Study

The effects of large beach debris on nesting sea turtles

  • Published source details Fujisaki I. & Lamont M.M. (2016) The effects of large beach debris on nesting sea turtles. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, 482, 33-37.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Restore beaches

Action Link
Reptile Conservation

Remove garbage and other solid waste from terrestrial, aquatic and coastal environments

Action Link
Reptile Conservation
  1. Restore beaches

    A controlled, before-and-after study in 2011–2014 on a beach in north-west Florida, USA (Fujisaki & Lamont 2016) found that restoring a beach by removing debris (man-made and natural) increased both the percentage of total loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta nests laid and failed nesting attempts in the restored section, and that nesting success remained similar when debris was left in place. The percentage of total nests that were laid in the beach section cleared of debris increased after removal (27 of 84 nests, 32%) compared to before (9 of 74 nests, 12%), whereas the percentage of total nests laid in the two no-removal sections decreased in one case (after: 15%; before: 32%) and stayed the same in the other (after: 52%; before: 58%). The percentage of failed nesting attempts (‘false crawls’) in the beach section cleared of debris also increased after removal (45 of 131 crawls, 34%) compared to before (29 of 170 crawls, 17%), and decreased in the two no-removal sections (after: 15–50%; before: 25–58%). Nest success rate was similar after debris removal (after: 38% success; before: 24% success). The beach (5.7 km total length) was divided into three sections that initially had natural debris only (1.3 km long); man-made and natural debris (1.7 km long, ‘middle’); or comparatively little debris (2.7 km long). All man-made (concrete, pipes, metal fencing) and natural (fallen trees and stumps due to erosion of an adjacent pine forest) debris were recorded (June–December 2012) and removed from the middle section only in December 2012. Nesting activity was monitored on all three beach sections daily in May–September 2011–2014 (two years before and after removal). 

    (Summarised by: Katie Sainsbury)

  2. Remove garbage and other solid waste from terrestrial, aquatic and coastal environments

    A controlled, before-and-after study in 2011–2014 on a beach in north-west Florida, USA (Fujisaki & Lamont 2016) found that restoring a beach by removing debris (man-made and natural) increased both the percentage of total loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta nests laid and failed nesting attempts in the restored section, and that nesting success remained similar when debris was left in place. The percentage of total nests that were laid in the beach section cleared of debris increased after removal (27 of 84 nests, 32%) compared to before (9 of 74 nests, 12%), whereas the percentage of total nests laid in the two no-removal sections decreased in one case (after: 15%; before: 32%) and stayed the same in the other (after: 52%; before: 58%). The percentage of failed nesting attempts (‘false crawls’) in the beach section cleared of debris also increased after removal (45 of 131 crawls, 34%) compared to before (29 of 170 crawls, 17%), and decreased in the two no-removal sections (after: 15–50%; before: 25–58%). Nest success rate was similar after debris removal (after: 38% success; before: 24% success). The beach (5.7 km total length) was divided into three sections that initially had natural debris only (1.3 km long); man-made and natural debris (1.7 km long, ‘middle’); or comparatively little debris (2.7 km long). All man-made (concrete, pipes, metal fencing) and natural (fallen trees and stumps due to erosion of an adjacent pine forest) debris were recorded (June–December 2012) and removed from the middle section only in December 2012. Nesting activity was monitored on all three beach sections daily in May–September 2011–2014 (two years before and after removal). 

    (Summarised by: Katie Sainsbury)

Output references
What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 21

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the evidence champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust