K.A., A.B. BOLTEN & M.Y. CHALOUPKA.
2003. Survival probability estimates for immature green
turtles Chelonia mydas in the Bahamas. Marine Ecology
Progress Series 252: 273-81. (Archie Carr Center for Sea
Turtle Research and Dept. of Zoology, Box 118525,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611, USA. E-mail:
kab@zoo.ufl.edu)
BJORNDAL, K.A., A.B. BOLTEN, T. DELLINGER, C.
DELGADO & H.R. MARTINS. 2003. Compensatory
growth in oceanic loggerhead sea turtles: response to a
stochastic environment. Ecology 84: 1237-49. (Address
as above)
BOLKER, B., T. OKUYAMA, K.A. BJORNDAL & A.B.
BOLTEN. 2003. Sea turtle stock estimation using genetic
markers: accounting for sampling error of rare genotypes.
Ecological Applications 13: 763-75. (Dept. of Zoology,
P.O. Box 118525, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL
32611, USA. E-mail: bolker@zoo.ufl.edu)

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 30

CARRUTHERS, T.J.B., W.C. DENNISON, B.J. LONGSTAFF,
M. WAYCOTT, E.G. ABAL, L.J. MCKENZIE & W.J.L.
LONG. 2002. Seagrass habitats of northeast Australia:
Models of key processes and controls. Bulletin of Marine
Science 71: 1153-69. (Univ Maryland, Ctr Environm Sci,
P.O. Box 775, 2020 Horn Point Road, Cambridge, MD 21613
USA. E-mail: tcarruth@ca.umces.edu)
CHALOUPKA, M. 2003. Phase 2 - Development of a
population model for the southern Great Barrier Reef green
turtle stock. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority
Research Publications 81: 62 pp. Available at: http://
www.gbrmpa.gov.au/corp_site/info_services/
publications/research_publications/rp81/rp81.pdf
ENGEMAN, R.M., R.E. MARTIN, B. CONSTANTIN, R. NOEL
& J. WOOLARD. 2003. Monitoring predators to optimize
their management for marine turtle nest protection.
Biological Conservation 113: 171-78. 9Natl Wildlife Res
Ctr, 4101 Laporte Ave., Ft Collins, CO 80521 USA. E-mail:
richard.m.engeman@usda.gov)
GODLEY, B.J., E.H.S.M. LIMA, S. AKESSON, A.C.
BRODERICK, F. GLEN, M.H. GODFREY, P. LUSCHI &
G.C. HAYS. 2003. Movement patterns of green turtles in
Brazilian coastal waters described by satellite tracking
and flipper tagging. Marine Ecology Progress Series 253:
279-88. (Current address: Marine Turtle Research Group,
University of Exeter, School of Biological Sciences,
Hatherly Laboratories, Exeter EX4 4PS, UK. E-mail:
bgodley@seaturtle.org)
HERBST, L.H., L. SICONOLFI-BAEZ, J.H. TORELLI, P.A.
KLEIN, M.J. KERBEN & I.M. SCHUMACHER. 2003.
Induction of vitellogenesis by estradiol-17 beta and
development of enzyme-linked immunosorbant assays
to quantify plasma vitellogenin levels in green turtles
(Chelonia mydas). Comparative Biochemistry and
Physiology B-Biochemistry & Molecular Biology 135: 551-
63. (Albert Einstein Coll Med, Inst Anim Studies, Dept
Pathol, 1300 Morris Park Ave., Bronx, NY 10461, USA. E-
mail: herbst@aecom.yu.edu)
HOUGHTON, J.D.R., M.J. CALLOW & G.C. HAYS. 2003.
Habitat utilization by juvenile hawksbill turtles
(Eretmochelys imbricata, Linnaeus, 1766) around a
shallow water coral reef. Journal of Natural History 37:
1269-80. (School of Biological Sciences, Singleton Park,
University of Wales Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK. E-mail:
Bdhought@swansea.ac.uk)
IRELAND, J.S., A.C. BRODERICK, F. GLEN, B.J. GODLEY,
G.C. HAYS, P.L.M. LEE & D.O.F. SKIBINSKI. 2003. Multiple
paternity assessed using microsatellite markers, in green
turtles Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758) of Ascension
Island, South Atlantic. Journal of Experimental Marine
Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 31
Biology and Ecology 291: 149-60. (School of Biological
Sciences, Singleton Park, University of Wales Swansea,
SA2 8PP, UK. E-mail: bsireland@swansea.ac.uk)
KUBOTA, R., T. KUNITO & S. TANABE. 2003. Is
arsenobetaine the major arsenic compound in the liver of
birds, marine mammals & sea turtles? Journal de Physique
IV, 107: 707-710 Part 1. (Ehime Univ, Ctr Marine Environm
Studies, Tarumi 3-5-7, Matsuyama, Ehime 7908566, Japan).
