Advertisement

Marine Biology

, 166:47 | Cite as

Satellite surveys: a novel approach for assessing sea turtle nesting activity and distribution

  • Paolo CasaleEmail author
  • Simona A. Ceriani
Method

Abstract

Range of occurrence and abundance is a fundamental information that describes an animal population and is particularly important for species of conservation concern such as sea turtles. Although sea turtles lay clutches on land, which helps identifying breeding aggregations, the current knowledge on the distribution of these animals is far from being complete. Traditional ground surveys and more recent aerial surveys bear limitations due to logistic constraints, cost and safety concerns. We tested a novel approach based on high-resolution satellite imagery on a 12-km tract along the Atlantic coast of Florida (USA) by comparing counts from a satellite image with counts from traditional ground surveys. Daily track counts were underestimated in zones with higher human presence, probably due to tracks deleted or confounded by human activity, and overestimated in zones with lower human presence, probably due to persistence of old tracks. Results show that satellite surveys can provide the order of magnitude of nesting level in relatively undeveloped or low-frequented coastal tracts, which represent the main objective of any preliminary survey on sea turtle occurrence. Satellite imagery represents a new complementary tool available to conservationists for filling gaps about sea turtle occurrence, especially in remote or unsafe areas.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The ground survey data were collected by the University of Central Florida Marine Turtle Research Group as part of the Florida Index Nesting Beach Survey program coordinated by the Fish and Wildlife Research Institute of the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The study was partially founded by the Marine Vertebrate Research Institute (Roma, Italy). We thank D. Santerini (Univ. Pisa) for image processing and two anonymous reviewers for their comments.

Funding

The study was partially funded by the Marine Vertebrate Research Institute (Roma, Italy)

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest.

Human/animal rights statement

No organisms were used in the study.

Supplementary material

227_2019_3494_MOESM1_ESM.docx (2.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 2275 kb)

