Study

Intensive beach management as an improved sea turtle conservation strategy in Mexico

  • Published source details García A., Ceballos G. & Adaya R. (2003) Intensive beach management as an improved sea turtle conservation strategy in Mexico. Biological Conservation, 111, 253-261.

Actions

This study is summarised as evidence for the following.

Action Category

Patrol or monitor nesting beaches

Action Link
Reptile Conservation

Relocate nests/eggs to a hatchery: Sea turtles

Action Link
Reptile Conservation
  1. Patrol or monitor nesting beaches

    A before-and-after study in 1988–1997 on a beach in Playa Cuixmala, Mexico (García et al. 2003) found that after limiting human access to the beach and introducing patrols, along with moving nests to an on-beach hatchery, numbers of olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea nests poached were lower. Results were not statistically tested. After limiting human access to the beach and introducing regular nightly beach patrols during the nesting season, two of 2,335 olive ridley turtle nests were poached in five years, compared to >90% of 59 nests poached in the two years prior to protections being introduced. A 3 km long beach was controlled by blocking human access and conducting night patrols at 3-hour intervals during the nesting season (July–March) in 1990–1997. At the same time, a proportion of nests were collected and transported to beach hatchery. Prior to this, nesting activity and poaching was monitored on the beach in 1988–1989.

    (Summarised by: Maggie Watson, Katie Sainsbury)

  2. Relocate nests/eggs to a hatchery: Sea turtles

    A replicated study in 1988–1997 on a sandy beach in Jalisco, Mexico (Garcıía et al. 2003) found that relocating olive ridley turtle Lepidochelys olivacea nests to an on-beach hatchery resulted in fewer nests being lost to erosion or predation, and similar hatching success compared to nests left in situ.  None of 65 relocated nests were lost to erosion or predation, whereas only 36 of 65 (56%) nests left in situ survived. Hatching success was similar in relocated (59%) and in situ nests (66%).  In August 1990, July 1991 and October 1994, a 3 km stretch of beach was patrolled for nesting turtles. Half of the nests discovered were relocated to the hatchery and half were left in situ (total of 18, 32 and 80 nests/year). The hatchery (10 x 35 m) was enclosed with a fence made of wire mesh and mosquito mesh (2.5 m high, 0.5 m deep). Hatchlings were counted and released on the beach, and nests were excavated to assess hatching success.

    (Summarised by: Maggie Watson, William Morgan)

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 19

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 Programme Red List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Save the Frogs - Ghana Bern wood Supporting Conservation Leaders National Biodiversity Network Sustainability Dashboard Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx British trust for ornithology Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Butterfly Conservation People trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust