Kachhapa - Wildlife Protection Society of India · Kachhapa, or olive ridley sea turtles, that nest in Orissa migrate to Sri Lanka, ... histories of conflict between some States of

October 2000 Kachhapa # 3 1

KachhapaA newsletter for the Indian subcontinent on sea turtle conservation andmanagement

The GOI UNDP Project Coastal industrial aquaculture Turtles and Tourists in Goa Survey of Maharashtra and Goa Conservation genetics of ridleys Offshore studies on olive ridleys Coral reefs in Andaman &Nicobar Marine turtles in A &N

Symposium 2000 - Resolutions Symposium 2001 Mahanadi & News from Orissa More on Dhamra

Editorial: Kachhapa – Ashoka’s most accomplished ambassador

Issue No. 3October, 2000


HELP US WITH OUR MAILING LISTSince this newsletter hopes to serve as a link for coastal and marine conservation, the more people wecan reach, the more effective it will be. You can help by passing the newsletter around to people andorganizations who are interested, and by helping us build up our mailing list. Please send us names andaddresses of individuals, NGOs, research institutions, schools and colleges and anyone else who wouldbe interested in receiving Kachhapa.

Call for articlesKachhapa, the newsletter, was initiated to provide a forum for exchange of information on sea turtlebiology and conservation, management and education and awareness activities in the Indiansubcontinent. The newsletter also intends to cover related aspects such as fisheries and marine biology.In the first issue, Kachhapa provided a compilation of organisations working on sea turtles in thesubcontinent. From the second issue on, Kachhapa has included articles on the above subjects. Whilethe Editors have done all the ‘editing’ thus far, we hope to initiate a review process for articles inupcoming issues. For the moment, Kachhapa will come out twice a year, sometime at the beginningand sometime at the end We request all our contributors to continue sending us information from theirpart of the subcontinent, including notes, letters and announcements. We welcome casual notes,anecdotal accounts and snippets of information.

All material should be sent to:

Kartik ShankerA1/4/4, 3rd Main Road, Besant Nagar, Chennai 600090. India.Or by email to:[email protected]

Email attachments should be sent as text files or Word 2000 documents (or any older version ofWord).

Visit our website – http://education.vsnl.com/kachhapa

Cover Photographs: Kartik Shanker

The opinions expressed in this publications are those of the individual authors and are not necessarilyshared by the Editors, members of the Editorial Board, the Wildlife Protection Society of India, or anyindividuals or organisations providing financial support.


Editorial: Kachhapa - Ashoka’s most accomplished ambassador

John G. FrazierConservation and Research Center, Smithsonian Institution

1500 Remount Road, Front Royal, VA 22630, USA.Email: [email protected]

Accounts of Ashoka’s prowess as an empirebuilder, visionary leader, and promoter ofBuddhism are well known, but why do we hear solittle of Kachhapa in relationship to the last andmost renowned king of the Mauryan dynasty?Ashoka, in his later, more illuminated years,represents the noblest of quests - to unitehumanity in collaboration and peace; andKachhapa is his greatest ambassador.

Kachhapa, or olive ridley sea turtles, that nest inOrissa migrate to Sri Lanka, underscoring theirrole as Ashokan ambassadors. But that is onlythe start: marine turtles have tremendous capacityto migrate and disperse over vast distances. Greenturtles that feed in the Gulf of Kutch nest inPakistan; leatherback turtles that nest in theNicobars most likely circulate throughout most ofthe Indian Ocean basin, possibly venturing eveninto the Red Sea to feed on seasonalconcentrations of their favourite food – jellyfish.During certain stages of their life cycle marineturtles may enjoy Kalinga’s world famousbeaches, or the once tranquil feeding grounds atthe doorstep of Krishna’s palace, or the remoteislands of far flung territories once inhabited bycannibals, but the rest of their lives are spent inother territories – and often on the high seas.“India’s marine turtles” are only “India’s” for apart of their life history, otherwise they are notIndian at all. These are, after all, marine turtles,and the oceans are their home. It is nothing for aturtle to cross an ocean basin while it is growinginto an adult, or to make migrations of thousandsof kilometres between feeding grounds andmating grounds.

No matter how hard India’s cadre of dedicatedconservationists labour to conserve theseintriguing animals, their efforts - if carried out in

isolation - will be incomplete. The best marineprotected areas in Gahirmatha, the mostenthusiastic community support for nestprotection in Goa, the longest running studentprogramme in Madras, none of these alone willbe sufficient. We must make full use of Ashoka’sambassadors, and develop efficient andcomprehensive programmes for regionalinternational cooperation.

Over the past few years there have beennumerous initiatives uniting marine turtlespecialists from the Indian Ocean in workshops,seminars, and other events, in order to enhancecommunication and collaboration. Now, aninternational agreement is being developed topromote and strengthen cooperation betweennations: The Memorandum of Understanding onthe Conservation and Management of MarineTurtles and their Habitats in the Indian Oceanand South East Asia (“IOSEA”). BetweenOctober 19 – 22, 1999 representatives from 22nations in the Indian Ocean and South East Asianregion, as well as specialists from half a dozenother organizations, met in Perth, Australia todiscuss needs and mechanisms for developingregional conservation and management of marineturtles. This was followed by the first round ofinter-governmental negotiations from July 11 –14, 2000 in Malaysia. Attended byrepresentatives of 24 countries, and observersfrom regional and international agencies, thedelegates at the meeting in Malaysia adopted atext Memorandum of Understanding.

The preamble of the MOU sets out a series ofconsiderations, recognising that marine turtles inthe region are endangered and that the protectionof these animals and their habitats are clearlystated priorities for conservation in various


instruments, both regional and international.Numerous human activities are acknowledged asposing threats to these animals, including variousforms of direct exploitation, modification anddestruction of habitats, coastal development,pollution, fishing activities, mariculture, tourismand inappropriate conservation actions.Recognising that marine turtles disperse andmigrate over vast distances, and depend on avariety of marine and coastal environments, thepreamble emphasises the need for integratingconservation and development activities, as wellas effective international cooperation. Becausethe support and collaboration of a wide variety ofstakeholders from different sectors of society, andvarious organisations – governmental and non-governmental – is essential, the preamble iswritten to be all inclusive. A fundamentalrecognition is that marine turtles are often underthreat because of human actions on the high seas,particularly modern fishing activities, and thatthese issues need to be addressed. It isacknowledged that states from both inside andoutside the Indian Ocean and South East Asianregion have responsibilities toward theconservation of marine turtles and their habitatsin the region, and they should be encouraged tocooperate and contribute toward the overall goalof marine turtle conservation.

The objective of the MOU “is to protect,conserve, replenish and recover marine turtlesand their habitats, based on the best scientificevidence, taking into account the environmental,socio-economic and cultural characteristics of thesignatory States.” Among the actions that aredescribed in the agreement are: promotingcooperation among signatory states, harmonisingnational legislation, joining other internationalinstruments related to marine turtle conservation,establishing a Secretariat, establishing anAdvisory Committee, designating nationalauthorities for each signatory, providing regularreports to the Secretariat on the implementationof the MOU, and evaluating the question offunding. A critical action will be thedevelopment, and subsequent implementation, ofa Conservation and Management Plan that will

adequately address measures for the conservationof marine turtles and their habitats, managementof direct exploitation and trade, reduction ofthreats – with fisheries bycatch specificallynamed, research, education, informationexchange and capacity building.

The next round of negotiations is planned forearly 2001, and this is when the Conservation andManagement Plan (CMP) will be developedthrough a process of negotiation. Because it isthe CMP that will provide guidance on specificmeasures to be carried out by the signatory statesto the IOSEA, these negotiations will be critical,for they will set the tone for how effective theMOU will be.

Other international agreements for marine turtleconservation include the Inter-AmericanConvention for the Protection and Conservationof Sea Turtles and the Convention on MigratorySpecies Understanding ConcerningConservation Measures for Marine Turtles ofthe Atlantic Coast of Africa. The former is theonly legally binding international treaty focusedon marine turtle conservation, and it is expectedto come into force in early 2001. Known as the“IAC”, this treaty has served as a model fordeveloping other related agreements, includingthe IOSEA. Even with the advantage of havinghad a model to follow, the IOSEA presents a hugrchallenge: the region under consideration iscomprised of scores of sovereign states, withtremendous diversity of cultures, religions,environmental, political and social conditions.Sadly, there are also long and contentioushistories of conflict between some States of theIOSEA region. Can we put aside thesedifferences and work towards a common goal ?

Time will tell! The Indian delegation hasparticipated actively in both meetings to developthe IOSEA, and clearly India has all the potentialto play a critical leadership role as this importantagreement develops and is implemented. Whatnation could speak better to the vision of Ashoka,and show the true role of Kachhapa as hisvenerated ambassador?


Turtles and Tourists – A coastal village in Goa shows the way

Roshni KuttyKalpavriksh

Apt # 5, Shree Dutta Krupa, 908, Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411004.Email: [email protected]

Goa – the name evokes an image of sun, sand, seaand hordes of tourists. Tourists, who bring intheir wake mounting garbage and destruction ofthe local ecology. This picture is true for most ofthe sandy beaches that Goa is famous for.However, there is a new awareness spreading,especially among the locals and a section of thestate government, that this kind of tourism doesnot last long. That it only leads to the proverbialkilling of the goose that lays the golden eggs, andthat there are other ways of bringing tourists in.

Morjim beach is one such example of the newkind of tourism taking root in Goa. A little knownbeach, sandwiched between the more famousVagator and Harmal beaches in Pernem taluka ofNorth Goa, Morjim is relatively undisturbed - oneof the reasons why the olive ridley turtles come tonest here every year. But there have been othercontributing factors to this “minor miracle”, asthe locals put it. Protecting the gravid turtles andthe eggs from being poached, round the clockvigilance by the locals, over the beach to see thatthe nests remain undisturbed are some of them.

The situation then

Turtle eggs were poached heavily by the locals inMorjim and turtle meat was sold in the localmarket. It is in this scenario that Capt. GerardFernandes came back to settle in his village –Tembawado which fronts Morjim beach and isnow in the news for turtle conservation in Goa.Capt. Fernandes decided to settle in his nativevillage after taking voluntary retirement from theArmed Services. He is presently leading the turtleconservation movement, though he intends toslowly allow others to take over. “The movementwill not sustain long if the second rung leadershipis not allowed to take over”, he explains.

When he moved back, Capt. Fernandes wasaghast to see that the village of his childhoodmemories was fast disappearing under theonslaught of what he terms as “the disease ofuncontrolled greed”. Migration to the towns insearch of casual labour by once self-supportingfamilies disturbed him, as did the changingtraditions and the increasing pressure on thenatural resources of Tembawado by theconstruction and trawler lobby. What alarmedhim even more was the increased poaching ofturtle eggs from the beach during the nestingseason of the olive ridleys on Morjim beach.