LOPEZ MENDILAHARSU, M., S.C. GARDNER & J.A.
SEMINOFF. 2003. Chelonia mydas agassizii (East Pacific
Green Seaturtle). Diet. Herpetological Review 34: 139-40.
(Centro de Investigaciones Biologicas del Noreste, S.C.,
La Paz, BCS 23090, Mexico. E-mail: milagros@cibnor.mx)
LU, Y.A., Y. WANG, A.A. AGUIRRE, Z.S. ZHAO, C.Y. LIU,
V.R. NERURKAR & R. YANAGIHARA. 2003. RT-PCR
detection of the expression of the polymerase gene of a
novel reptilian herpesvirus in tumor tissues of green
turtles with fibropapilloma. Archives of Virology 148: 1155-
63. (Univ Hawaii Manoa, Pacific Biomed Res Ctr,
Retrovirol Res Lab, Honolulu, HI 96822 USA. E-mail:
ylu@pbrc.hawaii.edu)
MANIRE, C.A., H.L. RHINEHART, G.J. PENNICK, D.A.
SUTTON, R.P. HUNTER & M.G. RINALDI. 2003. Steady-
state plasma concentrations of itraconazole after oral
administration in Kemp’s ridley sea turtles, Lepidochelys
kempi. Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 34: 171-78.
(Sea Turtle Rehabil Hosp, Mote Marine Lab & Aquarium,
1600 Ken Thompson Pkwy, Sarasota, FL 34236, USA).
MEAKINS, R.H. & S.Y. AL-MOHANNA. 2003. Some
problems and the importance of reptile biodiversity in
Kuwait. Journal of Arid Environments 54: 209-17. (Kuwait
Univ, Fac Sci, Marine Sci Unit, P. O. Box 5969, Safat,
Kuwait).
MROSOVSKY, N. 2003. Book Review: The Biology of Sea
Turtles, Volume II, by Lutz, PL, Musick, JA, Wyneken, J.
Nature 423: 225. (Dept. of Zoology, 25 Harbord St.,
University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G5,
Canada. E-mail: mro@zoo.utoronto.ca)
NAGELKERKEN, I., L.P.J.J. PORS & P. HOETJES. 2003.
Swimming behaviour and dispersal patterns of
headstarted loggerhead turtles Caretta caretta. Aquatic
Ecology 37: 183-90. (Univ Nijmegen, Dept Anim Ecol &
Ecophysiol, Toernooiveld 1, NL-6525 ED Nijmegen,
Netherlands. E-mail: i.nagelkerken@sci.kun.nl)
PELLETIER, D., D. ROOS & S. CICCIONE. 2003. Oceanic
survival and movements of wild and captive-reared
immature green turtles (Chelonia mydas) in the Indian
Ocean. Aquatic Living Resources 16: 35-41. (IFREMER,
 Lab MAERHA, Inst Francais Rech Exploitat Mer, BP
21105, F-44311 Nantes 3, France. E-mail: dpellet@ifremer.fr)
SEA TURTLE ASSOCIATION OF JAPAN. 2003. A circular
notice on sea turtles in 2002. Umigame Newsletter of Japan
57: 2-45. In Japanese. (E-mail: newsletter@umigame.org)
SHINSUKE, T., A. YASUMI & K. TAKASHI. 2003. Separation
and characterization of metallothionein in the liver of sea
turtles by high performance liquid chromatography/
inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry. Journal
de Physique IV, 107: 1227-1230 Part 2. (Ehime Univ, CMES,
Tarumi 3-5-7, Matsuyama, Ehime 7908566, Japan).
SIMS, D.W. 2003. Animal behaviour - Homing is a breeze for
sea turtles. Nature 423: 128. (Marine Biol Assoc United
Kingdom Lab, Citadel Hill, Plymouth PL1 2PB, Devon,
England. E-mail: dws@mba.ac.uk)
STORELLI, M.M. & G.O. MARCOTRIGIANO. 2003. Heavy
metal residues in tissues of marine turtles. Marine Pollution
Bulletin 46: 397-400. (Univ Bari, Fac Med Vet, Pharmacol
Biolog Dept, Chem & Biochem Sect, Strada Provo
Casamassima Km 3, I-70010 Bari, Italy. E-mail:
g.o.marcotrigiano@veterinaria.uniba.it)
TIWARI, M., R.R. CARTHY, A. SILVEIRA & K.A.
BJORNDAL. 2003. Caretta caretta (Loggerhead Sea
Turtle). Nest architecture. Herpetological Review 34: 138-
39. (Archie Carr Center for Sea Turtle Research and Dept.
of Zoology, Box 118525, University of Florida, Gainesville,
FL 32611, USA. E-mail: mtiwari@zoo.ufl.edu)
WILSON, R.P. & N. LIEBSCH. 2003. Up-beat motion in
swinging limbs: new insights into assessing movement
in free-living aquatic vertebrates. Marine Biology 142:
537-47. (Inst Meereskunde, Dusternbrooker Weg 20, D-
24105 Kiel, Germany. E-mail: rwilson@ifm.uni-kiel.de)
WITZELL, W.N. 2002. Immature Atlantic loggerhead turtles
(Caretta caretta): Suggested changes to the life history
model. Herpetological Review 33: 266-69. (NOAA-NMFS,
75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, FL 33149, USA. E-mail:
Wayne.Witzell@noaa.gov)