References

  1. Ben Hassine J, Escoriza D (2013) Caretta caretta in Tunisia: natural history and report of a new regular nesting area. Herpetol rev 44:557–561Google Scholar
  2. Benson SR, Dutton PH, Hitipeuw C, Samber B, Bakarbessy J, Parker D (2007) Post-nesting migrations of leatherback turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) from Jamursba-Medi, Bird’s Head Peninsula, Indonesia. Chelonian Conserv Biol 6:150–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bjorndal KA, Jackson JBC (2003) Roles of sea turtles in marine ecosystems: reconstructing the past. In: Lutz PL, Musick JA, Wyneken J (eds) The biology of sea turtles volume II CRC marine biology series. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, pp 259–273Google Scholar
  4. Caldwell DK (1959) The loggerhead turtles of Cape Romain, South Carolina. Abridged and annotated by DK Caldwell. Bull Fla State Mus 4:319–348Google Scholar
  5. Carr A, Ogren L (1959) The ecology and migrations of sea turtles. 3. Dermochelys in Costa Rica. Am Mus Novit 1958:1–29Google Scholar
  6. Carreras C, Pascual M, Tomás J, Marco A, Hochsheid S, Castillo JJ, Gozalbes P, Parga M, Piovano S, Cardona L (2018) Sporadic nesting reveals long distance colonisation in the philopatric loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta). Sci Rep 8:1435.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-19887-w CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Casale P, Tucker AD (2015) Caretta caretta. IUCN Red list of threatened species. Version 2016.2. http://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 23 Sept 2016
  8. Casale P, Broderick AC, Camiñas JA, Cardona L, Carreras C, Demetropoulos A, Fuller WJ, Godley BJ, Hochscheid S, Kaska Y, Lazar B, Margaritoulis D, Panagopoulou A, Rees AF, Tomás J, Turkozan O (2018) Mediterranean sea turtles: current knowledge and priorities for conservation and research. Endanger Species Res 36:229–267.  https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00901 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ceriani SA, Weishampel JF, Ehrhart LM, Mansfield KL, Wunder MB (2017) Foraging and recruitment hotspot dynamics for the largest Atlantic loggerhead turtle rookery. Sci Rep 7:1.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17206-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chan EH, Liew HC (1996) Decline of the leatherback population in Terengganu, Malaysia, 1956–1995. Chelonian Conserv Biol 2:196–203Google Scholar
  11. Groombridge B (2010) Using Google earth to confirm marine turtle nesting: the Makran Coast (Pakistan) & The Hadramout (Yemen). Mar Turt Newsl 129:17–19Google Scholar
  12. Hamza A (2010) Libya. In: Casale P, Margaritoulis D (eds) Sea turtles in the Mediterranean: distribution, threats and conservation priorities. IUCN, Gland, pp 157–170Google Scholar
  13. IUCN (2017) Guidelines for using the IUCN red list categories and criteria. Version 13. Prepared by the standards and petitions subcommittee. IUCN, Gland. http://www.iucnredlist.org/technical-documents/red-list-documents. Accessed 10 Nov 2018
  14. Jackson JBC, Kirby MX, Berger WH, Bjorndal KA, Botsford LW, Bourque BJ, Bradbury RH, Cooke R, Erlandson J, Estes JA, Hughes TP, Kidwell S, Lange CB, Lenihan HS, Pandolfi JM, Peterson CH, Steneck RS, Tegner MJ, Warner RR (2001) Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science 293:629–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. King FW (1982) Historical review of the decline of the green turtle and the hawksbill. In: Bjorndal KA (ed) Biology and conservation of sea turtles. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington, DC, pp 183–188Google Scholar
  16. Luschi P, Hays GC, Papi F (2003) A review of long-distance movements by marine turtles, and the possible role of ocean currents. Oikos 103:293–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mazaris AD, Schofield G, Gkazinou C, Almpanidou V, Hays GC (2017) Global sea turtle conservation successes. Sci Adv 3:e1600730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Metcalfe K, Agamboué PD, Augowet E, Boussamba F, Cardiec F, Fay JM, Formia A, Kema Kema JR, Kouerey C, Mabert BDK, Maxwell SM, Minton G, Mounguengui Mounguengui GA, Moussounda C, Moukoumou N, Manfoumbi JC, Nguema AM, Nzegoue J, Parnell RJ, du Plessis P, Sounguet GP, Tilley D, Verhage S, Viljoen W, White L, Witt MJ, Godley BJ (2015) Going the extra mile: ground-based monitoring of olive ridley turtles reveals Gabon hosts the largest rookery in the Atlantic. Biol Conserv 190:14–22.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2015.05.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Murphy T, Hopkins S (1984) Aerial and ground surveys of marine turtle nesting beaches in the southeast region. Final report to NOAA/NMFS/SEFC, US Department of CommerceGoogle Scholar
  20. National Marine Fisheries Service, U.S. Fish Wildlife Service (2008) Recovery plan for the northwest Atlantic population of the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta caretta), second revision. National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver SpringGoogle Scholar
  21. Pendoley KL, Whittock PA, Vitenbergs A, Bell C (2016) Twenty years of turtle tracks: marine turtle nesting activity at remote locations in the Pilbara, Western Australia. Aust J Zool 64:217–226.  https://doi.org/10.1071/zo16021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pike DA (2013) Forecasting range expansion into ecological traps: climate-mediated shifts in sea turtle nesting beaches and human development. Glob Change Biol 19:3082–3092.  https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12282 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Pritchard PCH, Mortimer JA (1999) Taxonomy, external morphology, and species identification. In: Eckert KL, Bjorndal KA, Abreu-Grobois FA, Donnelly M (eds) Research and management techniques for the conservation of sea turtles. IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group, pp 21–38Google Scholar
  24. Rees AF, Saad A, Jony M (2008) Discovery of a regionally important green turtle Chelonia mydas rookery in Syria. Oryx 42:456–459.  https://doi.org/10.1017/s0030605308000926 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rees AF, Avens L, Ballorain K, Bevan E, Broderick AC, Carthy RR, Christianen MJA, Duclos G, Heithaus MR, Johnston DW, Mangel JC, Paladino F, Pendoley K, Reina RD, Robinson NJ, Ryan R, Sykora-Bodie ST, Tilley D, Varela MR, Whitman ER, Whittock PA, Wibbels T, Godley BJ (2018) The potential of unmanned aerial systems for sea turtle research and conservation: a review and future directions. Endanger Species Res 35:81–100.  https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00877 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schroeder B, Murphy S (1999) Population surveys (ground and aerial) on nesting beaches. In: Eckert KL, Bjorndal KA, Abreu-Grobois FA, Donnelly M (eds) Research and management techniques for the conservation of sea turtles. IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group, pp 45–55Google Scholar
  27. Spotila JR, Reina RD, Steyermark AC, Plotkin PT, Paladino FV (2000) Pacific leatherback turtles face extinction. Nature 405:529–530CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Wallace BP, Tiwari M, Girondot M (2013) Dermochelys coriacea. IUCN Red list of threatened species. Version 2013.2. http://www.iucnredlist.org. Accessed 12 Dec 2013
  29. Weimerskirch H, Le Bouard F, Ryan PG, Bost C (2018) Massive decline of the world’s largest king penguin colony at Ile aux Cochons, Crozet. Antarct Sci 30:236–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Witherington B, Kubilis P, Brost B, Meylan A (2009) Decreasing annual nest counts in a globally important loggerhead sea turtle population. Ecol Appl 19:30–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Witt MJ, Baert B, Broderick AC, Formia A, Fretey J, Gibudi A, Mounguengui GAM, Moussounda C, Ngouessono S, Parnell RJ, Roumet D, Sounguet GP, Verhage B, Zogo A, Godley BJ (2009) Aerial surveying of the world’s largest leatherback turtle rookery: a more effective methodology for large-scale monitoring. Biol Conserv 142:1719–1727.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2009.03.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of BiologyUniversity of PisaPisaItaly
  2. 2.Fish and Wildlife Research Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation CommissionSaint PetersburgUSA
  3. 3.Department of BiologyUniversity of Central FloridaOrlandoUSA

Personalised recommendations