© William R. Curtsinger / National Geographic Stock

Juan Carlos Cantu, Mexico Program Manager

Humans can regularly be seen on Mexico’s beaches, umbrella drink in hand. But we’re not the only ones who regularly hit the country’s beautiful sandy coastline. Literally, every sea turtle species on earth nests on Mexico’s beaches, save one that is only found in Australia. That’s why we’re known as the sea turtle capital of the world, and that’s why the way Mexico protects its sea turtles matters on a global scale.

Current Mexican law classifies all sea turtle species as endangered. But unfortunately this really only means turtles are protected from direct harvest—meaning they can’t be killed for their meat, skin, shell or eggs. Yet other factors pose serious dangers, including damage to and destruction of sea turtle habitat. Even nesting habitat, which is particularly important to the survival of these species, was not legally protected.

An endangered Olive Ridley sea turtle comes ashore to lay her eggs. (© Steven Price)

But not anymore, because in February, a new Mexican law (known as Official Norm-162) took effect, and it offers a whole slate of new protections for sea turtle nesting grounds in Mexico.

Previously, only the most important sea turtle nesting sites have been designated as sanctuaries and natural reserves, which allowed them some level of protection but left the majority of nesting habitat vulnerable.  But now, the new regulation extends habitat protections to all turtle nesting sites. Here are just some of the things that this new and unprecedented regulation has accomplished for sea turtle nesting habitat:

Protecting Native Habitat
The new regulation forbids the removal of native vegetation in the nesting habitat. When coastal vegetation is removed, especially from sand dunes, it allows increased erosion that could eventually destroy nesting beaches. In addition, some turtles like the critically endangered hawksbill sea turtle even prefer to crawl up the beach all the way up to the vegetation to nest.

Loggerhead Sea Turtle Hatchling (NPS)

Putting Out Artificial Lights
The regulation also addresses one of the main factors that disrupt nesting turtles: artificial lights from houses, hotels and roads. These light sources can not only disorient nesting females, but they can be lethal to emerging hatchlings. As they climb their way up from their sandy nest, newly-hatched turtles look for the subtle light reflecting off the surf and waves to orient themselves towards the sea. Artificial lighting can point them in the wrong direction and when you are that young, one wrong turn can force you to use up your limited energy stores, leading to an almost certain death. Even those that eventually make their way to the surf can be too exhausted to swim away, becoming easy pickings for fish and marine birds. For the first time in Mexico, this new regulation calls for moving, changing or eliminating any light sources that illuminates a nesting beach or creates a glow that could disorient the females or hatchlings. These changes won’t happen overnight, but authorities are already informing beachside homeowners and hotels of the new rules.

Off-Road Vehicles
The new regulation also helps address the use of heavy vehicles on the beach. Heavy vehicles may compact sand, destroy nests and eggs, create deep ruts that can become traps for nestlings and basically tear up nesting beaches. No more. From now on, vehicles on nesting beaches have to be less than 300 kg in weight and can only be used for patrolling and management of the nesting site.

In the U.S., sea turtle nesting grounds are often carefully protected. (© Robert S. Donovan)

Spectators
A less obviously threatening activity also outlawed by the new regulation is the release of newly hatched sea turtles. Many hotels near nesting beaches offer guests the opportunity to be part of the release of hatchlings into the sea. The problem is that they keep the hatchlings in confinement for many days until enough people sign up for the activity. So when they are released after being held in captivity, they are too weak to handle the surf or avoid predators. Hatchlings need to get into the water as soon as possible after hatching so they can use their limited energy to swim away. This tourism practice is now forbidden, and hatchlings have to be released immediately. Also for the first time, those who want to watch sea turtles laying their eggs during nesting season will have to follow strict rules.

All of these and many more regulations will help protect beaches, nests, female sea turtles, their eggs and hatchlings from now on. I am proud to say that Defenders of Wildlife played a key role in making this happen. We worked on this regulation for many years; in fact we were the ones who proposed its creation back in 2002. It took a decade of lobbying before we got the Environment Ministry to develop it, and Defenders is one of only four non-governmental organizations credited with helping to make these new protections a reality. It took a long time to get these regulations adopted but now when sea turtles hit Mexico’s beaches to nest, they will find it a safer place than ever.

Originally published at TalkingFish.org

A pending decision on fishing for cod and other groundfish in New England has big implications for marine mammals including some of the most endangered animals in our waters, the North Atlantic right whale.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) is weighing a proposal that would expand commercial fishing into some 5,000 sq. miles of protected waters inside what are known as “groundfish closed areas” along the New England coast. More than 100 scientists sent a letter warning NOAA that this is a bad move for fish. But that’s not all. Scientists and conservationists also raised red flags about the potential harm to right whales, humpback whales, and harbor porpoises if NOAA ends protection for the closed areas.