THESES AND DISSERTATIONS

CAMPBELL, C.L. 2003. Population assessment and
management needs of a green turtle, Chelonia mydas,
population in the western Caribbean. Ph.D. Dissertation.
University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida: 124 pp. (E-mail:
ccampbell@wcs.org)
FERREIRA, M.B. 2002. Feeding ecology of the green turtle,
Chelonia mydas (Linnaeus, 1758), at Ra’s Al Hadd,
Arabian Sea, Sultanate of Oman. B.Sc. Dissertation.
FCMA, University of Algarve, Portugal: 73 pp. (Projeto
Tamar - Praia Forte, Brazil. E-mail: beferreira@tamar.org.br)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Publication of this issue was made possible by donations from the following individuals: Doreen Amos, Jeff
Bloodwell, Andrew Campbell, Dana Drake, Debbie Fritz-Quincy, Hobe Sound Nature Center, Diana Gardener, Hilary
Mackay, Jenny Mallinson, Edward Moll, Guy Olivier, Robert Prescott, Treva Ricou, Dr. Claudia Meschler & Steven Salmoni,
Frank J. Schwartz, Colin Scott, SAVE A TURTLE, SeaWorld,Inc., Esther Wolfram.

The following organizations support the MTN: Caribbean Conservation Corporation, Cayman Turtle Farm, Ltd.,
Center for Marine Conservation, Chelonian Research Foundation, Conservation International, Sea World, Inc., US Fish &
Wildlife Service, US National Marine Fisheries Service-Office of Protected Resources, Western Pacific Regional Fisheries
Management Council.

The MTN-Online is produced and managed by Michael Coyne.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily shared by the Editors, the Editorial
Board, the University of Exeter, or any individuals or organizations providing financial support.

