Study

Leatherback sea turtle nesting at Gandoca Beach in Caribbean Costa Rica: Management recommendations from fifteen years of conservation

  • Published source details Chacon-Chaverri D. & Eckert K.L. (2007) Leatherback sea turtle nesting at Gandoca Beach in Caribbean Costa Rica: Management recommendations from fifteen years of conservation. Chelonian Conservation and Biology, 6, 101-110.

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 study in 1990–2004 on one sandy beach on the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica (Chacón-Chaverri et al. 2007) found that patrolling beaches resulted in a decline in poaching of leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea nests. Results were not statistically tested. Incidents of poaching declined over the 14-year period when beaches were patrolled, from 55% of nests poached in 1990, to 13% in 1995, 9% in 2000 and 1% in 2004. The authors reported that most poaching events took place close to public access points to the beach. In February–July 1990–2004, the beach was patrolled every night for a total of 8 h (20:00–04:00 h). The main purpose of patrols was to locate nesting female turtles and to relocate nests laid in high-risk areas to an on-beach hatchery.

    (Summarised by: William Morgan)

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

    A replicated, controlled study in 1990–2004 on one sandy beach on the Caribbean coast of Costa Rica (Chacón-Chaverri & Eckert 2007) reported that relocating leatherback turtle Dermochelys coriacea nests from areas at high-risk of erosion to an on-beach hatchery resulted in similar emergence success compared to nests in low-risk areas. Results were not statistically tested. Emergence success was similar for eggs in the hatchery (43%) compared to eggs from nests in low-risk areas of the beach (41%). In February–July 1990–2004, all nests laid in high-risk areas (within 100 m of a river mouth) were relocated to on-beach hatcheries. Hatcheries were fenced and staffed 24 h/day during the incubation period, and all reburied nests were surrounded by a metal mesh cylinder to exclude predators and a fine cloth mesh (1 mm) to exclude flies. In February–July 1990–2004, nest surveys were conducted every night between 20:00–04:00 h, and all nests were monitored four times/day. 

    (Summarised by: 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 18

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