The beginning of the participatory protection

The turtle conservation movement in Morjimbegan in 1995-96, thanks to Capt. Fernandes, hiswife, brick layers Domio D’Silva and PrakashSaptoji, and shack owners Gilbert and DominicFernandes. There are several other locals, mainlyfisherfolk, who are also involved. Theconservation movement was a gradual processthat involved the Fernandes couple making thelocals aware of the importance of conserving seaturtles and how they could use conservation toturn the area into a potential tourist spot. Therelease of sea turtles from the protected nests in1995-96 marked a beginning in the turtleconservation movement and subsequently it wasreported in the local newspapers. The publicitycaught the interest of the State ForestDepartment, especially the present DeputyConservator of Forests (Wildlife), Mr. C.A.Reddy, and their participation boosted themovement in the subsequent year.

The turtle eggs, which are softer and rounder thanpoultry eggs fetch a local market price of Rs 3 – 4


per egg while a poultry egg costs one rupee in thesame market. Hence it is more lucrative for thefishermen to poach turtle eggs and sell them inthe market during the nesting season. Capt.Fernandes decided that if he needed the co-operation of the local villagers to protect theturtles he would have to offer them an economicalternative and not mere rhetoric about wildlifeconservation. So he pooled in an amount of Rs.5,000/- from his personal savings for awards toindividuals who reported turtle nesting sites. Thisweaned the villagers, especially the youth, awayfrom poaching turtle eggs, directly and indirectly.Those who were reported poaching werediscouraged from repeating the offence as it ledto disgrace in the small community. Abreakthrough was achieved when once-expert-poachers such as Bautis Fernandes, late BenjaminFernandes, Anand Pednekar and RatnakarHalankar, all fishermen from the village, startedreporting on nesting sites that needed to beprotected.

The fuss created around the olive ridley turtlescaught the attention of the rest of the villagers,apart from some tourists who visited Morjim.“The villagers,” says Capt. Fernandes, “have beenquick to cash in on this and the shack ownersespecially have been astute enough to recognisethat the quality of foreign tourists coming to thebeach has improved.” According to him, thetourists seek solitude and peace at Morjim beachaway from the crowds of heavily visited spots.The shack owners have responded by not blaringmusic, keeping the beach clean and thuspreventing stray dogs. Turtle conservation is nowa means of attracting tourists to this beach. Apartfrom turtles, dolphins are another source ofattraction as also a sizeable number of migratorybirds that flock to this area.

Joint wildlife management emerges

The Forest Department joined the effort in 1996-97 by deploying two guards to patrol the beachduring the nesting season and assist the villageyouth in nabbing the poachers. These guardsalong with 30-40 youth volunteers of the village

have helped in arresting the increase in poachingincidence. The Forest Department has alsocontinued with the award-giving scheme to localswho report nesting sites. Presently an award ofRs. 500/- is given to each volunteer. Inrecognition of his efforts, Capt. Fernandes wasawarded a plaque by the Government of Goa inOctober 1998 for wildlife preservation. Mr.Reddy’s enthusiasm to sustain this effort hastaken shape in the form of Project Turtle of theForest Department of Goa that pays six of thelocal youth on a daily basis to watch over thebeach and report nesting and hatching. A ‘TurtleStudy Centre’ has been set up at Pernem withinthe campus of the Range Forest Officer, Mr.Phadte, who has also been deeply involved withthis movement.

Continuing problems

However, the movement, now in its fifth year, isyet to battle the real threat to the turtles. This isfrom the construction lobby on the landward side,and the trawler lobby on the seaward side. Capt.Gerard Fernandes had himself faced violencefrom these forces initially. Now, however,because of the local support that he enjoys, theselobbies have become more cautious.

The adjoining village, Vithaldaswado, shares thesame beachfront with Tembawado and hence hasturtle nesting sites right up to Ashvem andHarmal village, further north in Pernem taluka.However, the villagers from Vithaldaswado havenot responded to the turtle conservationprogramme in the same manner as those inTembawado. The landowners along thebeachfront fear that the turtle conservationprogramme would attract stricter implementationof the Coastal Regulation Zone Notification,1991, here. This could mean that they would notbe able to sell their land, especially to the hotellobby, as the real estate price would go down.Capt. Fernandes has been trying to convince thevillagers not to sell their land. Instead, heproposes that they could add an extra floor totheir houses, which could be let out to touristsand thus earn good revenue. This way they could


manage to retain their ancestral lands, secure anincome through good quality tourism andpreserve their environment. The villagers fromTembawado are convinced, but not those fromVithaldaswado.

Although the incidence of nesting appears to beincreasing, the past year has witnessed highmortality of hatchlings due to flooding ofseawater over the nests. Villagers believe that thiscould be a fall-out of the global warmingphenomenon, which is also leading to increasederosion of sand dunes in Morjim by high tides.

The villagers are aware that this is only thebeginning and that they will have to face biggerthreats in trying to protect the olive ridley turtle.However, they take heart from the fact that theyhave become the leaders of the turtle conservationmovement that is catching on in Goa. Galgibagbeach in South Goa has started following inMorjim’s footsteps since last year and the number

of hatchlings that have been released fromGalgibag this year has touched 573 hatchlingsfrom seven nests so far. A great beginning!

(This article is based on the current study that is beingcarried out by Ms. Roshni Kutty as part of a Directory ofCommunity Conserved Areas in India)

Contacts:

Gerard Fernandes, H. No. 271, Tembwado, MorjimBeach, Pernem, 4035112. Goa.Phone: 0832 246509/246510Email: [email protected]

C.A. Reddy, Deputy Conservator of Forests (WildlifeDiv.), 4th Floor, Junta House, Panaji – 403001.Phone: 0832 229701 Fax: 0832 224747

Kalpavriksh, Apt 5, Shree Dutta Krupa, 908, DeccanGymkhana, Pune 411004.Phone / Fax: 020-5654239E-mail: [email protected]

A preliminary survey of sea turtles along the coast of Maharashtra and Goa

Varad GiriBombay Natural History Society

Hornbill House, Shaheed Bhagat Singh Marg. Mumbai.Email: [email protected]

A preliminary survey was carried out along thecoast of Goa and Maharashtra from May 13 –31,2000. Twenty five localities in Maharashtra andnine in Goa were visited. The objective of thesurvey was to collect information from secondarysources such as local people, fishermen, forestofficials, fisheries department, trawler owners andworkers and local non government organisations.The survey commenced from the Goa coast. Mostof the sites visited in each district represent thesouthern and northern limits of that district whichgives the idea of distribution pattern of marineturtles in that district.

Status in Goa

The Forest Department has created awarenessregarding the sea turtles through media andnewspapers. Thus the people in Goa were awareabout this group. While interviewing variouspeople in Goa, it was noticed that they werewilling to talk about all the marine fauna otherthan the sea turtles. In Goa, there are two mainnesting sites of olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelysolivacea): one at Morjim, North Goa and anotherat Galgibag, South Goa. Both these sites areprotected by the forest department with the helpof local people. Apart from these sites, two lesspopulated sites at Querim and Palolem may bepotential breeding sites of marine turtles and are


to be surveyed during the breeding season. Themain threat to marine turtles in Goa is eggpoaching by humans and incidental catch intrawler nets.

Status in Maharashtra

A total of 25 localities from three coastal districtsof Maharashtra were visited. In Maharashtra, themarine turtles nest on the entire coast. All thesites visited have recent nesting records. As perthe information gathered from the locals, thepopulation of turtles has drastically declined in

the last 10 years. At most of the sites the localsinformed us that earlier 15 to 20 turtles used tovisit each beach for nesting every year but nowthe number is reduced to less than five. A site atHareshwar in Raigad district has good potential..Besides this, beaches at Shiroda-Aravali andMotemal have good nesting records and these areto be surveyed during the forthcoming breedingseason. The population of the marine turtles inMaharashtra is under serious threat due toindiscriminate poaching of eggs by humans andincidental catch in fishing nets.

News from Orissa

There was both good and bad news during the1999 – 2000 season in Orissa. The supercyclonein October, 1999 crippled much of the state’smachinery and many conservation organizationsincluding Operation Kachhapa were involved inproviding cyclone relief. Consequently,conservation of sea turtles was not exactly apriority. It is believed that more than 20, 000olive ridleys died during this season as aconsequence of trawling related mortality. (TheOrissa high court in its May 14, 1998 , judgementin a case of WWF India Vs. State of Orissa hadordered that all fishing trawlers be equipped with

turtle excluder devices (TEDs) to avoid turtlesbeing caught in the their nets). However, in lateMarch, mass nesting did take place at the Nasiislands off the Gahirmatha coast. This again is nocause to celebrate as the islands have becomeeven more fragmented and narrow after thesupercyclone and much of the nesting area isconstantly inundated, resulting in very lowhatching success. Conservation initiatives andenforcement of nearshore mechanized fishingbans have to be implemented with greater vigourin the coming season if mortality is to be reduced.

More news from Dhamra

Source: Biswajit MohantyWildlife Society of Orissa

TULEC Building, Link Road, Cuttack 753012. India.Email: [email protected]

On 22nd September, a division benchof Honourable Orissa High Court consisting ofHonourable Mr. Justice P.C. Naik and Justice Mr.P.K. Mohanty after hearing the submissions of SriRaj Panjwani, Advocate issued notices to:

• Ministry of Surface Transport,Government of India,

• Ministry of Environment,Government of India • International Sea Ports Pvt. Ltd.,Chennai• Forest and Environment Dep’t.,Government of Orissa• Chief Wildlife Warden, Orissa


on a joint petition filed by Biswajit Mohanty andthe Wildlife Protection Society of India seekingreview of the environment clearance given to theproposed Dhamra Port Project. The said projecthad been cleared by the Ministry of SurfaceTransport under the Coastal Regulation ZoneNotification without going for formal clearance tothe Ministry of Environment of the Governmentof India. In an earlier petition the court's attentionhad been drawn to the lack of implementation oforders passed by the Orissa High Court on 14thMay, 1998 regarding directions to the stategovernment to regulate fishing activity bymechanised fishing trawlers for protection of seaturtles off the coast of Orissa. The petition expressed apprehensions on theimpact by the proposed Dhamra Port Project onthe habitat and breeding of olive ridley Sea turtlesand how migratory and reproductive patches ofturtles could be affected. The petitioner furtherdrew attention to the fact that there was reductionof the area of Bhitarkanika National Park from367 to 145 sq. kms in the final notification bywhich important ecological sensitive areas wereexcluded. The EIA report prepared by KirloskarConsultants, Pune and Aquaculture Foundation of

India, on the port project did not sufficiently takeinto account the effect on the migrationroutes and reproductive activities of olive ridleysea turtles. The petition discussed the effect ofartificial lighting and also on the movement oflarge cargo ships ranging from 60,000 DWT to1,20,000 DWT on turtle activity. The largestnesting ground of sea turtles in the world islocated at Nasi Islands close to the Dhamra Port.It may be recalled that the National EnvironmentAppellant Authority had also upheld theenvironmental clearance given earlier by theMOST, and the order of this Authority has alsobeen challenged. The most interest aspect is that the BhitarkanikaNational Park consisting of 367 sq. km wasconstituted on 3.10.1988. The state governmententered into a contract with International SeaPorts in October, 1997 for construction ofDhamra Port and in September, 1998 the Stategovernment issued the final notificationconstituting the Bhitarkanika National Parkwhereby the National Park area was reduced to145 sq. kms allegedly to enable the constructionof the port which fell right in the centre ofthe proposed National Park .