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page 32

 INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS
The remit of the Marine Turtle Newsletter (MTN) is to provide
current information on marine turtle research, biology, conservation
and status. A wide range of material will be considered for
publication including editorials, articles, notes, letters and
announcements. The aim of the MTN is to provide a forum for the
exchange of ideas with a fast turn around to ensure that urgent
matters are promptly brought to the attention of turtle biologists
and conservationists world-wide. The MTN will be published
quarterly in January, April, July, and October of each year. Articles,
notes and editorials will be peer-reviewed. Announcements may
be edited but will be included in the forthcoming issue if submitted
prior to the 15th of February, May, August and November
respectively. All submissions should be sent to the editors and not
the members of the editorial board. A contact address should be
given for all authors together with an e-mail or fax number for
correspondence regarding the article.
Text
To ensure a swift turnaround of articles, we ask that, where
possible, all submissions be in electronic format either as an
attached file in e-mail or on floppy disc in Word for Windows or
saved as a text file in another word-processing package. Should
these formats not be suitable, authors should contact the editors
to seek alternative arrangements. If internet access or compatible
computer facilities are not available, hard copies of the article can
be sent to the editors by mail or fax.
Scientific names should be italicised and given in full in their
first appearance. Citations in the text should be in alphabetical
order and take the form of: (Carr et al. 1974; Hailman & Elowson
1992; Lagueux 1997). Please keep the number of references to
a minimum.
SUBSCRIPTIONS AND DONATIONS
Tables/Figures/Illustrations
All figures should be stored as separate files: Excel, .bmp, .tif
or .jpeg file. The editors will scan figures, slides or photos for
authors who do not have access to such facilities. Tables and figures
should be given in Arabic numerals. Photographs will be
considered for inclusion.
References
The literature cited should include only references cited in
the text and follow the following formats:
For an article in a journal:
HENDRICKSON, J. 1958. The green sea turtle, Chelonia mydas
(Linn.), in Malaya and Sarawak. Proceedings of the Royal
Zoological Society of London 130:455-535.
For a book:
BUSVINE, J.R. 1980. Insects and Hygiene: The biology and control
of insect pests of medical and domestic importance. Third
edition. Chapman and Hall, London. 568 pp.
For an article in an edited volume;
GELDIAY, R., T. KORAY & S. BALIK. 1982. Status of sea turtle
populations (Caretta caretta and Chelonia mydas) in the
northern Mediterranean Sea, Turkey. In: K.A. Bjorndal (Ed.).
Biology and Conservation of Sea Turtles. Smithsonian Institute
Press, Washington D.C. pp. 425-434.
Where there are multiple authors the initials should precede the
last name except in the case of the first author:
BJORNDAL, K.A., A.B. BOLTEN, C.J. LAGUEUX & A.
CHAVES. 1996. Probability of tag loss in green turtles nesting
at Tortuguero, Costa Rica. Journal of Herpetology 30:567-571.
All journal titles should be given in full.

The Marine Turtle Newsletter (MTN) is distributed quarterly, in English and Spanish, to more than 2000 recipients in
over 100 nations world-wide. In order to maintain our policy of free distribution to colleagues throughout the world, the
MTN must receive $30,000 annually in donations. We appeal to all of you, our readers and contributors, for continued
financial support to maintain this venture. All donations are greatly appreciated and will be acknowledged in a future
issue of the MTN. Typical personal donations have ranged from $25-100 per annum, with organisations providing
significantly more support. Please give what you can. Donations to the MTN are handled under the auspices of
SEATURTLE.ORG and are fully tax deductible under US laws governing 501(c)(3) non-profit organisations. Donations
are preferable in US dollars as a Credit Card payment (MasterCard, Visa, American Express or Discover) via the MTN
website <http://www.seaturtle.org/mtn/>. In addition we are delighted to receive donations in the form of either a Personal
Cheque drawn on a US bank, an International Banker’s Cheque drawn on a US bank, a US Money Order, an International
Postal Money Order, or by Direct Bank Wire to Bank of America N.A. (routing no. 052001633, account no. 003931686998.)
Please do not send non-US currency cheques.

Please make cheques or money orders payable to Marine Turtle Newsletter and send to:

Marine Turtle Newsletter,

c/o SEATURTLE.ORG
11400 Classical Lane
Silver Spring
MD 20901
USA

Email: mcoyne@seaturtle.org

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page

Marine Turtle Newsletter No. 102, 2003 - Page