Right whale sightings are concentrated within many of the current closed areas. Opening them to commercial fishing could put whales at risk. (©TalkingFish.org)

Right whale sightings are concentrated within many of the current closed areas. Opening them to commercial fishing could put whales at risk. As this map shows, hundreds of right whale sightings have been documented in the closed areas.

“Opening these currently closed areas to fishing only increases the overall risk of entanglement for whales,” said Sierra Weaver, an attorney formerly with the conservation group Defenders of Wildlife.

Defenders joined the New England Aquarium, the Humane Society of the U.S. and other groups in a letter to NOAA. The letter explains that fishing vessels are already accidentally killing too many of the area’s two most endangered species of large whale, the right and humpback whales. And allowing commercial fishing in areas that have been safe harbor for these animals will only make matters worse.

“With only about 400 North Atlantic right whales left, every loss is a blow to this critically endangered population,” Weaver added.

The groundfish closed areas have been an important part of plans required by the federal arine Mammal Protection Act to minimize whale deaths due to fishing. The groups make clear in their letter that allowing commercial fishing in an area the size of Connecticut would change all the underlying assumptions in the plan regarding risk and rates of whale mortality. There is little indication that NOAA or the New England Fishery Management Council has sufficiently considered this.

A right whale calf swims under the chin of its mother. Researchers sighted the pair 13 miles off Amelia Island, FL on December 28, 2012.

Others wrote to remind officials about how important whales are to the coastal economy. Maine naturalist Zack Klyver said the company he works for, Bar Harbor Whale Watch Co., takes 50-60,000 passengers to see whales each year.

“These visitors have an exponential effect on the New England economy as they stay in our hotels, eat at our restaurants, and pay for gas,” Klyver wrote in his letter. Maine’s tourism industry generated nearly $10 billion last year—more than the state’s fisheries, forestry and agriculture combined, Klyver wrote. And he included this tidbit: the Maine office of Tourism found that “whales” is among the top words people use to search the office’s website.

Many of the letters and comments to NOAA noted how little thought seems to have been given to the broad ranging effects of the decision on the closed areas, and how rushed the decision process seemed. One letter cited the old adage “haste makes waste.” In this case, a hasty decision could end up wasting the lives of animals we cannot afford to lose.

Alejandra and others who worked to gather support for the shark proposals at CITES celebrate a long-awaited victory.

Sharks are finally getting the attention they deserve. Six years ago (which means two Conferences ago), or even at the last CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP), CITES delegates did not even think that it was possible to include shark species in the CITES Appendices. These ancient marine predators have always been an especially heated topic in the world of wildlife trade, with such strong opposition to listing them that it has been nearly a decade since a shark species was included in a CITES Appendix. Until this year, the whale shark was the last species listed, back in 2003. Since then, millions of sharks have continued to be killed each year to meet the demands of the shark fin trade, which has little to no regulation.

A NOAA agent counts confiscated shark fins.

Last week, a number of countries – including regions of Latin America, Europe, Africa and the U.S. – presented three shark proposals: Oceanic whitetip, hammerheads and porbeagle. All of these species have been heavily impacted by the shark fin trade. Populations of hammerhead sharks declined by 83 percent from 1981 to 2005 in the Northwest Atlantic, and similar declines are being seen in populations around the world. Porbeagles have also declined, thanks to unregulated longline fishing. Oceanic whitetips are exceptionally threatened by the fin trade, where the distinctive, easily-identifiable white-tipped fins of this species range can be worth up to $85 per kilogram.

The discussions around these shark proposals took all day long. Many delegates and representatives testified (something called an “intervention” at CITES) in favor of the proposals, presenting compelling arguments and information on the impacts that international trade has on these sharks. Most of all, they addressed the arguments that led similar proposals to fail at the last CoP in 2010. At that time, the opposition – which included China (a major shark importer), Thailand, Cambodia, Japan and others – trotted out all kinds of misinformation to keep the proposals from passing. They even claimed that one can’t identify the species of shark from the fins alone, which would make it impossible to judge imports from the shark fin trade.

Hammerhead shark.

This year, we came prepared. Defenders and our partners created shark identification guides that clearly show how to identify species of sharks and their fins. We also spent a great deal of time and effort reaching out to a number of nations before the Conference to encourage them to support these proposals, including all the Latin American and West African countries, which turned out to be crucial in getting enough votes. This time we finally saw some real progress for sharks. With an historic two-thirds vote in favor, all three proposals were approved! Oceanic whitetip, porbeagle sharks and three species of hammerheads will be listed in Appendix II of CITES, finally setting strict regulations to protect these species from the demands of the trade.

The same day also saw a similar victory for two species of mantas. Both are found only in fragmented populations across the tropics, but their tendency to gather in large numbers makes them exceptionally easy targets for fishermen – and especially vulnerable to overfishing. People catch mantas for their gill plates, also called “gill rakers,” which are used for medicinal purposes in East Asia. Places like Indonesia and Mozambique have seen their manta populations decline more than 80 percent in some places over the past eight years. Installing regulations on this trade, which kills thousands of mantas every year, is a great step toward ensuring a future for these two species. The proposal to list mantas passed the same day as the shark proposals, with even more votes than the sharks making it a great day for marine animals.

Unfortunately, freshwater rays did not fare as well. We worked hard to get support for a proposal to list three species of freshwater rays from South America in the CITES Appendix to better regulate the international trade of these animals, which are mainly imported for the pet trade in the US, Thailand, China, Europe and others. Sadly, the proposal did not get the support it needed to pass, mostly due to Europe’s negative vote and heavy opposition from pet trade organizations.

The problems began last Thursday, when the Kulluk, a conical Arctic drilling ship on its way to Seattle for repairs, broke away from its towing vessel and was set adrift.  Things only got worse from there:  The tow vessel, Aiviq, lost function in all four of its engines due to mechanical issues.  This is the vessel Shell heralded as a symbol of its commitment to doing things right in the Arctic. It is the vessel company president and CEO Gary Chouest described as “the world’s largest and most powerful anchor-handling icebreaker.”  It was designed to operate in minus-40 degrees and is apparently a state of the art vessel. And yet it could not keep control of Kulluk.  As winter seas continued to pummel the drill ship and its now two attendant tow vessels, the Coast Guard was called in to evacuate all of the Kulluk’s crew members.

But the Kulluk wasn’t just carrying crew members.  While the ship pitched up and down in the icy waters, about 150,000 gallons of fuel were sloshing around inside it, too, in the form of sulfur diesel, hydraulic fluid, and lube oil.  In effect, the Kulluk was an oil spill waiting to happen.

By Monday afternoon, the Kulluk was reattached to a repaired Aiviq and a new tow vessel, Alert. The ships were headed for safe port in Kodiak to weather the storm.  But the relentlessly rough water separated the Kulluk from the Aiviq, forcing the crew of the Alert to sever their line, as well.  Kulluk was adrift again, and this time, grounding was all but inevitable.  The ship ran aground around 9 pm on New Year’s Eve on a small island off the coast of Kodiak.

As of this writing, there have been no reports of leakage from the ship or oil sheen on the water.  But the event serves to remind us that drilling attempts in the Arctic will be costly and difficult at best and an environmental tragedy at worst.

Polar bears and other large mammals could suffer damage to their eyes, mouth, skin and lungs from petroleum exposure. Like bird feathers, polar bear fur loses its insulating and water-repelling properties when coated with oil.

This time, the Kodiak Coast Guard station was close enough to respond quickly, with plenty of helping hands and the right equipment. The Coast Guard station can also provide a base for personnel to coordinate efforts or to hunker down when the weather gets too bad to send response vessels.   But the drill sites in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas are over 1,000 miles away from Kodiak, and there’s no Coast Guard station nearer than that.  Shell claims their spill response ship Arctic Challenger can contain an underwater leak, but external support could take days or weeks to reach an out of control vessel, or even worse, a spill.

If something like the 2010 BP Oil Spill were to occur in the Arctic Ocean, the environmental damage would be truly unimaginable: iconic arctic species like whales, polar bears and walruses could all suffer. There is also a huge risk of damaging the intricate and pristine ecology of the Arctic Ocean in ways we don’t fully understand yet.  Combine that with the danger to spill response crews, and it’s hard to believe Shell is willing to risk drilling in the Arctic Ocean at all.

This latest fiasco with the Kulluk could have been a New Year’s oil spill.  The incident surely shows that Shell, even with state of the art equipment, cannot  prevent accidents in the remote Arctic. We can only hope that this and Shell’s other recent travails will convince lawmakers and the administration to put an end to offshore drilling in the Arctic before it’s too late.

Sierra on a whale watching boat (Credit: Whale & Dolphin Conservation Society)

One of my favorite work trips every year is to the annual meeting of the North Atlantic Right Whale Consortium in New Bedford, Massachusetts. The fewer than 500 remaining North Atlantic right whales live almost exclusively in the coastal waters off the Eastern U.S. and Canada, and this annual meeting brings together the scientists, government officials and conservationists working to bring these highly endangered animals back from the brink of extinction. Defenders of Wildlife has long been a forerunner in the fight to address the leading threats to this species.

As I do every year, in November I presented to the Consortium on the efforts of Defenders and our conservation partners to ensure that right whales and the busy waters of the Eastern Seaboard that they call home are protected from increasing industrialization. There’s a lot happening right now on these fronts, so it was great to communicate to the scientists how their research is being used for right whale conservation, and the upcoming opportunities for them — and you — to weigh in on what’s needed to protect right whales.

Some things to watch for:

Speed Limits for Ships
Ship strikes are the leading cause of death for North Atlantic right whales. In 2008, following years of pressure from Defenders and our partners, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) imposed the first-ever speed limits for large ships on the East Coast. These requirements give crew members more time to stop and avoid whales, and for whales to move out of their path. But the speed restrictions we fought so hard for will expire in December, 2013 unless the governments acts to extend them. Defenders and our partners petitioned NMFS in June to do just that, as well as to expand the restrictions to other times and places that right whales need protection. Making sure these rules stay in place and are as effective as possible is vital to right whale survival and recovery.

A right whale and her calf

Fishing Gear Entanglement
NMFS is scheduled to release a proposed rule and draft environmental impact statement in early- to mid-2013 on new measures to prevent right whales from being entangled in fishing gear. Entanglement can lead to the long and painful death of large whales as fishing lines cut into their blubber and limit their ability to feed and swim. I’m a member of the team advising NMFS on the entanglement problem, and am pushing strongly for the agency to take prompt action to protect right whales and other endangered species from this serious threat.

Critical Habitat
We’re also urging NMFS to move forward with proposed changes to the critical habitat for the North Atlantic right whale. Defenders and our partners petitioned NMFS for expanded critical habitat back in 2009, calling for expanded protection of right whale breeding, calving and feeding grounds, and for the designation of their migratory corridor as critical habitat for the first time. When they failed to act on our petition, we took legal action, and NMFS promised a proposal before the end of 2011. We’re still waiting, but will continue our efforts to shake loose this important conservation measure.

North Atlantic right whales have a long road to recovery, and threats to the survival of the species abound. With your help, Defenders of Wildlife is continuing the fight to make our oceans a safer place for whales.

Some 73 million sharks are killed each year for their fins, depriving ocean habitats of this vital top predator.

by Brian Bovard

Sharks are facing an undeniable worldwide threat as populations are pushed to the brink of extinction due to targeted and by-catch over-fishing. Up to 73 million sharks are killed each year for their fins alone in a brutal process known as “finning” which involves slicing off a shark’s fins, usually while it’s still alive, and discarding the body at sea. As demand for this pricey commodity, which can sell for over $300 per pound and is used primarily to make an Asian delicacy shark fin soup, continues to soar shark populations across the world will continue to plummet. As predators at or near the top of marine food webs, sharks help maintain the balance of marine life in our oceans and research shows that the massive depletion of sharks will have cascading effects throughout the oceans’ ecosystems.

Fortunately countries across the world are recognizing the dangers posed by these massive depletions of shark species. This past week Defenders of Wildlife’s International Counsel, Alejandra Goyenechea, along with government representatives from 50 other countries worldwide, had the honor of attending the first meeting of signatories to the Memorandum of Understanding on the Conservation of Migratory Sharks concluded under the UN Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) which took place in Bonn, Germany. Defenders was present to ensure that proper conservation measures were in place as participants adopted a new conservation plans, which aims to catalyze regional initiatives to reduce threats to migratory sharks. Signatory states also agreed to involve fishing industry representatives, NGOs, and scientists in implementing the conservation plan.

Under the Memorandum of Understanding, countries agreed to exchange information among government bodies, scientific institutions, international organizations and NGOs for better cooperation. Improved monitoring and data collection will help assess the structure, trends and distribution of shark populations necessary to design targeted conservation measures. Although the memorandum of understanding for the conservation of sharks was made non-binding, the signatories agreed that fishing quotas for sharks must be established and monitored closely while by-catch for mako, spiny dogfish, porbeagle, basking, white, and whale sharks must be monitored much more diligently.

Currently 258 shark species are listed as threatened on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List. An additional 210 species are listed in the Data Deficient category because of a lack of sufficient population data, which itself suggests these species are at high risk. The IUCN has estimated that 32 percent of open-ocean sharks are threatened with extinction. Sharks are slow to grow, slow to reach sexual maturity, very slow to reproduce, with some shark species having gestation periods of up to two years, and so are particularly susceptible to overfishing. Also shark species that are coastal swimmers, mostly pregnant females are very easy targets for overfishing. Fortunately there is a growing global awareness to protect sharks as more states and countries pass legislation that will protect these magnificent species.