Conservation genetics of olive ridleys on the east coast of India

Kartik ShankerWildlife Institute of India

PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India.Email: [email protected]

Introduction

The study of sea turtles has largely been confinedto the brief period in their life cycle when theycome ashore to nest. In recent times, moleculargenetic tools have played a major role inanswering questions of biological and ecologicalinterest in marine turtles. While field basedtagging studies of several thousand turtles overthirty years merely provided clues of natal

homing behaviour in turtles (i.e. the return ofnesting adult females to the beach where theyhatched), studies using genetic markers were ableprove the theory conclusively in green turtles andother species (Bowen, 1996). Molecular geneticmarkers have been widely used in studying globalpopulation structure of sea turtles, in tracing thesource of turtles caught in deep sea and otherfisheries, and in tracing the long distancemigratory routes of these species.


Olive ridleys are circumglobal in distribution, andare particularly well known for the phenomenonof mass nesting. The Orissa coast has three majormass nesting sites, of which Gahirmatha is thelargest in the world with 100 to 500, 000 turtlesnesting each year. In the past five years, there hasbeen serious cause for concern due to marinefisheries related mortality on the Orissa coast(Pandav et al., 1998; Shanker & Mohanty, 1999).Since 1994, more than 75,000 turtles have beencounted dead on the Orissa coast and actualnumber dead is certain to be much higher(Pandav & Choudhury, 1999; B. Mohanty, Pers.Comm.)

Methods

We studied the population genetic structure ofolive ridleys on the east coast with a view toevolving conservation strategies for these turtles.The study was a collaboration between BCChoudhury and Kartik Shanker, Wildlife Instituteof India and Dr. Lalji Singh (Director) and Dr.Ramesh Aggarwal, Centre for Cellular andMolecular Biology, Hyderabad. Tissue sampleswere collected from three sites in Orissa and onesite in Tamil Nadu. Various molecular genetictechniques - RAPD, multilocus fingerprinting,Microsatellite analysis, and Mitochondrial DNAsequencing- representing different approaches,were used to analyse DNA polymorphism. Themultilocus fingerprinting showed a high degree ofvariation polymorphism between individuals. Themicrosatellite analyses did not point to anypopulation structuring along the coast. Lowpopulation structure may point to weak natalhoming in olive ridleys on the east coast of India.

Results

Mitochondrial DNA sequencing revealed thepresence of five haplotypes, of which two havebeen previously reported from Sri Lanka by anearlier study by Dr. Brian Bowen and colleaguesin the USA (Bowen et al., 1998). However, wefound three new haplotypes, which could bespecific to the east coast of India. The dominanthaplotype (K) in our study is the most ancient

lineage in ridleys suggesting that olive ridleypopulation on the east coast of India could be thesource for contemporary global populations ofridleys. This increases the conservationimportance of this population. This study hasraised more important questions which can beaddressed using molecular genetic techniques.Specifically, the population genetic structure ofolive ridleys in Indian waters needs to beaddressed using more microsatellite analyses. Thedocumentation of mitochondrial DNA sequencehaplotypes for various species in Indian waterswould form part of a long term global effort totrace migratory routes and to identify sources ofturtles killed in deep sea fisheries.

References

BOWEN, B.W. (1996) The Contribution of Geneticsto Marine Turtle Conservation. In Proceedings of theInternational Symposium on Sea Turtle ConservationGenetics (Eds. Bowen, B.W. and Witzell, W.N.).NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC-396.

BOWEN, B.W., CLARK, A.M.., ABREU-GROBOIS,F.A., CHAVES, A., REICHERT, H.A., AND FERL,R.J. (1998) Global Phylogeography of the ridley seaturtles (Lepidochelys spp.) as inferred from mt DNAsequences. Genetica 101: 179-189.

PANDAV, B., CHOUDHURY, B.C. & SHANKER,K. (1998) The Olive Ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelysolivacea) in Orissa: an urgent call for an intensive andintegrated conservation programme. Current Science75: 1323-1328.

PANDAV, B & CHOUDHURY, B.C. (1999) AnUpdate on the Mortality of the Olive Ridley SeaTurtles in Orissa, India. Marine Turtle Newsletter83:10-12.

SHANKER, K. & MOHANTY, B. (1999) OperationKachhapa: In search of a solution for the OliveRidleys of Orissa (Guest Editorial) Marine TurtleNewsletter 86: 1-3.

(The study was funded by the Wildlife Instituteof India, Dehradun. The detailed study reportcan be obtained by writing to the WII. Aresearch paper is in preparation)


RESOLUTIONS ON ORISSA AT THE SEA TURTLE SYMPOSIUM IN MARCH2000

The following resolutions were proposed at the 20th Annual Sea Turtle Symposium at Orlando, Florida,in March 2000. Both resolutions were passed unanimously by the floor.

Resolution on the urgent need to reduce trawling related mortality of olive ridleysea turtles on the Orissa coast, India – March 2000

20th Annual Sea Turtle SymposiumMarch 1-4, 2000, Orlando, Florida, USA

Symposium Resolution 2000-4Passed by the Membership on March 3, 2000

Considering that unregulated mechanised trawland gill net fishing has resulted in large-scaleannual mortality of olive ridley sea turtles withmore 50,000 dead turtles counted along theOrissa coast in the past five years; and

Considering that nearly 10,000 dead turtles havebeen counted during the 1999-2000 seasondespite repeated assurances by the stategovernment that there would be adequatepatrolling of coastal waters and enforcement ofexisting laws for the prevention of turtlemortality; and

Considering that the number counted dead on thebeach are only those turtles washed ashore andthe total mortality is most likely to be muchhigher; and

Considering that mechanised fishing has alsoadversely affected the traditional and small scalefishing communities on the coast of Orissa,leading to statewide protests by these fisherfolkagainst mechanised fishing; and

Considering that there exists legislation, theOrissa Marine Fisheries Regulation Act (1982)and Rules (1983),which bans all mechanisedfishing within 5 km of the coastline; and

Considering that no mechanised fishing isallowed within 20 km of the Gahirmathacoastline, which was declared a marine sanctuaryby the Orissa Government in 1997; and

Considering that both the above laws areflagrantly violated by mechanised trawlers, due tothe total lack of, or at best, poor enforcement andpatrolling by the concerned government agencies;and

Considering that none of the mechanised trawlersoperating in Orissa’s coastal waters are usingTurtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) and thuscontinue to flagrantly violate the provisions of theOrissa Marine Fisheries Regulation Act, 1982 andthe directions issued on 14.5.98 by theHonourable Court of Orissa in OJC No. 3128/ 94(WWF India Vs. State of Orissa and Ors) ; and

Considering the fact that the olive ridley seaturtle enjoys the highest level of protection underthe Indian wildlife laws since it is protected underSchedule I to the Wildlife Protection Act, 1972 aswell as is listed under Appendix I to the CITES ;and

Considering that, since 1983, there have beenrecommendations by leading Indian scientists,


environmentalists, and government officials, aswell as non-Indian experts for mechanizedtrawlers in Orissa to use TEDs;

It is hereby resolved that:

The members of the 20th Annual Sea TurtleSymposium, Orlando, Florida

Entreat the Forest Department, FisheriesDepartment and Coast Guard to work together inOrissa to strictly enforce the ban on mechanisedfishing within the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuaryand the 5 km nearshore fishing ban, both ofwhich would drastically reduce sea turtlemortalities with immediate effect; and

Request the Fisheries Department of Orissa toevolve a plan to ensure the use of TEDs by

mechanised trawlers in Orissa coastal waters byno later than 2002; andRequest the Fisheries Department of Orissa tosafeguard the livelihood of the traditional countryfishermen by enforcing the provisions of theOrissa Marine Fisheries Regulation Act, 1982 andrules framed thereunder which bans off shoremechanized fishing for a distance of 5 kms fromthe coast.

Strongly recommend that effective long termconservation strategies should involve allstakeholders including the Forest and FisheriesDepartment of the Government of Orissa, NonGovernmental Organizations, ResearchInstitutions and most importantly, the traditionalcoastal fishing communities, whose support andinvolvement would be crucial to the survival ofthe olive ridley and its marine habitat in Orissa.

Resolution on the urgent need to review coastal development plans in order toconserve olive ridley sea turtles as well as critical nesting habitat for the turtles and

other endangered species on the Orissa coast, India– March 2000

20th Annual Sea Turtle SymposiumMarch 1-4, 2000, Orlando, Florida, USA

Symposium Resolution 2000-5Passed by the Membership on March 3, 2000

Considering that the proposed construction of alarge all weather, deep water, modern bulkterminal port at Dhamra threatens the Gahirmathaolive ridley sea turtle rookery, the largest in theworld, with over 200,000 turtles nesting in 1999;and

Considering that the port will have a 550 m berthlength and will occupy a total of 900 acres, and ismerely 10 km north of the nesting beach atGahirmatha; and

Considering that the 62.5 km rail corridor toBhadrak - 200 metres wide, and including arailway, a highway and land development - will

occupy 3000 acres, and is adjacent to theBhitarkanika Wildlife Sanctuary; and

Considering that this port will cater to bulk cargosuch as coking coal and iron ore and the ultimatecapacity will be 25,000 tonnes per annum; and

Considering that the project proposal has onlybeen cleared by the Ministry of Surface Transportand NOT by the Ministry of Environment andForests, due to a loophole in the CoastalRegulation Zone rules; and

Considering that the proposed off-shore crude oilterminal at Kantiagoda threatens the mass nesting


ground at Rushikulya, which is the second largestin Orissa with 60,000 turtles nesting in 1996; and

Considering that the terminal has a capacity of 18million metric ton per annum for giant oil tankersfrom the Gulf and other oil producing countries;and

Considering that the pipelines will be connectedto Kantiagoda village, which is virtually on top ofthe Rushikulya turtle mass nesting site; and

Considering that the Environmental ImpactAssessment Report [interim], which was preparedby the National Institute of Oceanography ofGoa, has not adequately addressed the presenceof turtles in the area and has also ignored the factthat the seacoast off Rushikulya is a proposedmarine sanctuary which is awaiting governmentnotification; and

Considering that the report actually states that"sensitive and fragile ecosystems…are absent inthe project area", and briefly mentions thepotential for crude oil spills: "in very rare eventsof tanker accidents or subsea pipeline rupture,large spill may occur"; and

Considering that the oil spill from a similarSingle Buoy Mooring in Gujarat in 1999 has

resulted in substantial damage to marine life andto marine ecosystems in the area: and

Considering that the mass nesting beaches atRushikulya, where more than 60,000 turtlesnested in 1996, enjoys no legal protection so far;

It is hereby resolved that:

The Members of the 20th Annual Sea Turtle,Orlando, Florida

Request the Government of India to review theDhamra port project, subject the proposal toobjective Environmental Impact Assessment andhave the proposal passed through the properchannels of the Ministry of Environment andForests; and

Request that since other sites for the constructionof the port have been identified, these sites areobjectively considered and evaluated asalternatives; and

Request the Government of India to reassess theCrude Oil Terminal at Rushikulya whichthreatens one of the most important nestingbeaches of olive ridleys in Orissa.

Offshore studies on olive ridley sea turtles in Gahirmatha, Orissa.

Karthik RamSalim Ali school of ecology

Pondicherry University, Pondicherry 605014. India.Email: [email protected]

Introduction

The largest known population of the Olive ridleysea turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) occurs alongthe Orissa coast (Bustard, 1976, Limpus, 1995).Enormous arribadas have been observed over thepast decades and as many as 600,000 turtles have

nested in the course of two weeks (Dash and Kar,1990). The L olivacea population that occursalong the Bay of Bengal has suffered severelyover the past decades. Apart from the threatsfaced while nesting, marine turtles areparticularly vulnerable when they aggregateoffshore (Richard & Hughes, 1972; Pers. Obs.).


The interactions between turtles and the fisheriesis inevitable in a region like Orissa, the outcomeof which has not always been favorable for bothturtle or man. The ever-increasing human inducedmortality of several thousand breedingindividuals along the coast of Orissa has been analarming concern over the past several years(Pandav et al., 1998). Incidental capture andmortality resulting from such capture arecurrently recognized as important threats to seaturtles (Hilllestead et al., 1982). It is believed toaccount for more deaths than all other humanactivities combined (Henwood and Stunz, 1987,National research council, 1990, Robins, 1995).Mortality in the last 5 years alone has exceeded50,000 turtles (Pandav, unpublished data). Largescale mortality of olive ridleys in Mexico and thesubsequent collapse of three large breedingassemblages in the 1970's & 1980's clearlyillustrates the consequences of such actions(Cliffton et al., 1982).

While much of the conservation efforts havefocused on protecting nesting habitats, protectionin the marine environment has been overlooked,as enforcement is difficult and problematic.However, since turtles spend nearly all of theirlives at sea (Owens, 1997), it is imperative thatconservation efforts be directed in this region.Information on the offshore ecology of sea turtlesis hence very crucial during the phase in their lifehistory. Despite two decades of sea turtle researchin Orissa (Bustard, 1974; Dash and Kar, 1990,Pandav et al., 1998), hardly any have studiedthem away from the nesting beach. Pandav et al.2000 presented the first such account from thisregion. In order to shed more light on this aspectof sea turtle biology and also to aid in theconservation effort, I carried out a study inGahirmatha during the 1999-2000 season. Thesurvey period coincided with the mating period ofthe olive ridleys for this area that is spread over amaximum period of 90 days (Dash and Kar,1990, Pandav, pers comm.) My objectives wereto determine the spatial and temporal distributionof these turtles during the period prior to nestingand to get an idea of the intensity of mating thatoccurs in the vicinity of the rookery.

Methods

L. olivacea sighting data was collected betweenDecember 1999 and February 2000 using Linetransects. The study area was surveyed in acountry boat powered by a 10-hp diesel engine atan average speed of 8 km/hr. The bearing andradial distance of turtles sighted was measuredusing an 8 x 50 binoculars with a built inmagnetic digital compass and a range finder(Leica Vector, Leica Corporation 1994).Environmental factors that were likely to affectdetectability were also recorded.

Apart from the sightings, pairs were also capturedand tagged during the study period. Locationsfrom these captures were used for determining theextent of distribution in these near shore waters.Latitude and longitude position of each captureand sighting was recorded throughout the studyperiod using a hand held Global PositioningSystem (Garmin Inc.). A depth profile of thestudy area was also constructed alongrepresentative lines. The distribution wasdetermined by plotting capture locations on themap using arc view.

Results

The estimated surface density of pairs was 26pairs km -2 (CV 11.4 %) and the encounter ratewas 3.9 pairs/km. The influence of variousenvironmental factors on transects was found tobe statistically insignificant but the sea stateclearly affected detectability. Individuals taggedwhile mating exhibited some degree of inter-rookery movement. 1524 adults stranded in thefirst 3 weeks of the mating period and the overallmortality was over 3000. Sex ratios of thestranded turtles were skewed more towards males(1.47:0.68). Capture locations pooled over a 3year period seems to suggest that the area usedfor breeding did not exceed 57.98 sq. km. Thereproductive patch was situated at a depth of 8-65feet.

The density of pairs even when extrapolated failsto account for the intensity of nesting that occurs


at Gahirmatha. It is possible therefore thatfemales from several such assemblages aggregateduring arribadas. The extent of offshoredistribution seems to be consistent withobservations off Nancite where individuals in thereproductive patch although transitory were foundwithin 5 km offshore during the breeding period.These mating pairs also tend to occur in muchshallower waters than do other species of seaturtles (Heather Kalb, pers. comm.) A possibleexplanation for such assemblages appears to bethe one provided by Richard and Hughes (1972).They attribute assemblages of ridleys to nearshore environments to the effects of rivereffluents, which may influence recognition of thesame site at a later stage. The location of theaggregations in the present study is close to themouth of the river Maipura where considerabledeposition takes place. Although the size of thepatch is quite variable both within and betweenseasons, the location has remained the same.Another explanation may involve the role of nearshore currents.

Incidental capture and threats other the offshorewaters to this highly endangered group is causefor great concern. As this study clearly shows,turtles suffer significant mortality when theyaggregate in nearshore waters prior to nesting. Aneffective conservation strategy needs toincorporate these findings in order to protect theridleys of Orissa.

References

BUSTARD, H.R. 1974. World’s Largest Sea TurtleRookery?; Tiger Paper 3:3.

CLIFFTON, K., D.O. CORNEJO AND R.S. FELGER1982. Sea Turtles in the Pacific Coast of Mexico. InK.A. Bjorndal (Ed.) Biology and Conservation of SeaTurtles. Smithsonian Institution Press. WashingtonD.C. 109-209.

DASH, M.C. AND C.S. KAR 1990. The TurtleParadise. An Ecological Analysis and ConservationStrategy. Mehta.Offset printers. New Delhi.

HILLESTEAD, H.O., J.I. RICHARDSON, C.MCVEA JR AND J.M. WATSON JR., 1982.Worldwide Incidental Capture of Sea Turtle. 489-497In K.A .Bjorndal (Editor), Biology and Conservationof Sea Turtles, Second edition. Smithsonian institutionpress, Washington D.C.

HENWOOD, T.A. & W.E. STUNZ. 1987. Analysis ofSea turtle Captures and Moralities during CommercialShrimp Trawling. Fisheries Bulletin, 85: 813-817.

KALB, H.J., VALVERDE, R AND OWENS, D.W.1992. What is the Reproductive Patch of the oliveridley Sea Turtle ? In Proceedings of the 12th AnnualWorkshop on Sea Turtle Conservation and Biology.Jekyll Island, Georgia. Pp 57-61.

LIMPUS, C.J. 1995. Global Overview of The Statusof Marine Turtles: 1995 Viewpoint, In K.A .Bjorndal(Editor), Biology and Conservation of Sea Turtles,Second edition. Smithsonian institution press,Washington D.C. pp 605-609.

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. 1990. Declineof the Sea Turtles: Causes and Prevention. NationalAcademy Press, Washington D.C., 259 pp.

PANDAV, B., B.C. CHOUDHURY AND K.SHANKER. 1998B. The olive ridley Sea Turtle(Lepidochelys Olivacea) in Orissa: an Urgent Call Foran Intensive and Integrated Conservation Program.Current science vol. 75, No. 12.

ROBINS, J.B. 1995. Estimated Catch and Mortality ofSea Turtles from The East Coast Otter Trawl Fisheryof Queensland, Australia. Biological Conservation.74: 157-167.

(This study was funded by a grant from theBarbara Delano Foundation, USA andcoordinated by the Wildlife Preservation Societyof India, New Delh. The study was part ofauthors M.Sc. dissertation at PondicherryUniversity. A research paper is in preparation)


Indian Fisheries over the past 50 years (Part II) Coastal Industrial Aquaculture

Thomas KocheryGeneral Coordinator, World Forum of Fish-Harvesters and FishworkersVelankanny Junction, Valiathura, Thiruvananthapuram 695008. India.

Email: [email protected]

The first part of this article (in Kachhapa #2)covered the impact of mechanisation on Indianfisheries. Here, I try to cover the effects of coastalindustrial aquaculture on traditional fishingcommunities and on fisheries.

The Coastal Regulation Zone Notification

When Shrimati Indira Gandhi was the PrimeMinister she wrote to all the chief ministersasking them to protect the coastal zone rangingfrom 0-500 m area of the coast from sea. In1991, the GOI issued a Notification called CRZNotification under section 3(1) and section3(2)(V) of the Environment (Protection) Act,1986. For the first time, it recognized the right oftraditional fisher people over the coast. Therewere 13 prohibitions in this zone like Industrialpollution, dredging, constructions etc. Thoughinitially the GOI did not see the implications, itlater wanted different amendments because of thepressure from the Hotel and Industrial lobbies.But the fisher people resisted this move and theSC insisted upon the strict implementation ofCRZ Notification without diluting it.

Industrial Aquaculture - CRZ violation

On one hand, the GOI came out with the CRZAct, but on the other, it was also encouragingactivities against its own law. The MarineProducts Export Development Authority(MPEDA) with the Ministry of Commerce tookthe lead in promoting shrimp industries violatingall the protections to the coastline enshrined inthe CRZ. The economic policy of the GOI,which was desperately looking for foreignexchange, also invited multinational corporationsand other capitalists to establish industrial

aquaculture all along the coastline, with the solepurpose of export. Now aquaculture has becomea big business not only in India but in manydeveloping countries in Asia and elsewhere.

The "Rape and run" approach

India has an estimated area of 1.19 millionhectares of brackish water, of which 8,25,000hectares are now under shrimp culture.According to official reports about 6,046 prawnponds covering about 10,860.93 hectares ofcoastal land were used for shrimp culture byOctober 1994. But as per non-official estimates,more than 20,000 hectares of coastal land cameunder shrimp culture. The MNCs have had noqualms in acquiring prime agricultural lands andconverting them into intensive shrimp pondswhich have maximum life of only 5 to 10 years.Abandoned farms can no longer be used forshrimp farming or for agriculture. The shrimpindustries then move on to other areas,continually leaving devastated people and landsbehind them.

Development for whom?

Aquaculture has been hailed as holding "muchpromise for meeting increasing food demands"and as providing "important economic andnutritional benefits to many regions of thedeveloping. world". The questions that need to beasked are:1. For whose nutrition is the food produced?2. Who benefits from the sale of the produce?3. How does it affect agriculture and marinefisheries?4. What are the ecological hazards?5. How are human rights (of small farmers and


fisher people) upheld or violated ?

Ecological Degradations

Salination of ground water

One ha. of industrial shrimp farm requires120,000 cubic meters of sea water annually. This12 meters of saline water over and above thewater in coastal ecosystems creates seriousproblems of ground water salination, resulting indrinking water famine. Women are forced to walklong distances to secure drinking water. A studycarried out by the Central Institute of Brackish.Aquaculture (CIBA) in 1995, in Nellore district,found the salinity figures to range from 410 to4900 PPM.

Salination of land

The seepage from the aqua farms createssalination and water logging of neighbouringagricultural farms. Nellore, which is named after"nellu" which means rice in Telugu, is nowtotally destroyed through the impact of shrimpfarms. The Cauvery delta is another fertile area inwhich agricultural land is being converted intoshrimp farms.

Pollution, destruction of mangroves and coastalForests

Factory farming of shrimp requires 4-6 tons perhectare of artificial feed. Only 16.7% of this feedis converted into shrimp biomass. The rest isconverted into pollution, which deteriorates waterquality inside the pond and in the ecosystem. It isthis build-up of pollution that is responsible forthe collapse of shrimp production in a shortperiod and for the destruction of the productivityof estuarine and coastal waters. The cumulativepollution over a production cycle can bedevastating. Mangroves are the nurseries ofmarine life. Shrimp farms destroy the mangroveecosystems, not only by the waste being sent intothe sea but also by direct conversion ofmangroves into shrimp farms. The destruction ofmangroves increases the risk of cyclones and

floods.

Depletion of marine fisheries

Marine fisheries are destroyed in three ways byindustrial shrimp farms;

1. Wild fry is the major source of seed inshrimp farms. For every single fry ofcommercially desirable Peneaus monodon(Tiger prawn) caught, several other marinespecies are wasted as "fry by catch".2. Fish caught at sea is a major source ofshrimp feed. Each ton of industrial shrimprequires ten times its weight in marine fishfor conversion to feed.3. The pollution from shrimp farms, alsokills fish life and destroys marine resources.

Human Rights Violations

Displacement of traditional fisher people, smallfarmers and agricultural labourers

People have a right to work and live in their ownplace. While they also have a right to migratewhere they want to, they should not be forced todo so. For centuries the small fisherfolk, farmersand agricultural labourers have been living inharmony with nature while at the same timeproviding food for themselves and for others.They are skilled people by their own right. Theyshould be helped to develop appropriatetechnology to improve their work and life.Instead, industrial aquaculture has createdconditions by which they can no longer survive intheir own place. They are forced to leave theirhomes and hire themselves out as unskilledlabourers.

Creation of unemployment

Aquaculture can provide direct employment toonly 2 persons per hectare and 110 man days perhectare for initial construction. The World BankAqua Project in India with a 3 billion Rupeeoutlay creates employment for only 14,000people. Most of these jobs go to outsiders (skilled


persons), leaving the bulk of the local peopleunemployed.

The struggles against industrial aquaculture

The people who were affected by the shrimpculture came together and protested. Themovement got strengthened by manyorganizations like Campaign Against ShrimpIndustries, PREPARE, PROFAM, the OrissaKrushak Mahasangh and many others, both at thegrassroot level and at the level of scientificresearch and legal aids. They waged a war bothin the land and in the court. Finally the SupremeCourt in its land mark judgement in December1996 ordered the demolition of all the aquaculturefarms because it was a violation of CRZnotification of 1991 (details of the judgement canbe obtained from the author).

The Aquaculture Authority Bill

Instead of carrying out these directions of theSupreme Court, the Agriculture Ministry draftedan Aquaculture Authority Bill (AAB). This Billwas tabled in the Rajya Sabha on March 19, 1997and passed at its last session on March 20, 1997without keeping in mind the judgement of theSupreme Court. The Aquaculture Authority Billis one of the most anti-people legislation everintroduced in the Indian Parliament. It is contraryto the Environment Protection Act and to theEnvironment Policy of the Central Governmentreflected in the CRZ Notification. It is alsocontrary to the welfare of the rural populationliving in the coastal areas. Whether the Shrimpindustrial aquaculture farm is large or small, thelivelihood of more than a 100 million peopleliving in the coastal areas and who were givenprotection by the Supreme Court judgement willbe adversely affected by the introduction ofAquaculture Authority enactment.

The struggle continues

The demands of the present agitation (from July1, 1998) of the fisher people include:Ø That the Aquaculture Authority Bill of

1997 pending before the Lok Sabha bewithdrawn.Ø That the Notification dated July 9, 1997issued by the Ministry of Environment &Forest amending the CRZ notification ofFebruary 10, 1991 be withdrawn.Ø That steps to implement in total theSupreme Count judgement of December 11,1996 on Aquaculture be taken.Ø That all the existing Joint / Lease licensesbe cancelled and that the Government shouldcontinue holding meetings with the NationalFisheries Action Committee Against JointVentures (NFACAJV) for theimplementation of all the recommendations ofthe Murari High Power Committee.Ø That there should be a monsoon trawl banin all the coastal states at the same time forthe conservation of fish resources.

Misleading "Success Stories"

Often the industrial and export oriented fisheriesand related sectors publish their "Success Stories"with impressive figures. For example the MarineProducts Export Development Authority(MPEDA) has reported its achievement ofhaving crossed US $ 1 billion mark for the fourthconsecutive year. It further says that in 1972-73,the year of its inception, the total volume ofmarine products exported from India was 38, 903tonnes valued at Rs. 59.72 crores which have by1997-98 touched 3, 85, 818 tonnes valued at Rs.4,697. 48 crores. What is suppressed under these'achievements' is the plight of the workers,mostly women, engaged in the sea food exportIndustry. Around 1 lakh women, mostly contractand migrant workers are enslaved in theseprocessing industries. Their extremely strenuousand hazardous work conditions violate all labourlaws. And this maximization of work-timecombined with meagre cost of maintenance of theconfined migrant labour force, goes to form the"success story" of MPEDA.

True development and progress

True development or progress should include the


following factors:Ø It should lead to fulfilling the basic needsof the poorest.Ø The prior rights of the local people andtheir natural knowledge should be respectedØ The developmental activity shouldinvolve the people who are alreadytraditionally engaged in fishing and aredependent upon it for their livelihood.Ø It should be sustainable.Ø It should respect the environment and eco-balance.

World Forum of Fish-harvesters andFishworkers (WFF)

The problems of the fisher people all over theworld is similar. The United Nation's Food andAgricultural Organization's reports of 1995 and1996 have found unequivocally that the fisheriesof the world are undergoing the most seriouscrisis ever recorded. At least seventy-five percentare in or verging on a state of collapse due to theravages of over-fishing, destructive fishing gears- most particularly by factory trawlers - and theeffects of coastal industrial aquaculture, industrialand domestic pollution, and the myriadconsequences of global warming. The fishingcommunities all over the world are under thethreat of extinction. So the fisher people'sorganizations from 35 countries came together inNew Delhi from November 17 – 21, 1997 and

formed the World Forum of Fish-harvesters andFishworkers (WFF). The objective of the Forumis to protect the fish resources and the fishingcommunities by promoting sustainabledevelopment of fisheries through eco-friendlygears and methods and to work for a global banagainst all destructive fishing (particularly factorytrawlers), coastal industrial aquaculture andcoastal industrial pollution. India has beenchosen as the co-coordinator. The WFF hasdeclared November 21, the foundation day of theWFF, as World Fisheries Day. On this day,every year, all over the world, actions,campaigns, studies, etc will be organized with aview to protecting the fish resources, and thefishing communities through sustainable smallfisheries and to evoke public awareness.

Conclusion - The challenges before us

We need to continue our struggles against allkinds of destructive gears and methods of fishingin order to conserve fish resources. We need tostep up struggles against coastal industrialaquaculture and against all kinds of coastalpollution. We need to see that the fisher peoplewho are solely dependent on fishing should ownthe sea and the water bodies and gear. The oceanis a living organism. The life of the planet andthe dependent health and welfare of humanitymust not be sacrificed to the greed of the few.

SYMPOSIUM 2001 ANNOUNCEMENTThe 21st annual symposium for sea turtle biology and conservation will be held atPhiladelphia, Pennsylvania, USA from February 24 – 28, 2001. Details are available athttp://www.seaturtle.org. Symposium announcements can be obtained by post mail bycontacting the Symposium Registration Coordinator, Donna Broadbent (E-mail:[email protected] ; Tel: + 1-304-947- 5366, Fax: +1-304-947-5364, 480 Williamsport Pike,Suite 3, Martinsburg, West Virginia, 25401, USA). Registrants who cannot access theInternet and who require a personal invitation letter to attend can request this letter bycontacting the Symposium Secretary, Sheryan Epperly-Chester (Email:[email protected]; Tel: +1-305-361-4207; Fax: +1-305-361-4478; Address:NOAA/NMFS, 75 Virginia Beach Drive, Miami, Florida 33149, USA).


The GOI UNDP Sea Turtle Conservation Project

Source: Wildlife Institute of IndiaPO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India.


The Government of India – UNDP Sea TurtleProject is a national sea turtle conservationproject which is being executed by the Ministryof Environment of Forests, with the WildlifeInstitute of India, Dehradun coordinating thevarious sub-programmes within the project. Theproject, initiated in late 1999, has variouscomponents including extensive surveys alongthe coast, reviews of legislation and communitybased conservation, education and awareness,GIS studies of key nesting areas, TEDdemonstrations and implementation and trainingfor wildlife and fisheries managers and fieldbiologists.

Surveys

While there is scattered literature for the entirecoast on sea turtle nesting, no systematic surveyhas been carried out and many areas have beenignored. One of the objectives of this programwas to extensively survey the entire coast for seaturtle nesting and mortality with intensivesampling of key areas. Another objective of thesurvey is to build a coastal network oforganisations and individuals involved orinterested in marine conservation and fisheriesissues who can serve to disseminate and collectinformation. Surveys have been initiated in mostof the states by the following organisations:

Ø West Bengal – Nature, Environment andWildlife Society, Calcutta.Ø Orissa – Forest Department, Governmentof Orissa, Bhubaneshwar.Ø Andhra Pradesh – Wildlife Institute ofIndia, Dehradun.

Ø Tamil Nadu – Salim Ali Centre forOrnithology and Natural History, Coimbatore.Ø Kerala – THANAL Conservation Action& Information Network, Thiruvananthapuram.Ø Maharashtra and Goa – BombayNatural History Society, Bombay.Ø Gujarat – Gujarat Institute of DesertEcology, Bhuj.Ø Andaman and Nicobar islands –Andaman and Nicobar Environmental Team, PortBlair.

Other projects

The Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradunconducted a Rapid Assessment survey of theimpact of the supercyclone (October, 1999) withspecial reference to sea turtle nesting habitats. Areview of legislation is being undertaken byEnviro Law, New Delhi. Kalpavriksh, Pune isconducting a study of community basedconservation in Kerala, Goa and Orissa. OrissaRemote Sensing Application Centre,Bhubaneshwar is using GIS and satellite imageryfor the characterization of sea turtle nestinghabitats in Orissa. The Centre for EnvironmentalEducation, Ahmedabad will be conducting aworkshop to facilitate education and awarenessprogrammes in various states.

The Orissa Forest Department and the WildlifeInstitute of India, Dehradun plan to conduct anational workshop for sea turtle conservation andmanagement in November, 2000. The projectbegan in late 1999 and currently extends tillDecember, 2001.


Current marine turtle situation in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands – An urgentneed for conservation action

Harry V. AndrewsAndaman Nicobar Environmental Team, Centre for Island Ecology,Post Bag 1, Junglighat PO, Port Blair 744103. Andaman Islands.

Introduction

The four species of marine turtles that occur inthe Andaman and Nicobar Islands are theLeatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), theHawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), the Greensea turtle (Chelonia mydas) and the olive ridley(Lepidochelys olivacea). Blyth in 1863 inMonat’s paper first reported only three species,the olive ridley, Green and Hawksbill to occur inthe Andaman and Nicobar Islands. In the late1970’s and up to early 1980’s, there were severalreported of Loggerheads nesting on these islands.However there is absolutely no evidence of thisspecies nesting in the Andaman and NicobarIslands now.

Status surveys and studies in the Andaman andNicobars have recorded India’s best nestingbeaches for three species, the Leatherback, Greenand Hawksbill sea turtles. The presence of Greenturtles and Hawksbills feeding grounds are alsoconfirmed (Bhaskar, 1993). Evidence of thedecline of sea turtles in the islands has beenreported (Bhaskar, 1993) and the need forconservation and recommendations has also beendiscussed (Bhaskar, 1993, Bhaskar and Andrews,1993 and Sivasunder, 1996). In 1978 thenotification of 94 islands in the Andamans assanctuaries includes 30 islands as confirmed seaturtle nesting sites. There are at least 24 sitesreported for the Nicobar group of islands(Bhaskar, 1993 and Tiwari, 1991). Currently allthe best viable nesting sites are either in TribalReserves or in uninhabited islands. This reportreviews literature and includes new nesting sitesand observations made during crocodile andwetland surveys over the past seven years.

Leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea)

This unique animal, the largest marine reptile,occurs only in the Andaman and Nicobar groupof islands and in Sri Lanka for the NorthernIndian Ocean region. There are sixty four knownnesting sites in the world and 23 sites have beenreported for these islands and currently only 21sites are utilised by these large reptiles for nesting(Andrews and Whitaker 1996, Bhaskar, 1993 andTiwari, 1991). The last reported nesting onKaramatang No. 9 beach in Middle AndamanIsland was in 1974 and the last nesting atCuthbert Bay also in Middle Andaman was in1978 (Bhaskar, 1993). There are incidents of oneor two turtles nesting in Cuthbert Bay duringsome years and the last report was in 1997 of onefemale nesting. These two areas were thenorthern-most distributional range for this speciesin the Andamans. This is a typical example wheretoo much human disturbance on the beach such assand mining, cattle, predation of eggs by humansand feral dogs, and settlements and camps on thebeach, can affect nesting intensity and deterfemales from nesting. These causes and examplesmust be considered for management planning.Most of the Leatherback rookeries in theNicobars were found only in 1990 (Bhaskar 1993& Tiwari, 1991) and nesting on the east coast ofRutland only in 1997 when nests were found inMay.

Leatherback sea turtles nest 4.9 times on anaverage, per season, ranging from 1 to 7 timesdepending on the female’s reproductive status forthat year (Bhaskar, 1993). During the 1991 – 92season 166 females nested in the Great Nicobarisland. This may be an under-estimate, being foronly 8 of the 9 nesting sites, and of these 8, some


sites were surveyed well after the nesting seasonin March (Bhaskar,1993). However, this was thefirst time that a figure for the Leatherback nestingpopulation on Great Nicobar Island was reportedand possible only through tagging females afterthey came up to nest. In 1981, 10 nests in SouthBay in Little Andaman island was reported byBhaskar and in 1984 he counted 84 nests on theWest Bay beach of Little Andaman Island.During mid March 1999, 34 nests were countedon the West Bay beach during a crocodile surveyand no nests or tracks were found on the SouthBay beach. Juvenile leatherbacks have beenobserved off the southern coast of North SentinelIsland, an island north west of Little Andamanisland.

Australian tagged Leatherbacks have beenobserved to nest on the Galatha beach in theGreat Nicobar Island on the South-East coast.However, no information has been reported forthese turtles which is a loss of extremely valuabledata on the biology of the species.

The estimated nesting population for Andamanand Nicobar Islands is 198 females (Bhaskar,1993) and there has been no other effort toestimate populations. Nesting season for thisspecies has been discussed by Bhaskar, (1993)and Sivasunder, (1996). The nesting season forthe Nicobars, from observations at the Galathabeach, starts in November, peaks in lateDecember and January. In some years, it spillsinto April and there are records of turtles nestingin October in some years. Maximum nesting inSouth Andaman on Rutland Island is fromSeptember through December. Bhaskar (1993)has reported nesting all year round except in May.However there are records of Leatherbacksnesting in May on Rutland island as per theForest Department records and from observationsin May 1997 on the east coast of Rutland.

Threats to nesting populations, nests and nestingbeaches has been discussed by several authors,Bhaskar, (1993); Bhaskar and Andrews, (1993);Misra, (1993); Sivasunder, (1996) including theevidence of decline in populations. The various

threats for the leatherbacks are mainly predationof eggs by humans and feral dogs at the Galatheain Great Nicobar Island, South bay in littleAndaman Island, Jahazi beach and the east coastof Rutland Island. Currently Jahazi beach onRutland is under immediate threat due to tourismdevelopment plans and a road leading to thisbeach. This area is a part of the Mahatma GandhiNational Park. The other main threat whichcannot be quantified is the amount of plasticsfloating around the Andaman and NicobarIslands. This is mainly due to the direction ofcurrents and wind that brings plastics from closeby South Eastern countries and a large amount ofplastic has been generated within the Islands overthe past six years. It is known that leather backturtles swallow plastics mistaking it for jelly fishand deaths have been reported world wide.

Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata)

The Andaman and Nicobar has been recorded asthe best nesting beach for this species in India(Bhaskar,1993) and hawksbill favour smallisolated island beaches for nesting. There aretwelve reported hawksbill nesting sites in theNicobar group, three beaches on little AndamanIsland and 27 nesting sites on 26 islands in theAndaman group of Islands. South Reef Island inmiddle Andamans and North Brother and SnarkIslands in the south are considered the mostimportant hawksbill nesting sites (Bhaskar 1993& 1996). Although there are no records ofhawksbills nesting on the west coast of Middleand South Andaman Islands, these areas comeunder the Jarawa Reserve and can not besurveyed. Hawksbills have been observed yeararound in the sea and in the bays along the westcoast and Bluff Island seems to have a perfecthawksbill nesting beach. Hawksbill feedinggrounds are found all around the Andaman andNicobar Islands.

The nesting population for the Andaman Islandsis estimated as 205 and for the Nicobars, 45.However this requires further surveys andassessments with a big team of researchersconsidering the number of sites in both the island


groups and the logistics. It is near impossible toland on several islands during the monsoonswhich happens to be the main nesting season forseveral species. Previous records have reportednesting through out the year except in June, thestart of the season being July and peaking fromSeptember to October and tapering off inDecember. Hawksbills turtles nest 2.85 timeswithin a season and renesting intervals for thisspecies on South Reef Island has been reported as12-17 days, averaging 14.06 (Bhasker,1996).

The main threats to this species in the AndamanIslands is poaching by settlers for meat and eggs.This species is the most commonly hunted turtle,mainly because it is found in shallow reefs or inthe reefs during low tide and can be easilyspeared. Feral dogs are a major threat to turtles inthe Andaman and Nicobar Islands, where they notonly dig up nest for eggs but also kill nestingturtles. Interviews with fishermen indicate that anestimated of 50- 80 turtles on an average arekilled annually by drowning in shark and gillnets.The south western corner of Rutland Island hadone of the best hawksbill nesting beaches in theAndamans until the early 1980’s after which sandmining destroyed the beach. Currently Smith andRoss Islands off North Andaman Island areunder severe threat due to tourism and relateddevelopments. The amount of plastics could alsopose a major treat to this species.

Green turtle (Chelonia mydas)

This is the most common species found along theAndaman and Nicobar coasts and they also nestyear around. However main nesting occurs fromJune to November, peaking in July and thisspecies nests four times within a season. Bhaskar(1993) had reported 37 nesting sites for greenturtles in the Andamans including LittleAndaman Island and 12 sites for the Nicobargroup of islands. During crocodile surveys inmarch 1997, three nesting sites were found on theeast coast of Baratang Island in Horsford,Rawlen’s and Grieve Bays, besides other sitessuch as north of Outram Island, Long and North

passage Islands on the east coast. The new siteson the west coast are Petri and Bluff Islands and abeach in Robert bay in Middle Andaman Island.During March 1998, a total of 58 nests werecounted on South Sentinel Island. 33 turtlesnested between a ten day period and in one night13 turtles nested on three different beaches. Thisisland has been reported as important for greenturtle nesting (Bhaskar, 1993) and other authorstoo have reported nesting on this island in 1973and 1974 (Davis and Altevogt, 1975). DuringMarch 1997, 19 nests were counted on a beachnorth of the Jarawa creek in Rawlin’s Bay on theeast coast of Baratang Island.

Previous assessments and nest count for hisspecies were mostly carried out just before themain nesting season or just after. This clearlyindicates that we still do not have a properestimate of the nesting population for this species.There are indications that turtles from otherregions can some times be found in the Andamanwaters. In September 2000, some fishermenfound a U.S. tagged turtle in their shark net, southof Little Andaman Island.

Feeding grounds for the green turtle are allaround the Andaman and Nicobar Islands andsome of these sea grass beds are under threatmainly due to degradation through siltation. Otherthreats to this species are poaching for meat andeggs, drowning in nets, impact of tourism andsand mining. Sand mining is definitely going toeffect nesting grounds of this species inMadhuban on the south east of South AndamanIsland, Rutland and Baratang Islands. Tourismand related development will have an impact inLong, North Passage, Rutland, Smith, Ross andHavelock Islands. Havelock already has very fewturtles nesting due to extensive poaching,tourism, drowning in nets, and predation of nestsby humans and dogs. Lack of turtles nesting inCorbyn’s Cove, south of Port Blair in SouthAndaman Island and North Cinque Island hasbeen due to the development of infrastructure fortourism and lights on these beaches.


Olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea)

This species nests both in the Andamans and theNicobars during October to April, the peakseason being January to February. Ridleys nestonly on the east coast of the Andaman Islands and12 sites have been confirmed besides three sitesin the Nicobar group. The main sites for thisspecies are Madhuban in South Andaman Island,Cuthbert Bay and Karamatang in MiddleAndaman, Ramnagar and Coffeedera beaches inNorth Andaman Island, Smith, Trlby and HumpIslands. The major site however is Cuthbert Bay,where annually most number of ridley turtles nestat the beaches on either side of the Betapur creek.In 1988/1989, 338 nests were reported (Misra,1990). It is an area where mini arribadas occur,60-125 turtles nesting in one night (Sajan Paulpers. comm.). This phenomenon however needsto be recorded and quantified through twoseasons at least. The other sites are three beacheson the west coast of Little Andaman island. Themajor ridley nesting location is Great NicobarIsland which has four nesting beaches and 280nests were found on three sites during the 1991-1992 survey (Bhaskar, 1993). The other island inthe Nicobars is Teressa. The nesting populationfor this species in the Andaman and NicobarIslands has been reported as 445 with femalesnesting on an average of 1.5 times per season(Bhasker,1999). There is a possibility that oliveridleys nest on North Passage and Long Islandsand this needs to be investigated.

The main threats to this species are drowning inshark nets, poaching for meat and large scale nestpredation by humans and dogs on most majorbeaches. Sand mining in Madhuban, Karamatangand Cuthbert Bay is affecting nesting as well.

Discussion

The current trend of tourism developmentactivities on Smith, North passage, Long andRutland Islands will, in the next two or threeyears, have an impact on sea turtle nesting.Rutland has already lost one very importantleatherback and hawksbill turtle nesting beach

due to sand mining in the 1980s. The peakleatherback nesting season is also the touristseason and tourism is going to have a major effecton Jahazi beach in Rutland Island. Leatherbackturtles stopped nesting in Karamatang andCuthbert Bay due to sand mining and otherhuman activities. In the near future tourism willimpact green and olive ridley nesting on thesetwo beaches.

Sand mining on the east coast of Little AndamanIsland and Madhuban beach in South AndamanIsland is going to effect green and ridley nestingin another years time. There is a possibility thatleatherback sea turtles nest on Madhuban beachand it could also be a major ridley nesting site.This beach has never been previously surveyedfor sea turtles and requires immediate assessment.Several beaches on the east and west coast ofLittle Andaman island need to be surveyed.

Impact of fisheries on sea turtles in the Andamanand Nicobars Islands requires a very urgentassessment. The feral dog problem in theAndaman and the Nicobars requires urgent actionbecause they not only destroy nests, but they alsokill and eat nesting turtles. These dogs in mostareas do not belong to any person and can be shotsystematically.

The remoteness and inaccessibility of most seaturtle nesting islands and beaches during the startof the nesting season makes it difficult formonitoring, surveys and protection.

References

ANDREWS, H V & R. WHITAKER. 1998. Countryreport for India including the Andaman and Nicobarislands. Biology and conservation of the amphibians,reptiles and their habitats in South Asia. In Proc. TheInternational Conference of the amphibians andreptiles of South Asia. Sri Lanka. August 1-5, 1996.

BHASKER, S.1993. The status and ecology of seaturtles in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands. ST 1/93.Centre for Herpetology, Madras Crocodile BankTrust, post Bag 4, Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu603104, India.


---------------- . 1996. Renesting intervals of thehawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) on SouthReef Island, Andaman Islands, India. Hamadryad.21:19-22.--------------- & H V. ANDREWS. 1993. Action planfor sea turtles in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands,India. Marine turtle Newsletter. (60): 23.

DAVIS, T. A. & R. ALTEVOGTR. 1976. Giantturtles and robber crabs of the South Sentinel. Yojana.20 (13, 14): 75- 79.

MISRA, A. 1990. Olive ridley turtle- breeding andbehaviour. Tigerpaper. 29-32.

MOUAT , F. J. 1863. Adventures and researchesamong the Andaman Islanders. Hurst and Blackett,London.

SIVASUNDAR. A. 1995. Studies on the nesting ofleatherback sea turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) in theAndaman Islands. M. Sc. Dissertation. Salim AliSchool of Ecology, Pondicherry University.

TIWARI, M. 1991. A follow up sea turtle survey inthe southern Nicobars. Report: Madras CrocodileBank Trust. Post Bag 4, Mamallapuram, Tamil Nadu603104, India.


Coral reefs of the Andaman and Nicobar Islands

Sarang KulkarniWildlife Institute of India

PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India.Email:[email protected]

For colour, sheer beauty of form and design, andtremendous variety of life, perhaps no naturalarea in the world can equal coral reefs. Theirbeauty has fascinated generations of people, bothscientists and laymen, down through the years.

Over a vast region of the tropics, the shallowinshore waters are dominated by the formation ofcoral reefs and indeed, they are used to define thelimits of the tropical marine environment. Coralreefs are one of the most productive ecosystemsin the world. They are characterised by complexassociations of plants and animal communities,rapid and efficient cycling of nutrients. In a way,they are an oasis in the nutrient deficient expanseof the warm tropical seas. These highly diversemarine ecosystems typically contain numbers ofspecialised species representing almost all groupsof marine animals. The complex ‘Mega City’ likestructure of a reef provides abundant shelter forfishes and invertebrates and provides safe placesas fish nurseries. It provides a hard substrate inthe highly dynamic marine environs on whichmany organisms such as clams, sponges, sea fans,anemones and algae colonise and grow. For manyother species a coral reef is a critical habitatduring a particularly vulnerable or critical stageof their life cycle. The different parts of the reefare used for feeding, for spawning, as nurserygrounds and for shelter. Protecting such criticalhabitats from disturbance is essential inmaintaining higher fisheries return. The coralreefs are associations of colonial animal likeforms belonging to hard corals, along with otherorganisms that secrete calcium carbonate andcalcareous algae. Reef building corals are ofparticular importance because they generate muchof the three-dimensional shapes and structure thatcharacterise the reef habitat. They are thefoundation and origin of thousands of oceanic

islands. They are also of vital importance to manylarger islands and continental margins for theprotection of land from sea wave action andprovide subsistence to millions of people. Coralreefs provide subsistence, security and culturalvalue to the human communities inhabitingislands and coasts of tropical nations.

The mainland coast of India has two widelyseparated areas containing reefs: the Gulf ofKutch in the northwest, which has some of themost northerly reefs in the world and Palk Bay(with a long fringing reef) and the Gulf ofMannar (with numerous fringing reefs aroundsmall islands) in the southeast. There are patchesof reef growth on the west coast, for example atGaveshani Bank. The Andamans and Nicobarshave fringing reefs around many islands, and along barrier reef (320 km) on the west coast. Thereefs are poorly known scientifically but mayprove to be the most diverse in India and those inthe best condition. The Laccadives have extensivereefs but these are equally poorly known.

The Andaman and Nicobar Island chainconstitute a string of the oceanic islands. Theseislands are separated by Andaman Sea fromSouth East Asian coast to the east, Bay of Bengalto the west from the Indian peninsula, and by theMalacca Strait in the south from Sumatra. TheAndaman and Nicobar Islands are situated in theBay of Bengal within 60 and 140N latitude, 920

and 940 E longitude. They are also called the BayIslands. There are 349 islands in the Andamanand Nicobar Island group. Together theyconstitute a Union Territory (U.T.) of the Unionof India, and are divided into two districts:Andaman, north of 100 channel, and Nicobar tothe south. The two are separated by about 160 kmof sea. Being close to the equator and surrounded


by sea, the islands have tropical climate.Precipitation is heavy; with both northeast andsouthwest monsoons being received, it rainsseven months in a year. Cyclones sometimesoccur, at the change of monsoons.

These islands harbour the largest number of coralgenera and species recorded from India with closeaffinity towards the East Asian reefs, which areconsidered as the centre of high coral diversity inthe world. So far 64 genera and 164 species ofcorals have been reported from Andaman andNicobar Islands. The total estimated coral reefarea in these islands is 953.3 km2 based onremote sensing data. The coral reefs in theseislands are represented by patchy, fringing andbarrier reefs. The coral reefs growth is known upto a depth of 40 meters and luxuriant coral growthoccurs at 5 - 8 metres. Fringing reefs are wider onthe west coast of these islands. Currently,pristine coral reef exists in remote islands whichare away from human interference by direct andindirect mean such North Reef, Great Barren,Narcondum islands, Andaman and Nicobar. Theadministration showed its interest to protect coralreefs and adjacent ecosystems by declaring 2marine National Parks and a number ofsanctuaries.

Marine National Parks

§ Mahatma Gandhi Marine National Park,Wandoor

§ Rani Zansi Marine National Park, RichiesArchipelago

Other protected areas which protect reefs

• Saddle Peak National Park• Barren Island Sanctuary: active volcano,

with coral communities• Battimalv Island Sanctuary (Nicobars)• Interview Island Sanctuary• South Reef Island Sanctuary• Megapode Island Sanctuary (Nicobars)• Narcondum Island Sanctuary• North Reef Island Sanctuary

• La Touche Island Sanctuary• South Sentinel Island Sanctuary

Despite protection, there has been a noticeabledecline in reef health over the years and severalobservers have reported the detrimental impactsof sediment loads in the water, outbreaks of thestarfish Acanthaster planci, rise in sea surfacetemperature and overexploitation of reefresources in these waters

Factors affecting coral reefs in A & N Islands

Coral reef ecosystems, like the tropical rainforests, are among the most mature ecosystem onour planet. Such mature ecosystems are verysensitive to external impact, be they natural orman-made. During the last few decades,catastrophic acute natural events have affectedcoral reef systems, resulting in their destruction invast areas of these islands; Storms, the warming ofwater by the El nino, current, extra low tides,Acanthaster plagues, and various kinds ofanthropogenic stress were among the causes. Theregeneration of thus degraded reef ecosystemstakes decades. In these islands, closeinterconnection and cumulative effect of naturaland anthropogenic stress factors and the processesof destruction of the reef system caused by themappears to be clearer and clearer.

Storms

Among the factors of physical stress whichdamage the corals are wave action, decrease insalinity, sedimentation, exposure and overheatingduring extra low ebbs. Sometimes the action ofthese factors reaches a catastrophic level, causingmass mortality among the corals. Most often, suchevents are connected with the monsoon season andpassing of cyclones over the reef, which areaccompanied by heavy rains causing decrease insalinity and massive sedimentation. In the opensea, the wind creates waves 8-15 m high. Near thereef edge such a storm raises waves 4-8 m high.Such waves smash the ramose corals, andespecially susceptible are windward side reefs.


The massive coral and firm foliose corals aredestroyed by storms to a lesser degree. Thedestruction during the storms proceeds mostlyunder the action of masses of rubble moving backand forth at high speed. They smash the ramosecorals and irreversibly damage the massive ones.After an extra-strong storm the reef benthiccommunities cannot completely recover forseveral decades. Often they do not recover at all,remaining overgrown with coralline algae.

El nino

Recently, the phenomena of mass bleaching andsubsequent mortality of corals were recorded on aglobal scale in vast areas of different reef regionsmainly due to rise in sea surface temperature as aresult of El nino. The phenomenon of bleaching ofcorals stressed by high temperature, oxygendeficiency or by the presence of toxic pollutantsmanifests itself in the expulsion of zooxanthellaeby their polyps. High temperature stimulates theactivity of lysosomes in the cells of zooxanthellae,triggering the process of their self-digestion inpolyps. If the stress is prolonged for long periodsthen bleached corals most often die. Thepercentage of mortality among bleached corals isespecially high in corals sensitive to stress, likesome species of Acropora and Pocillopora.Nevertheless, some corals, like Porites, Milleporaand Psammacora may survive bleaching and lateron may recover. In May 1998, 65-90 % massmortality of corals in these islands was reported,although these results are now accepted asexaggerated. But along with the global coral reefregions, these islands are also potential threatenedby rise in sea surface temperature (SST).

Acanthaster planci

The “crown of thorns” starfish Acanthaster planciis a large specialised corrallovore echinoderm,which feeds exclusively on scleractinian corals.Massive infestation of crown of thorns was firstrecorded in 1989 in MG marine national park. Thisresulted in the catastrophic degradation of thecorals. The subsequent recovery might take 10 –40 years, depending on the degree of damage and

on not being attacked by starfish repeatedly. Theattacks by this starfish on reefs could beconsidered as an ecocatastrophe on a large scale,triggered mainly by human activity. TheAcanthaster planci have very flexible motile spinyrays. By their use, they are able to crawl easilyupon colonies of the corals and hold onto them.

Coral disease

The exposure of corals to disease had been firstdiscovered in M.G. marine national park in 1991.They described two kind of disease, white bandand black band, as an indication of stressedenvironment. Still, corals from the deeper water ofM.G. marine national park also showed symptomsof the disease. Outbreaks of these were recordedon reefs where corals had been destroyed bycyclones, and then bored by sponges and clams.The transfer of pieces of diseased coral to healthyones can infect them. The diseased corals mostlydie. It became evident that disease strikes mostlycorals enfeebled by stress, in particular by theactivity of man on reefs. Under the influence ofsiltation and pollution in zones of such an activity,the coral increase their excretion of mucus, theexcess of which stimulates the development ofbacteria, which then infect the corals themselves.

Anthropogenic factors

Reef ecosystems exist at their boundary ofendurance of physical stress. However, its periodiccharacter has allowed them not only to survive, butalso to flourish. Anthropogenic stress is muchmore dangerous for them because in most cases itis not only permanent but has the tendency toincrease with time. In conditions of cumulativeimpact of physical and anthropogenic stress, theinhibition and destruction of reef systems could beirreversible. Therefore, the anthropogenic impactsbecause of fisheries, tourism, deforestation andfaulty land use practices in catchments havebecome the main factors for coral reefdegradation. Massive anthropogenic stress on reefshad begun in late 70s, when settlement startedgrowing rapidly and resulted in deforestation incatchments. Discharge of freshwater from


catchments increased in monsoon, which driven tothe different reefs by currents, increase from yearto year. As tidal wave currents are strong in thisgroup of islands, these currents play a very crucialrole in transporting this sediment from the creekmouth to the reef area. The soil in catchments isfine and loamy, and when it is transported to thereef by rainwater, it does not settle down in thenearest reef but in further reefs. They not onlyexert a toxic effect on reef biota, but also fomentsome processes unusual for reef environment, suchas eutrophication. The nutrients accumulating onthe reef with discharge waters stimulate the growthof seaweeds, which inhibit and then replace thecorals. It is evident in most of the dead part of thereef. In areas subjected to discharge, the bloomingof phytoplankton is furthered, including the toxicdinoflagellates and blue green algae. These bloomsviolate homeostatic conditions in the reefecosystems, thus destabilising them. They weakenthe resistance of corals and cause their mortality.The water discharged to reefs from the fieldscontain besides nutrient fertilisers and alsopesticides, polychlorophenols, insecticides(delderin, eudrine) and herbicides (high phenoxyacids). These substances accumulate in the tissues

of corals and other fauna, being toxic for them inminor concentrations of 0.1 mg/l. Corals thusstressed die or, when they survive, they excrete alarge quantity of mucus. It stimulates microbialgrowth, which then causes the death of corals.Among the resources of coral reefs in these islandsexploited by local people are: 1) fish and edibleinvertebrates: molluscs, holothurians, crabs,shrimps, lobsters 2) Shell collection.Overexploitation of each of these resourcesdestabilises the reef ecosystem, undermines itsability to reproduce and thus leads to their loss.

Tourism

The tourist boom of the last one and half decadesmay become an important harmful factor to thereefs of some parts. But this factor is not yetconsidered as an immediate threat to reefs. InJolly Boys, Redskin and to some extent Grubisland, hordes of tourists wander on the reef flats,trampling down everything that lives. Tramplingabout on reefs, tourist destroy the population oframose corals of these reefs. These reefs also facedamage from mechanical damage by anchors andmotor propellers of excursion boats.

Mahanadi, an on-line newsletter

Mahanadi is an online newsletter dedicated to theecology and wildlife of Orissa. It was started inJune, 2000 and is brought out by BiswajitMohanty and Ashok Mahapatra

“The Mahanadi is an e-newsletter dedicated tothe ecology and wildlife of Orissa and shall bemainly circulated through the Internet. Webelieve that this is the quickest method todisseminate happenings of ecological andwildlife interest In order to keep costs low werequest our readers and patrons to kindly give ustheir e-mail address so that we can dispatch themagazine through electronic mail. Apart fromsaving us postage costs it shall help inconservation of valuable forests since paper is

made from trees. Readers are welcome to submitarticles. Readers are also welcome to write aboutany issue concerning the state's environment,ecology or wildlife. However, publication ofarticles shall be subject to acceptance by theeditors” – Editors, Mahanadi

E-mails maybe addressed to the editors :Biswajit Mohanty: [email protected] Mahapatra: [email protected]

Readers may also access the magazine on theInternet: www.angelfire.com/md2/mahanadi

(The following news items were extracted fromMahanadi # 1- Ed.)


Depleting reserves threaten fishing community

Declining fish reserves in coastal Orissa could spelldoom for thousands of fishermen. According to arecent study by United Artists Association of Orissaand Integrated Coastal Management of AndhraPradesh, over the last decade the catch from the sea aswell as from Chilika lake has gone down considerably.The study covered the fishing villages in Puri andGanjam districts. According to the study, thefishermen revealed that their total catch had comedown to 10 per cent of pre 1990 levels. While theannual fish catch was about 5,983 tonnes and theshrimp collection about 1,177 tonnes, they had comedown to 1,352 tonnes and 281 tonnes respectively.The presence of trawlers near the shore and populationpressure had led to this decline, the study said. Thestudy also said that trawlers from Andhra Pradesh hadmade it impossible for traditional fishermen of Puriand Ganjam districts to operate in the area. In mostfishing villages, half the household income comesfrom shrimp seed collection which is a dependablesource of income. However, indiscriminate collectionof shrimp seeds has destroyed other marine speciewhich are generally discarded on the beach by shrimpseed collectors. The study said many fishermen hadmoved to other coastal areas in the state to work astrawler crew or rickshaw pullers in Puri, Paradeep,Cuttack and Bhubaneshwar due to the decliningreserves.

Mother prawns are illegally caught from the coastalwaters by Andhra trawlers and sold at about Rs.5 -6,000 each. Due to the weak action by the Fisheriesdepartment, the seedling mafia has attacked them anumber of times. Since the seedlings traders keepeveryone happy from the top to the bottom, no actionis taken against them. There is a demand to strengthenthe fisheries laws to make it equivalent to the forestlaws since in case of seizure of timber from anyvehicle, the vehicle is also confiscated which is notbeing done in case of the seedlings. The fisheries dept.only seizes the seedlings and not the vehicle.

A recent survey conducted by the Wildlife Society ofOrissa indicates that even schoolchildren are forsakingclasses to collect seedlings to earn upto Rs.100 a day.This is more evident in Kendrapada, Jagatsinghpur,Balasore and Bhadrak districts where hundreds ofpeople can be seen running to the creeks, river mouthsand beaches at dawn to catch prawn seedlings. Thetiger prawn seedlings are carefully picked up from the

whole lot and the rest are just thrown mindlessly onthe ground killing such species like bhekti, mullets,tuna, sharks, pomfrets and sal. The supply ofseedlings has grown to meet the demand and in 2000the prices are lower at Rs.300 to Rs.400 per 1,000compared to Rs.900 per 1,000 in 1999.

Source : The Samaja, 29.01.2000 * The New IndianExpress , 17.2.2000 * The Hindustan Times,24.3.2000 * The Times of India, 26.3.2000

High Court bans Prawn farms near BhitarkanikaSanctuary

The Orissa High Court has directed the stategovernment to ensure that no fresh prawn gherries areconstructed or re-constructed within the 500 metreCRZ (coastal regulation Zone ) of the Bhitarkanikasanctuary wildlife sanctuary. Justice P.C. Naik andJustice B.P. Das passed this order in response to a PILby Wildlife Society of Orissa and Wildlife ProtectionSociety of India. The court noted with concern that196 prawn gherries had been constructed over an areaof 6,497 acres in the forest and private land within theCRZ area. The collectors of Kendrapada andJagatsinghpur districts maintained that the gherrieshad since been washed away in the super cyclone. Thecourt also asked the government to formulate a planfor plantation and it could approach the Centre forfunds. "Afforestation is of great importance as theforest cover had been destroyed in the super cyclone, "the court observed.Source : The Times of India , 23.12.99

Dolphins face Extinction

The Chilika lake is the abode of the Irrawady dolphin.Besides, this two other species are found in thecoastal waters of Orissa. The dolphins are under threatdue to illegal fishing activity of some fishermen .Dolphin meat is being used as bait for shark fishing insome parts of the state. " But the country fishermen inthe State have a lot of sympathy for the mammal. Theyrelease the mammal the moment it is trapped in thenet, " said Biswajit Mohanty, the Secretary of WildlifeSociety of Orissa. They are sometimes caught in thetrawl nets of shrimp trawlers and are drowned.Morever, baby dolphins which are obviously slowerthan the adult ones easily get caught in the propellersof these trawlers.Source : The Hindustan Times , dt. 27.4.2000, AsianAge, dt. 30.4.2000


Editors

Kartik Shanker

Wildlife Institute of India,

Dehradun, India.

Phone: 0135 640112 -115


Belinda Wright

Wildlife Protection Society of India,

New Delhi. India.

Phone: 011 6213864 Fax: 011 6464918


Editorial Board

B.C. Choudhury, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.

John G. Frazier, Conservation & Research Center, Smithsonian Inst., USA.

Biswajit Mohanty, Wildlife Society of Orissa, Cuttack. India.

Bivash Pandav, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. India.

Operation Kachhapa

Belinda Wright, Project Director, Operation Kachhapa, New Delhi. India.

Biswajit Mohanty, Project Coordinator, Operation Kachhapa, Cuttack. India.

Mr. S.K. Pani, Project Officer, Operation Kachhapa, Cuttack. India.

For more information, contact:

Operation Kachhapa

Wildlife Protection Society of India (WPSI),

Thapar House, 124 Janpath, New Delhi 110048

Phone: 011 6213864/6238710 Fax: 011 6464918


Operation Kachhapa is coordinated by the Wildlife Protection Society of India and supported by the

Barbara Delano Foundation

Documents

Kachhapa - Wildlife Protection Society of India · Kachhapa, or olive ridley sea turtles, that nest in Orissa migrate to Sri Lanka, ... histories of conflict between some States of