Flaws in Iucn'S Red List System, Exemplified by The Case of Sea Turtles' by Nicholasmrosovsky

The Indian Ocean Turtle Newsletter was initiated to provide a forum for exchange of information on sea turtle
biology and conservation, management and education and awareness activities in the in the Indian subcontinent,
Indian Ocean region, and South/Southeast Asia. The newsletter also intends to cover related aspects such as
coastal zone management fisheries and marine biology.
The newsletter is distributed free of cost to a network of government and non-government organisations and
individuals in the region. All articles are also freely available in PDF and HTML formats on the website. Readers
can submit names and addresses of individuals, NGOs, research institutions, schools and colleges, etc for inclusion
in the mailing list.
SUBMISSION OF MANUSCRIPTS
IOTN articles are peer reviewed by a member of the editorial board and a reviewer. In addition to invited and
submitted articles, IOTN also publishes notes, letters and announcements. We also welcome casual notes, anecdotal
accounts and snippets of information.
Manuscripts should be submitted by email to: [email protected]

If electronic submission is not possible, mail hard copies to:
Kartik Shanker
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)
659, 5th A Main Road, Bangalore 560024. India.
Manuscripts should be submitted in MS Word or saved as text or rich text format. Figures should not be embedded
in the text; they may be stored in EXCEL, JPG, TIF or BMP formats. High resolution figures may be requested after
acceptance of the article. In the text, citations should appear as: (Vijaya, 1982), (Silas et al., 1985), (Kar & Bhaskar,
1982). References should be arranged chronologically, and multiple references may be separated by a semi colon.
Please refer to IOTN issues or to the Guide to Authors on the website for formatting and style. Authors should
provide complete contact information including an email address and fax number.
Reference styles in list:

Vijaya, J. 1982. Turtle slaughter in India. Marine Turtle Newsletter 23: 2.
Silas, E.G., M. Rajagopalan, A.B. Fernando & S. S. Dan. 1985. Marine turtle conservation & management: A
survey of the situation in Orissa 1981/82 & 1982/83. Marine Fisheries Information Service Technical &
Extension Service 50: 13-23.
Pandav, B. 2000. Conservation & management of olive ridley sea turtles on the Orissa coast. PhD thesis. Utkal
University, Bhubaneswar, India.
Kar, C.S. & S. Bhaskar. 1982. The status of sea turtles in the Eastern Indian Ocean. In: The biology and conservation
of sea turtles (ed. K. Bjorndal), pp. 365-372. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C., USA.
This newsletter is produced with support from:
IOTN ONLINE IS AVAILABLE AT http://www.seaturtle.org/iotn

Indian Ocean Turtle Newsletter No. 1
Editorial
Kartik Shanker

659, 5th A Main Road, Hebbal, Bangalore 560024. India
Email: [email protected]
It gives me great pleasure to introduce the Indian Ocean The first issue has a focus on sea turtle conserva-
Turtle Newsletter, which will serve as a forum for tion in Orissa on the east coast of India. In this
discussing issues regarding the conservation and issue, we review legislation related to sea turtle
management of sea turtles and their habitats in South conservation in Orissa and evaluate its efficacy.
and Southeast Asia and the Indian Ocean. The newsletter We also present the views and perspectives of
aims to disseminate information in a timely manner about various stakeholders including traditional and
sea turtles and their habitats to government departments mechanised fisherfolk on sea turtle conservation
and other concerned government agencies, voluntary measures in Orissa. The issue includes profiles of
organizations, NGOs, fisherfolk associations, community various non government organisations working
groups, universities and students as well as other institu- in Orissa on fisheries and on sea turtle conserva-
tions and individuals involved with the conservation and tion. Finally the issue includes a bibliography of
management of sea turtles and their habitats. It will literature on sea turtles in Orissa.
provide a mechanism through which awareness about
the status of sea turtles and their habitats can be In forthcoming issues, we intend to focus on
disseminated to a wide audience, and will be a medium other parts of India and South Asia, Southeast
to communicate with the international community (re- Asia and the Indian Ocean islands. In keeping with
searchers, conservation organisations and other interested our philosophy of open access, the newsletter will
parties) about sea turtle related activity in the region. be distributed free to subscribers and will also be
available online.
A Review of Legislation and Conservation Measures for Sea Turtles in Orissa,

India
Aarthi Sridhar, Basudev Tripathy and Kartik Shanker
Coastal and Marine Conservation Programme

659, 5th A Main Road, Hebbal, Bangalore 560024. India
Introduction
accompanied by the sharp decrease in size of
In Orissa on the eastern coast of Indian occurs the well- adults suggest a potential or imminent decline in
known phenomenon of synchronous mass nesting - the the population, consistent with fishery-related
‘arribada’ - exhibited by the olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys mortality of at least 1,00,000 turtles since 1994,
olivacea). The mass nesting beaches are located at three and 10,000-15,000 turtles per year since 1999
sites - Gahirmatha, Rushikulya and the Devi River mouth (Pandav, 2000; Shanker et al., 2004b). Much of
(Pandav et al., 1998). Olive ridley turtles nesting at these this mortality is attributed to drowning in trawl
locations are part of a distinct genetic population that nets (Pandav and Choudhury, 1999), but recent
nest along the east coast of India (Shanker et al., 2004a). accounts suggest that gill nets may also cause large
The recent failure of arribadas in 1997 and 1998 scale mortality (Wright and Mohanty, 2001).
January, 2005 1
Fishing nets in Orissa range from artisanal shore been issued by the judiciary and official committees
seines, entanglement nets (trammel nets), hook and at the State level.
line fishing, a wide variety of gill nets and trawl nets.
Besides the incidental take from certain fishing Species protection under the Wild Life (Protection) Act,
operations, other threats to the turtles include 1972
Casuarina plantations along the nesting beaches, which
have caused a loss in the nesting habitat at the Devi Records show that till the mid 70’s Orissa openly
River mouth and artificial illumination from towns supplied local as well as distant markets like Kolkata
and highways at the Rushikulya site (Pandav et al.., with turtle meat and turtle eggs (Kar, 2001). The Wild
1998). Proposals for commercial ports and other Life Protection Act (WLPA) came into force in 1972;
large-scale anthropogenic activities near the mass subsequently, all sea turtles found on the Indian coast
nesting beaches are likely to pose a threat to this were included in the list of protected species in Sched-
population as well. Given the scenario of escalating ule I of the Act. The WLPA declared the consumption,
threats to the sea turtles and the marine environment trade, hunting and injury of turtles as prohibited, and
in general, it is necessary to reflect on the conserva- the enforcement of the Act eventually led to the decline
tion measures in the state, development threats to in turtle trade in Orissa by the 1980s (Kar, 2001).
the marine environment and existing conservation Significantly, the WLPA does not make a clear
and research efforts. distinction between incidental/accidental capture in
fishing nets and poaching. Therefore fisherfolk found
As one might expect, there is no single common with sea turtles in their fishing nets can be penalised in
view between the various categories of fisherfolk the same manner as poachers, irrespective of whether
(traditional and mechanised), government depart- the catch takes place within or outside a protected
ments, scientists and conservationists on the existing area. Enforcing officers are vested with considerable
official sea turtle protection measures in operation powers and the penalties of the WLPA are heavy,
in Orissa. The conflicts arising out of the lack of comprising a combination of a term of imprison-
agreement on conservation is also attributed to ment and fines. The nesting beaches and offshore
failure of all these groups to come together to work waters at Devi and Rushikulya, being turtle habitats
out effective, appropriate and commonly agreed by definition, are also required to be protected during
conservation measures. However, there has been a the breeding and nesting season by the Orissa Forest
gradual shift in this scenario and recently, diverse Department.
groups including the traditional fishworkers, turtle
biologists, local conservation groups and NGOs Declaration of the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary
met in December 2004 to address issues of common
concern, leading to the formation of the Orissa On 27th September 1997, the Government of Orissa
Marine Resources Conservation Consortium. In this declared Gahirmatha, one of the world’s largest
article, we review legislation related to sea turtle nesting beaches and it’s waters as the Gahirmatha
conservation in Orissa Marine Sanctuary (GMS) under section 26(1)(b) of
the WLPA. This comprises parts of the nesting beaches
Review of sea turtle conservation legislation (uninhabited islands and sand spits) and the near shore
in Orissa waters around the area. The marine sanctuary was
divided into a core area measuring 725.5 km2 and a
We present key events related to sea turtle conser- buffer zone measuring 709.5 km2. The total area of
vation legislation in Orissa, which is a combination the GMS measures 1435 km2. The notification of the
of species and habitat protection (Table 1). The key GMS states that no fishing activities are to be permitted
legislations in operation in the state are the Indian in the core area throughout the year. The WLPA also
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, the Orissa Marine does not mandate that the Government undertake a
Fisheries (Regulation) Act, 1982 and the Orissa consultative process of ‘settlement of rights’ (as
Marine Fisheries (Regulation) Rules, 1983 (Figure 1). provided in section 19-25 of the WLPA) if the
Numerous subsequent interventions and orders have proposed protected area is comprised of reserve
January, 2005 2
forests or territorial waters. The WLPA however registration of the fishing boats. However these
provides that ‘adequate measures should be taken to protect decisions were drafted in exclusivity with no proof
the occupational interests of local fishermen’. Section 26(2) of any consultation with local fisherfolk from the
states that ‘the right of innocent passage of vessels and boats region surrounding the sanctuary. This created
through the territorial waters shall not be affected by the notifi- problems in implementation. For example, the finer
cation’. details of enforcing these fishing regulations such as
proof of ‘innocent passage’, assessment of number
As proof of having taken adequate measures to proof marine fisherfolk requiring access rights, process
tect the interests of local fisherfolk, on 21st May 1998, of obtaining permits to pass through the core area
a High Power Committee (HPC) constituted by the of the GMS to the buffer zone were overlooked.
Government of Orissa met to decide on fishing rights Despite the problems in implementation at the
within the core and buffer zone of the GMS Gahirmatha Sanctuary, the State Government
(Government of Orissa, 1998). The HPC maintained through it’s High Power Committee, is pursuing the
that no fishing would be allowed in the core area. For idea of according Protected Area status (under the
the buffer area of the sanctuary, a region located for WLPA) to the Devi and Rushikulya areas (See Table
the most part beyond the core area, the HPC decided 1 - event dated 10.10.2003). However it is not clear
to permit only catamarans and crafts using motors what rights (fishing and passage rights) the local
less than 10 hp and monofilament nets (‘of smaller net people will have in these new Sanctuaries.
size and length’). This was also made a condition for
INDIA
ORISSA
Figure 1: Fisheries regulations for sea turtle conservation in Orissa
January, 2005 3
Turtle specific fishing regulations of the Orissa Marine Devi River mouth) and Rushikulya (Chilika lake mouth
Fisheries (Regulation) Act, 1982 to Rushikulya River mouth). The annual ban was for the
turtle season from January to May.
Since 1994, the Government of Orissa has been
issuing biennial orders under the Orissa Marine General fisheries management regulations and turtles
Fisheries (Regulation) Act (OMFRA), prohibiting
all fishing in the coastal waters of the Gahirmatha It is now being recognised that fisheries regulations play
nesting beach. The ban on fishing in these waters a very critical role in turtle conservation. By keeping
is round the year and is not only for the turtle mechanised vessels away from near shore waters,
season. It is reissued at the end of each term. The reproductive congregations are protected to a great
Fisheries Department of the Government of extent. Section 4(1) of the OMFRA empowers the State
Orissa introduced a seasonal prohibition on fishing Government to introduce regulations in any specified
by trawlers for a distance of 20 km from the area for different categories of fishing vessels and fishing
seashore at the Devi (Jatadhara River mouth to gear. Rule 16 (1) of the OMFR Rules states that the
Table 1: Turtle Conservation Measures and Related Laws

Date Regulation
Species protection
1972 Introduction of the Indian Wild Life Protection Act (WLPA). The olive ridley
turtle is currently listed on Schedule I, which affords maximum protection under
the Act
Fisheries management regulations
1982 – Orissa Marine Fisheries Regulation Act (OMFRA), 1982 and Rules introduced in
1983 1983
1983 OMFR Rules introduced. It outlined different fishing zones for different fishing
crafts
Habitat Protection
1994 OMFRA Biennial orders prohibiting fishing at Gahirmatha. Reissued periodically.
6.06.1997 OMFRA seasonal prohibition (Jan–May) on fishing by trawlers at Devi and
Rushikulya 20 km seaward radius. Reissued periodically.
27.09.1997 Declaration of the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary (GMS) under the WLPA.
10.10.2003 State High Power Committee (HPC) recommends that the State Government
consider proposals for the Devi and Rushikulya areas to be declared as Wildlife
Sanctuaries.
Fishing Rights
21.05.1998 State HPC issues restrictions on fishing within the Gahirmatha Sanctuary.
Fishing Gear Regulation
6.12.1997 OMFRA order mandating use of Turtle Excluder Devices (TEDs) on trawlers
17.04.2001 OMFR Rules mandating ‘mechanised fishing vessels’ to use TEDs
Judicial intervention
7.03.2003 Interim orders on turtle conservation from the Central Empowered Committee
(CEC) of the Supreme Court of India
10.10.2003 HPC prohibits fishing by trawlers and gill-netters in the Dhamra mouth, Devi
mouth and Rushikulya mouth from 1st November to 31st May, 2004
7.04.2004 Revised CEC directions on fishing regulations
January, 2005 4
waters five kilometres from the shore is reserved large meshed multifilament net), the large meshed
exclusively for non-mechanised traditional fishing crafts, monofilament pomfret net and the ring seine. Of
and that no other type of mechanised fishing vessel these, the former two are well known to result in
shall be allowed to operate in the area. Mechanised turtle mortality. It needs to be stated that this sort
fishing vessels (including trawlers) up to 15 meters of of self-regulation is becoming a rare occurrence and
length are allowed to operate only beyond five has been welcomed by conservationists, the judiciary
kilometres of the coastline. Current studies indicate that and the Government.
turtle congregations are found mainly within five
kilometres from the shore (Pandav, 2000; Tripathy, Judicial intervention for turtle protection
2004). Consequently a better implementation of this
fisheries regulation will reduce considerably trawler In a recent petition filed before the Central Em-
induced turtle mortality. The OMFRA also imposes a powered Committee (CEC) appointed by the Su-
ceiling on the number of mechanised vessels that can preme Court of India (Shri Alok Krishna Agarwal
be licensed to operate along the Orissa sea coast. The vs. Union of India State of Orissa and others), the
present limit, as notified under Form VI, Rule 17 of petitioner outlined matters related to non-implemen-
the OMFRA Rules, 1983, is one thousand vessels. There tation of turtle protection measures and other threats
are however a large number of illegal and unlicensed to turtles in Orissa. In it’s first interim directions in
vessels operating in violation of this rule. this petition, dated 7 th March 2003, the CEC
imposed a complete ban on all gill net boats
Gear regulation examples: The Turtle Excluder Device (TED) operating in the waters off the three mass-nesting
and self regulation by the OTFWU sites. However after much agitation from the tradi-
tional fishworker organisations, led by the OTFWU,
In the mid 1990s, the Government of United States these orders were revised. The final orders of the
of America modified Section 609 of Public Law 101- CEC dated April 2004 are detailed and pay more
162 of the Endangered Species Act, 1973 and made it attention to the nature of restrictions for the
mandatory for countries exporting shrimp to the U.S traditional fisherfolk. At the Devi and Rushikulya
to set in place a marine turtle conservation programme sites, trawlers are prohibited from fishing for the
comparable to that of the U.S (for a review, see Bache months of November till May for a distance of 20
and Frazier, in press). However, the US Government kms towards the sea from the high tide line (point
has been insisting on recognising only the usage of TEDs 3.1.1 of the 2004 CEC report). At these two sites,
as suitable conservation measures in order to permit in the offshore turtle congregation areas, artisanal
shrimp imports from India. Compelled to use TEDs, fishing (with sails and oars only, and in limited
shrimp exporting trawlers from India, particularly from numbers) is permitted. Motorised fishing boats of
Orissa, have been issued free TEDs by the Marine particular specification (using small mesh size,
Products Export Development Authority, an institution monofilament nets up to 300 metres) are permit-
under the Ministry of Commerce. Some attempts at ted in all areas except the congregation areas at these
popularising TEDs in Orissa have also been under- two sites. The CEC also stated that in addition to
taken with assistance from local NGOs like Project the sting ray net, the ring seine net and the sea bass
Swarajya . The OMFRA mandates that all trawl boats net, all nets measuring 140 mm and above, whether
in Orissa must use TEDs in their nets. All trawlers insist monofilament or multifilament are to be prohibited
that the accompanying catch - loss from the use of in Orissa, until there is sufficient proof that they are
Figure
TEDs is too high (for a review of TED not a threat to turtles (point 3.3.5 of the 2004 CEC
implementation, see Shanker and Kutty, in press). This report). The CEC also laid out specific orders
rule is blatantly violated throughout the state and not a regarding issuing of permits,licences and detailed
single trawler is known to use a TED in their nets. documentation of fishing crafts and gear and iden-
tification mechanisms.
On the other hand, the Orissa Traditional Fish Worker’s
Union (OTFWU) decided to spontaneously ban a few However, the CEC orders uphold the fishing regu-
nets along the entire Orissa coast – the sting ray net (a lations within the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary. In
January, 2005 5
effect, there continues to be a ban on fishing within draft map of the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary
the core area of the Marine Sanctuary for any comprised of a region measuring 65 kms in length,
category of fisherfolk and fishing practice. The and 10 kms in width (seaward distance). This included
existing regulations in the buffer zone also remain. the Wheeler islands (site of the Defence Research
While the OTFWU has welcomed, in general, the Development Organisation missile testing range) as
CEC’s revised April, 2004 orders, it is still advocating well as the site of the proposed Dhamra port.
for more relaxations within the Gahirmatha Marine However, the State Government in its letter No. 11693,
Sanctuary. It is to resolve some of these issues that dated 20th June 1997 requested that these areas be
collaborative actions on sea turtle conservation excluded. This request was accepted and the finally
planning and implementation are being initiated in notified area excluded the site of the Dharma port
Orissa and the Wheeler islands. Ironically, there is no evidence
to show that any consultation took place with local
Developmental activities around the Gahirmatha Marine fisherfolk on deciding conservation measures or
Sanctuary fishing restrictions in the GMS area prior to its
declaration. This is despite local fisherfolk and the
Anthropogenic activities near Gahirmatha and the Fisheries Department placing formal records
other nesting sites clearly include illegal aquaculture expressing their apprehensions on impacts of fishing
farms, proposed port construction and operation, restrictions on livelihoods. It appears that in the case
industrial sand mining, proposed construction of the GMS, defence and large-scale commercial
facilities for offshore oil exploration and artificial considerations were given priority while deciding the
illumination from industries, towns and other boundaries and quality of conservation in this
residential areas near the coast. The ‘Wildlife important region.
Conservation Strategy’ adopted by the Government
of India in 2002 states that lands falling within 10 In retrospect, it appears that the turtle conservation
km of any protected area should be declared an measures that have been introduced at various stages
Ecologically Fragile Zone. Such zones would have in Orissa have been ad hoc and not necessarily
the possibility of regulating environmentally destruc- appropriate to conservation needs of this population.
tive activities while permitting benign ones. There Protests from traditional fisher representatives
are also laws for the protection of the coastal envi- regarding livelihood concerns have been over a decade
ronment such as the Coastal Regulation Zone Noti- old but their involvement in official meetings on
fication, 1991 and the Water (Prevention and Control conservation measures only began in 2003. This was
of Pollution) Act, 1974. These regulate the activities preceded by a scenario of severe conflict between
of industries in the coastal zone. There are a number officers and fisherfolk at the three sites and subsequent
of activities on the coast that are in violation of protests and demonstrations by the fisher unions.
these laws. Some examples include the reported Turtle conservation measures are also most
release of untreated effluents by Oswal Chemicals comprehensive in dealing with fisheries related
and Fertilisers Ltd at Paradip and of Jayshree mortalities, in comparison to other threats such as
Chemicals at Ganjam, the extensive prawn farms plantations and lighting. Implementation efforts have
along the Kendrapara and Jagatsingpur coast etc. also focused on fisheries related mortalities. However
Proposed projects such as the proposed commercial there is still much disagreement between several
port at Dhamra, around twelve kilometres north categories of fisherfolk over which fishing regulations
of the nesting beach at Gahirmatha, lie outside the and turtle conservation regulations they are willing to
boundary of the Sanctuary but will have significant follow. The conservation measures that regulate
negative impacts on this ecologically sensitive site. fisheries need immediate attention. This process of
review and planning for sea turtle conservation in
Conclusion Orissa will require the involvement of fisherfolk from
various categories at all stages.
It is of interest to note that prior to the declaration
of the Gahirmatha Wildlife Sanctuary, the earlier
January, 2005 6
Literature Cited
Bache, S.J. & J. Frazier. In press. International instruments Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & K. Shanker. 1998. The
and marine turtle conservation. In: Sea turtles of the Indian olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) in Orissa : An
subcontinent (eds. K. Shanker & B.C. Choudhury) Universities urgent call for a intensive and integrated conservation
Press, Hyderabad. India. programme. Current Science 75: 1323-1328.
Government of Orissa. 1998. ‘Minutes of the Meeting of Shanker, K. & R. Kutty. in press. Sailing the flagship fantastic:
the High Power Committee under the Chairmanship of the myth and reality of sea turtle conservation in India. Maritime
Hon’ble Chief Minister, Orissa on Protection of Olive Ridley Studies (Special Issue)
Sea Turtles’
Shanker, K., J. Ramadevi, B.C. Choudhury, L. Singh and
Kar, C.S. 2001. Review of threats to sea turtles in Orissa. In: R.K. Aggarwal. 2004a. Phylogeography of olive ridley turtles
Proceedings of the Workshop for the development of a National Sea (Lepidochelys olivacea) on the east coast of India : implications
Turtle Conservation Action Plan, Bhubaneswar, Orissa (eds. K. for conservation theory. Molecular Ecology 13: 1899-1909.
Shanker & B.C. Choudhury), pp 15-19. Wildlife Institute of
India, Dehradun. Shanker, K., B. Pandav & B.C. Choudhury. 2004b. An
assessment of olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea) nesting
OTFWU. 2004. Letter to the Central Empowered Committee, population in Orissa, India. Biological Conservation 115: 149-
dated 19th February 2004 160.
Pandav, B. 2000. Conservation & management of olive ridley sea Tripathy, B. 2004. A study of the offshore distribution of olive
turtles on the Orissa coast. PhD thesis. Utkal University, ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) in the coastal waters of
Bhubaneswar, India. Rushikulya rookery along the Orissa coast, India. Wildlife
Conservation Society – India Program Small Grant, Centre
Pandav, B & B.C. Choudhury. 1999. An update on the For Wildlife Studies, Bangalore, India.
mortality of the olive ridley sea turtles in Orissa, India. Marine
Turtle Newsletter 83: 10-12. Wright, B. & B. Mohanty. 2002. Olive ridley mortality in gill
nets in Orissa. Kachhapa 6:18.
Perspectives of the Traditional Fishworkers on Sea Turtle Conservation
K. Aleya
Secretary, Orissa Traditional Fish Worker’s Union, Ganjam

Sana Aryapali, PO: Bada Aryapali, Via: Ganjam, Orissa, 761 020
E-mail: [email protected]
The Orissa Traditional Fish Worker’s Union (OTFWU) below:

is the largest union in the State representing the interests • The present system of protection solely entrusts
of traditional fishworkers of Orissa. Recently the union the forest department with powers that are often
has actively advocated for the traditional fishworkers abused at the village level.
stating that excessive turtle conservation measures have • Traditional fishermen must be made partners in
impacted their livelihoods. We have articulated our conservation efforts at all levels.
responses to the official sea turtle conservation • No traditional fishing gear should be banned
measures in Orissa. Key points of the appeal by without adequate and scientific study and data.
OTFWU to the Supreme Court’s Central Empowered
Committee, dated 19th February 2004 are detailed
January, 2005 7
• Fishworkers displaced due to ban on any should decide upon the exact period, nature and
particular gear should be provided with adequate extent of restriction on fishing activities depending
financial assistance for shifting to any other upon field observations.
allowable gear. • The OTFWU also states that following fisheries
• OTFWU will voluntarily ban the use of 3 types management measures need to be undertaken as
of nets that trap turtles. part of a more holistic marine conservation
• Areas within the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary approach:
that do not have turtle congregations should be
declared as buffer areas. Within these buffer areas - Stop collection of prawn seeds from sea and creeks.
the existing fishing restrictions need to be revised - Stop intensive aquaculture in the coastal zone as per
to allow traditional fishing practices that do not the SC judgment by Justice Kuldip Singh, 1996.
impact turtles. - Strict implementation of monsoon ban on trawling
• In case of a complete ban on any particular area from 15th June to 31st August.
for a particular period, all affected fishermen - Enact National Marine Fishing Regulation Act to
of that are must be compensated for the loss cover entire EEZ.
of income for the same period. Adequate - Diversify the existing trawlers and mechanised fleet
financial allocations for this purpose must be a to harvest deep-sea resources and thereby reduce
component of the conservation program. overcapacity in traditional waters.
• Traditional fisherfolk using traditional gears - Stop water pollution from industrial establishments,
should be differentiated from mechanised gears sewerage, tourism, commercial ports and oil
like trawl nets. exploration etc.
• For each of the turtle congregation areas, joint - Bring about aquatic reform conferring rights to the
management/ monitoring committees traditional fishing community to own and manage
comprising of traditional fishermen, officials and water bodies, fishing crafts and gears and distribution/
scientists should be formed. This committee marketing of fish.
Turtle conservation from the perspective of Orissa’s trawling industry
Project Swarajya
Ganesh Ghat, Bakharabad, Cuttack-753002, Orissa

E-mail: [email protected]
Over the years, the trawler associations of Orissa and vociferous statements. From these
through their representatives have been expressing communications, their overall concerns can be figured
their reactions towards turtle conservation measures out. Based on these statements and also from informal
enforced by the Government. These have ranged discussions intermittently held with the trawler
from outright rejection of the theory that holds associations since then, we may sum up their overall
trawling to be the major cause of turtle mortality, concerns as follows:
to making suggestions for conservation measures
• Indian trawlers should not be forced to use any
that meets their interests and involves them in field
prototypes or modified designs of TEDs, since
level implementation. In one instance i.e. in a
these are American innovations, which are useful
Workshop-cum-Demonstration on Turtle Excluder
only for targeted shrimp trawling which takes place
Devices (TEDs) held at Paradip in February 2002,
in US waters. These are not suited for India where
the representatives of trawler associations of the
mixed trawling of shrimp, fish and crab of
State articulated their position vis-à-vis the turtle
different varieties and sizes of catch goes on. This
related fishing restrictions and made quite elaborate
January, 2005 8
is true even in case of the so-called Indian trawler • If caught within the prohibited zones, a trawler
friendly CIFT TED - the latest design imposed may be caught and a case registered against it
on trawlers by the Government - which has been by the appropriate designated officials, with no
found to result in more than 20% of their fish arrest of persons or seizure of boat, net, catch
catch loss - an unviable proposition. etc. If found guilty, the concerned trawler may
• In place of TEDs, an indigenous device needs to be awarded with pecuniary fines at the end of
be evolved under the collaborative efforts of the the litigation. The legal proceedings have to be
Government and the trawling industry, that completed expeditiously within a time frame.
effectively minimizes the loss of fish catch while Such an approach is convenient for both the
safeguarding turtles from incidental catch. trawling industry and enforcement agencies.
• If the government earmarks an area for seasonal • The current penalties are excessive by any
closure of all fishing operations such as that reckoning and pushed quite a few fisher families
currently existing at Gahirmatha, there is no need to complete ruination. This is more so when
to make the usage of TEDs mandatory all along we consider the fact that turtles if ever caught
the Orissa coast. in trawl nets are only incidental catch and not a
• The boundaries of the fishing-prohibited area in result of intentional poaching. Again the cases
the coastal waters should be clearly demarcated so should not be forwarded to the court since the
as to be visible from a distance, possibly by using exasperating delay in the disposal of cases in
solar powered buoys. the courts simply tells upon the survival of the
• There is presently no boundary and no method to concerned fisher families.
prove that a fishing boat has entered a prohibited • The charter of rights for marine fishing
area. There are also no clear procedural guidelines communities vis-à-vis the various legislations
to make arrests and seizures. Therefore the act of and regulations and their enforcement by
making such arrests and seizures without any clearly different authorities should be formulated by
laid-down procedure is unfair. the Government in consultation with the
• There is no reason why during the non-turtle season, concerned fisher agencies and spelt out clearly.
fishing should not be allowed in the Gahirmatha • Malpractices such as extortion and bribery by
Marine Sanctuary and the congregation areas along some staff in the Forest Department in
the coastal waters of Orissa. connection with turtle cases should be
• The exact area and location of turtle congregation completely stopped.
zones off the Orissa coast should be reviewed and • The trawler associations are willing to extend
redrawn from time to time in a collective exercise their wholehearted cooperation to all turtle
by both enforcement agencies and the trawling conservation measures at the ground level,
industry, in view of periodical changes found in provided these are adopted with their consent.
the behaviour of migrating, congregating and Secondly their concerned personnel should be
nesting turtles in choosing new sites and financially remunerated using turtle conservation
abandoning old ones. funds with the Government in a manner similar
• The prohibitive or restrictive measures on fishing to other technical or enforcement agencies.
operations in the waters of Orissa imposed for • The Government should make efforts to
the purpose of turtle conservation or the involve the trawling community in research and
conservation of other forms of biodiversity development programmes around turtle
should be reviewed and reformulated on the basis conservation, marine fisheries and biodiversity,
of dialogues between enforcement agencies and and also in promoting eco-tourism along Orissa
the marine fishing industries of the State. coast.
January, 2005 9
Biological Studies on Sea Turtles on the Coast of Orissa
Kartik Shanker1, Basudev Tripathy1 and Bivash Pandav2
1-Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)

659, 5th A Main Road, Hebbal, Bangalore 560024. India.
2- Wildlife Institute of India
PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India
Several turtle biologists have studied the olive ridley mass nesting beaches. More significantly, the results
turtle in Orissa over the last decade and have revealed the distinctiveness of the population on
developed strategies towards turtle conservation. the east coast of India, and suggested that they
Summarised below are some relevant findings of may be ancestral to populations in the Atlantic
these studies: and Pacific oceans (Shanker et al., 2004b).
• Satellite imagery studies suggest that the failure
• An increase in mortality was documented from of mass nesting at Gahirmatha in 1997 and 1998
a few thousands in the early 1990s to more than is due to natural causes such as erosion and
10,000 per year by the mid 1990s (Pandav, reduction in the nesting habitat due to the impacts
2000). A review of data suggested that this of successive cyclones (Prusty et al., 2000).
population may be on the verge of a decline,
based on evidence from the failure of arribadas Conservation recommendations
in recent years, a decline in adult sizes and high
fishery related mortality (Shanker et al., 2004a). • There should be more effort to identify and
• Nearshore surveys have shown that sea turtles monitor reproductive patches. Identification and
occur in discrete areas which have been named protection of these reproductive patches from
as ‘reproductive patches’. These reproductive trawling and other harmful fishing practices will
patches have been located off the coasts of significantly reduce turtle mortality.
Gahirmatha (Pandav, 2000; Ram, 2000) and • Protection of the reproductive patches (rather
Rushikulya (Tripathy, 2004), and are expected than the entire marine sanctuary) is a more effective
to occur in the offshore waters of other mass and efficient way of utilising the limited
nesting beaches such as Devi River mouth. The manpower resources of the state, and can involve
patches are about 50 – 75 km2 in size, and local fishing communities.
extend to a distance of about 5 – 6 km offshore. • Monitoring of turtle nesting and mortality should
• The Wildlife Institute of India tagged 10,000 also be carried out by independent agencies to
nesting turtles and 1600 mating pairs in offshore evaluate success of management measures.
waters from 1995 – 1999. Results showed that • While reducing current mortality, turtle
olive ridley turtles migrate between mass nesting conservation strategies should be effective in the
beaches (Pandav, 2000). Tagged turtles were long term.
recovered from southern Tamil Nadu and Sri • The nesting habitat of sea turtles must be
Lanka, indicating that at least some of the olive protected; adverse impacts of Casuarina
ridleys that nest in Orissa migrate to these areas. plantations and beach lighting need to be
• In satellite telemetry studies conducted in 2001, mitigated.
3 of 4 turtles remained in the offshore waters • Rigorous assessments of various developmental
of Orissa between April and July, 2001, moving activities on coastal and offshore habitats of olive
within 50 and 200 km of the coast. A fourth ridley turtles are required
turtle migrated to the coast of Sri Lanka in • Satellite telemetry studies will provide important
August 2001. information about migration and offshore
• Genetic studies confirmed the results of tagging distributions of turtles during breeding and non-
and showed that there is no genetic difference breeding seasons.
between nesting populations in each of the
January, 2005 10
Literature Cited
Pandav, B. 2000. Conservation & management of olive ridley sea Pondicherry University, Pondicherry, India.
turtles on the Orissa coast. PhD thesis. Utkal University,
Bhubaneswar, India. Shanker, K., B. Pandav & B.C. Choudhury. 2004a. An
assessment of the olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea)
Pandav, B. & B.C. Choudhury. 2000. Conservation & management nesting population in Orissa, India. Biological Conservation
of olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) in Orissa. Final 115: 149 – 160.
Report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun.
Shanker, K., J. Rama Devi, B.C. Choudhury, L. Singh &
Prusty, B.G., R.K. Sahoo & S.D. Mehta. 2000. Natural causes R.K. Aggarwal. 2004b. Phylogeography of olive ridley
lead to mass exodus of olive ridley turtles from Ekakulanasi, turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) on the east coast of India:
Orissa, India: a need for identification of alternate sites. In: implications for conservation theory. Molecular Ecology 13:
Sea Turtles of the Indo-Pacific: Research, Conservation and 1899-1909.
Management (eds. N. Pilcher & G. Ismail) pp. 189-197. ASEAN
Academic Press, London, UK. Tripathy, B. 2004. A study of the offshore distribution of olive
ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) in the coastal waters of
Ram, K. 2000. Behavioural ecology of the olive ridley sea turtle Rushikulya rookery along the Orissa coast, India. Wildlife
Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, 1827) during the breeding Conservation Society – India Program Small Grant, Centre
period. M. Sc. Dissertation, Salim Ali School of Ecology, For Wildlife Studies, Bangalore, India
Views of Fishworker Support Organisations on Turtle Conservation Measures

in Orissa
International Collective in Support of Fishworkers
27, College Road, Chennai 600006. India

The International Collective in Support of Fishworkers alternative livelihood. Incentives to switch to

has been involved in researching the interaction between more selective gear should also be considered.
fisheries and turtle conservation in Orissa. While several • Recognising and protecting the rights of safe
of the views in our note overlap with those of other passage: In the implementation of turtle
groups such as the traditional fishworker groups and conservation measures, right of safe passage
those of turtle biologists, certain others are exclusive through the marine sanctuary and ‘no-fishing
opinions. Our views on turtle conservation measures zones’ should be better recognized and protected.
and the highlights of our note are presented below: This is an important issue for several
communities living in the vicinity of the marine
• There should be strict implementation of the 5- sanctuary, who have to cross the core area of
km near-shore ‘non-trawl zone’. the Gahirmatha sanctuary to fish beyond, and
• Protection of reproductive patches is an efficient face harassment on a regular basis.
and cost effective conservation method.
• Regulating the use of certain gear: There should be Turtle Conservation Measures Useful in the
no blanket proscription of all forms of gillnets, Medium and Long Term
which is the mainstay of the fishers of Orissa.
• Compensation should be given for livelihood • Review of legislation: There is need for
opportunities foregone. A compensation package considerable improvement of the scope of
for fishing opportunities foregone should be legislation for turtle protection, especially with
worked out, including provisions for earning an regard to turtle-fisheries interactions. Instead of
total protection regimes for turtles, it may be
January, 2005 11
judicious to move into conservation regimes for • Hand-held global positioning system (GPS)
all the coastal living resources, including turtles. instruments should be distributed to fishers in both
In Orissa, as well as in other parts of India, there mechanized and non-mechanized categories so that
is a need to develop a conservation plan not if prior information is given to the fishers about
only for marine fisheries within territorial waters the location of reproductive patches, they can, with
but also for the whole of the exclusive economic the aid of GPS, determine the location of such
zone. patches and avoid fishing there. All fishers should
• There should also be a proper operational be prohibited to fish in such patches
definition of fishing in fisheries legislation. There • Traditional fishworkers must be made equal and
should be effective and transparent ways to effective partners in conservation efforts at all
determine what constitutes fishing within the levels.
marine sanctuary or ‘no-fishing zones’. • There should be greater dissemination of
• There should be an improved understanding information about conservation measures and
about turtle-fisheries interactions. regulations in place, particularly among fishworkers.
• Measures must be undertaken to reduce the total This, in combination with professional training of
fishing effort. enforcement officers responsible for apprehending
• Awareness and training programmes should be fishing vessels, should ensure that unnecessary
undertaken among fishing communities. harassment of fishers and increasing opportunities
• There needs to be better socio-economic data. for bureaucratic corruption, are avoided.
Reliable socio-economic data about communities • Conservation programmes should address the
dependent on fisheries resources in turtle habitats range of factors that contribute to turtle mortality,
should be collected to better assess the impact including non-fishery factors such as industrial and
of turtle conservation measures on local urban pollution of the sea, development projects
livelihoods. such as ports, military establishments and
• There should be training and better coordination operations, oil and gas exploration, mineral mining
among enforcement officials. from the coastal areas, intensive prawn culture,
• Use of VMS and GPS for better implementation collection of prawn seeds (larva) with fine-meshed
and enforcement: Satellite-based vessel nets, and uncontrolled and irresponsible tourism,
monitoring systems (VMS) should be introduced and bring them within the ambit of conservation
to track fishing vessel movement in fishing programmes.
grounds. All mechanized fishing vessels should • Conservation programmes should take a holistic,
be brought under the ambit of such a ecosystem approach towards conservation,
programme with financial assistance from the management and sustainable use of all the coastal
government. and marine living resources, including turtles.
Initiatives towards Consensus - the Orissa Marine Resources Conservation

Consortium
K. Aleya
Coordinator, Orissa Marine Resources Conservation Consortium

Sana Aryapali, PO. Bada Aryapali, Via: Ganjam, Orissa, 761 020
E-mail- [email protected]
Stakeholders in the turtle-fisheries scenario have been space whereby the turtle-fisheries stakeholders could
perceived as being either “pro-turtle” (anti-people) come together to discuss and address important
or “pro-people” (anti-turtle). Throughout the last problems arising out of turtle-fisheries interactions.
decade there has been no conducive platform or It was expressed by some stakeholders such as the
January, 2005 12
traditional fishworkers group that there should be a • To liase with the state government, NGOs,
common platform to discuss the turtle-fisheries issue. central government, CEC, fishing communities
In December 2004, divergent groups comprising and other policy level institutions and bodies to
conservationists, biologists, fisherfolk NGOs and other achieve the objectives of the OMRCC.
interested persons met to form a voluntary and non-
official sea turtle conservation consortium in Orissa, Members of the OMRCC
which would be beneficial to both conservation as
well as livelihoods. The group has been named as the • Representatives from the OTFWU
Orissa Marine Resources Conservation Consortium. • Operation Kachhapa and other local marine
conservation NGOs
The mission of the OMRCC was declared to be ‘To • Representatives from marine fishworkers’
ensure sustainable use of marine living resources and cooperative societies
livelihoods’. • Marine scientists, turtle biologists, fisheries
experts
The objectives of the consortium are: • Marine resource conservation and management
• To reduce and prevent the over-exploitation of experts
marine resources of Orissa.
• To protect the rights of the traditional fisherfolk in The OMRCC shall endeavour to include other
Orissa. groups such as:
• To define the rights, resources, responsibility and • Trawler representatives from different areas
roles of the various stakeholders in marine • Panchayat Raj Institutions related to coastal areas
conservation in Orissa. • Fish traders (particularly those associated with
• To work towards sustainable livelihoods of traditional fishworkers)
traditional fisherfolk in Orissa.
• To promote and engage in the conservation of Coordination
threatened marine life in Orissa.
• To conduct periodic assessments of the The OMRCC shall have one coordinator and two
effectiveness of sea turtle conservation measures assistant coordinators. The ter m of these
in Orissa. coordinators shall be three months. The present
• To conduct periodic assessments of the impacts coordinator is K. Aleya from the Orissa Traditional
of sea turtle conservation measures on the Fish Worker’s Union. Assistant Coordinators are
livelihoods of fisherfolk of Orissa. Biswajit Mohanty (Operation Kachhapa) and Aarthi
• To promote and facilitate collaborative sea turtle Sridhar (Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and
and fishery resource conservation actions in Orissa. the Environment). A group of facilitators have been
• To evolve and promote a common sea turtle identified to provide inputs and support on specific
conservation strategy developed by various areas such as advocacy (Ashis Senapati), NGO and
stakeholders represented in the OMRCC. civil society groups (Dolli Dash), community groups
• To develop conflict management mechanisms to (Buddhimanta Rao), participatory research (Basudev
address fisheries and conservation related issues in Tripathy) and natural resource management (Dr. N.P.
Orissa. Gantayat).
• To advocate against polluting activities and
environmentally unsustainable development The mission, objectives, membership and
practices in the coastal areas of Orissa. operational aspects of the OMRCC were decided
• To define and promote indigenous, innovative through a collective process but these are liable to
technology for sustainable harvesting of marine change based on changing needs and requirements.
resources. Therefore, any changes in the functioning and the
• To develop eco-friendly indigenous markets for present principles and operation of the OMRCC
marine resources of Orissa. would be possible with the collective consent of
the members.
January, 2005 13
The Dhamra Port in Orissa
Pankaj Sekhsaria
Kalpavriksh, Apt. 5 Shree Dutta Krupa,

908 Deccan Gymkhana, Pune 411004. Maharashtra.
The proposed Dhamra minor port is located just environmental legislation in the country, allowing for
north of the boundary of the Bhitarkanika National the development of at least a 100 such ‘minor’ ports
Park on the Orissa coast and about 10 km away along the country’s coastline. Many, including Dhamra,
from the Gahirmatha Marine Sanctuary. The in Orissa, Kulpi in West Bengal, Positra in Gujarat and
proposed port, located in the immediate vicinity of Tadri in Karnataka are located in areas that are
this extremely important and fragile zone, was ecologically extremely sensitive.
granted environmental clearance not by the Ministry
of Environment and Forests (MoEF), but by the Presumably, the reason to exclude a minor port from
Ministry of Surface Transport (MoST) of the environment clearance is that it is ‘minor’, investment
Government of India. This bizarre situation has its is limited, land requirements are negligible, not many
origins in July 1997, when the MoEF amended the people will be affected, and the overall environmental
1991 Coastal Zone Regulation (CRZ) notification impact will be minimal if not negligible. The reality
under the Environment Protection Act (EPA), 1986 on the ground is different. The difference between a
and handed over power to the MoST to grant major and a minor port, strangely, is not of size or
environmental clearance to port projects. The MoST’s quantum of investment, but of jurisdiction alone.
clearance powers were finally taken back three years While the major ports (such as Kandla, Cochin,
later in 2000, but before this happened the MoST Chennai. Paradip and Vishakapatnam) are under the
had already granted clearance to the port at Dhamra. Central Government, minor ports are under the
The other equally bizarre aspect is the nomenclature charge of state governments. The proposed port at
of the port project as ‘minor’. Minor ports have Dhamra is to be developed over an area of nearly
another clear and rather exceptional exemption from 1,000 acres, and another 3,000 acres are being acquired
the Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) for other project-related development activities. The
notification also promulgated under the EPA, 1986. proposed investment is about Rs. 1,500 crores (~ USD
They don’t need to go through the EIA process 300 million). As per the original notification, all projects
and as a result getting clearances for minor ports exceeding an investment of Rs. 50 crores (USD 10
has been rather simple for state governments and million) have to go through the EIA process, yet minor
project proponents. ports with more than Rs. 1,000 crores (USD 200
million) investment are still exempt from the
In 1994, the Ministry of Environment and Forests Environmental Impact Assessment process.
(MoEF) issued its ‘Environment Impact Assessment’
(EIA) notification. Meant as a tool to ensure that At present, the Indian corporate bodies involved in
developmental projects did not ride rough shod over the port project at Dhamra are believed to include
environmental concerns it listed 29 (later increased ICICI Bank, construction major Larsen & Toubro
to 32) industrial and developmental activities that (L&T) and Tata Steel. In October 2004, Tata Steel
needed environmental clearance from the and L&T were reported to have signed a deal for the
Government of India. Clause 3, Schedule I of the construction of the port valued in excess of Rs. 1,500
notification contains this list of projects which crores. Tata Steel has also announced plans to set up a
includes ports, harbours, airports (except minor ports Rs. 8,000 crore (USD 1.6 billion), six million tonne,
and harbours). Why an exception was made for integrated steel plant at Duburi in the neighbouring
minor ports is not very clear. However, this exception Jajpur district and invest another Rs. 5,000-6,000 crore
has created one of the biggest loopholes in (USD 1 billion) to develop iron ore mines in the
January, 2005 14
Keonjhar and Sundergarh districts. In addition, there Recent studies reveal congregations of nesting turtles
is a proposed Bhadrak-Dhamra railway line. Tata up to six kilometre offshore and 12 km south of
officials have been quoted as saying that the Gahirmatha. This is a fraction of the turtle
development of this port is critical to all their other population that would be affected. Researchers
investments in the region. remind us repeatedly that we do not yet have enough
data on offshore turtle movements. But it is not
More recently, in August 2004, South Korean steel difficult to imagine the impact of port construction
maker Posco and Australian mining major BHP Billiton and operations activity. Some 50 million cubic
jointly approached the Orissa Government with an metres (cu. m.) of silt are to be dredged initially,
even larger investment proposal: a 10 million tonne followed by an annual two million cubic metres every
integrated steel plant, that would include iron ore single year. Subsequent shipping traffic, oil spills,
mining, setting up a coke plant and power generation. chemical leaks, illumination and pollution from
The proposed investment is an enormous Rs. 39,000 townships and other habitation would further impact
crore (USD 8 billion) over 10 years. Like the Tata turtles and the marine ecosystem. The Central
proposal, this too mentions a port at Dhamra. And Empowered Committee’s (CEC) July 2004 report
their steel plant location is also Duburi, or perhaps to the Supreme Court states: “The present site (Dhamra
Dhamra itself. This cumulative proposed investment port)”, “will seriously impact Gahirmatha’s nesting turtles
of Rs. 55,000 crores (> US 10 billion) is obviously and could lead to the beach being abandoned by the marine
attractive to the state government. creatures. It is therefore necessary that an alternative site is
located for this port”.
Chronology of events related to the Dhamra port

(Source: Petition filed in the Orissa High Court by Wildlife Society of Orissa and others, 2000)
Mar. 1881: Dhamra notified as a port (Chandbali).

Jun. 1931: Port limit extended, only a small fishing jetty on Dhamra river.
Sep. 1972: Olive ridley turtles included in Schedule I, Wildlife (Protection) Act.
Apr. 1975: Notification for the declaration of Bhitarkanika Sanctuary issued.
1978: Government establishes fishing jetty on Dhamra river within port limits.
Oct. 1988: Draft notification for the declaration of the 367 sq. km. Bhitarkanika National Park.
Present Dhamra site within national park boundary.
1994: Environment Impact Assessment notification issued under Environment Protection Act, 1986
exempting minor ports from its purview.
Jun. 1997: State government issues letter to reduce area of Bhitarkanika National Park to ensure
Dhamra is outside the boundaries.
Jul. 1997: Coastal Regulation Zone notification amended conferring power on the Ministry of Surfac
Transport (MoST) to grant environmental clearance to ports.
Sep. 1997: Notification declaring the Gahirmatha Wildlife Sanctuary issued.
Oct. 1997: International Sea Ports Pvt. Ltd., (with Larsen & Toubro as major stake holder), gets an E I A
report prepared by Kirloskar Consultants, Pune.
Dec. 1997: Fresh proclamation issued for Bhitarkanika National Park.
Apr. 1998: Orissa government asks the MoST to clear Dhamra port.
Sep. 1998: Final notification for 145 sq. km. Bhitarkanika National Park issued. Dhamra site now
outside park boundaries.
Jan. 2000: The MoST grants clearance to Dhamra port.
Mar. 2000: 20th Annual Sea Turtle Symposium passes resolution expressing concern over Dhamra port
Dec. 2003: Lead financier ICICI Bank suggests modifications in the concession agreement for the
project and interest in its construction is revived.
Feb. 2004: Tata Steel expresses interest in joint venture with L&T.
January, 2005 15
Jul. 2004: Supreme Court appointed Central Empowered Committee says: “The present site (Dhamra)
will seriously impact Gahirmatha’s nesting turtles and could lead to the beach being abandoned
by the marine creatures. It is therefore necessary that an alternative site is located for this port.”
Aug. 2004: Korean Steel Major Posco and Australian mining company BHP-Billiton express interest
in an integrated iron ore mining, steel plant and Dhamra port construction project with proposed investment
of Rs. 39,000 crores.
Sep. 2004: International campaign to save Dhamra gathers steam.
Oct. 2004: Tata Steel and L&T sign agreement for construction of Dhamra port.
Modified and reprinted with permission from Sanctuary Asia Magazine, December 2004
Operation Kachhapa & the Sea Turtles of Orissa
Belinda Wright1 & Biswajit Mohanty2
1 - Project Director, Operation Kachhapa

Wildlife Protection Society of India, M-52, Greater Kailash, Part -1, New Delhi 110048. India.
2 - Project Coordinator, Operation Kachhapa
Wildlife Society of Orissa, Shantikunj, Link Road, Cuttack 753012. India.
The olive ridley in Orissa with the Wildlife Society of Orissa (WSO) and the
Orissa Forest Department. Operation Kachhapa
The olive ridley turtle is known for its spectacular (kachhapa is the Oriya word for turtle) has successfully
mass nesting behaviour. There are only three places built up a public image for sea turtle conservation in
in the world where this unique natural phenomenon Orissa. The programme’s main objectives are
- known as an arribada (Spanish for ‘arrival’) - occurs. prevention of mortality by improving patrolling of
One of them is in the state of Orissa on India’s illegal fishing zones, collecting data on turtle mortality
eastern coast. But over the past decade the turtles and illegal fishing, building public support for turtle
have been facing increasing pressures off the coast conservation, and fighting legal battles in court.
of Orissa. Illegal trawling and gill netting has
devastated their populations. While traditional fishing OpK assisted enforcement agencies by hiring sea-going
methods pose little problem to the turtles, large patrol boats, providing equipment and support to
mechanised fishing vessels dragging trawl nets patrol staff, and by serving as a co-ordination centre
behind them trap and drown tens of thousands of for the various enforcement agencies involved in turtle
turtles as they congregate offshore to mate. Large- protection. OpK field staff also carry out turtle
scale development projects – such as the construction mortality counts outside the Gahirmatha Marine
of a mega port, and offshore drilling for natural Sanctuary and provide the authorities with
gas – situated in the turtle’s congregation areas and information on illegal trawler movement, illegal night
migration paths are creating increasing pressure for fishing and gill netting. These time-consuming tasks
the sea turtles of Orissa. involve walking and cycling along vast stretches of
the coastline.
Operation Kachhapa
OpK receives immense support from the national
To reduce turtle mortality and safeguard the future and state media. It informs the media about mortality,
of the species, the Wildlife Protection Society of nesting and hatching events, offshore mating and
India (WPSI) launched “Operation Kachhapa” casualties. As a result of this continuous liaisoning,
(OpK) in 1998. The programme is run in partnership the mortality of the olive ridley along Orissa’s shores
January, 2005 16
has dominated the news for the past six years, leading measures. Further, the CEC also passed orders
to growing public concern. OpK also runs a Turtle asking the department to involve local fishermen in
Interpretation Centre, which is aimed at school turtle protection measures. In April 2004, the CEC
children, in the state capital of Bhubaneshwar, and is issued further recommendations on turtle protection
the main source of information on sea turtle activity activities.
in Orissa.
Dhamra Port
As part of its awareness programme, ‘wandering
minstrels’ trained by OpK travel to fishing villages The construction of a large port has been proposed
along the coast and present song, dance and story- on the mouth of the Dhamra River, adjoining
telling shows highlighting turtle conservation issues, the Bhitarkanika National Park. The site is 7 km north
ecological significance of the olive ridley, and how of the nesting beaches on Nasi I and II islands, and
traditional fishing communities can use existing laws 10 km north of the nesting site in Gahirmatha
to protect their livelihoods. They have performed in Marine Sanctuary. This area contains the world’s
over 150 villages in Ganjam, Puri and Jagatsinghpur largest population of the olive ridley. Large
districts. They also put up posters and banners about congregations of breeding turtles are found at the
turtle conservation issues along their travels. entry channel to the proposed port in front of the
Dhamra River. Heavy shipping traffic – including
Legal Case cargo ships with as much as 120,000 DWT
capacities – will cut through turtle congregations.
Implementation of marine fishing regulations would Light and chemical pollution is inevitable. In addition,
ensure the survival of the sea turtles as well as traditionalthere is a further risk of the introduction of exotic
fishermen. However, the regulations are openly flouted species during the discharge of ballast water. The
by large mechanised trawlers and gill netters, with construction of the approach channel (15 km long
devastating consequences for the turtles, as well as and 230 m wide) will result in the dredging and
traditional fishermen who are unable to compete with dispersion of nearly 40 million cubic metres of
these boats and lose their catch to them. WPSI and ocean floor bed, destroying the benthic fauna that
the Wildlife Society of Orissa had originally filed a the congregating turtles feed on. However, the CEC
case in the High Court in Orissa asking, among other in its orders dated 6th April, 2004 has directed the
things, for the implementation of existing fishing state government to reconsider relocation of the
regulations. However, the mechanised fishing boat port in view of its likely impact on sea turtles.
owners are a large and politically influential body in
Orissa, and this slowed the case down. Though there Reliance Industries Limited (RIL)
were a series of court orders to implement the law,
the state government dragged its feet. RIL is India’s largest private company and it has
aggressively pursued oil and natural gas exploration
Meanwhile, Mr. Alok Krishna Agarwal, a turtle lover in India and abroad. The Bay of Bengal is reported
and an advocate of the Supreme Court of India, filed to be one of the richest reservoirs of hydrocarbons
a case with the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), in the world, due to sediments deposited by rivers
which has been set up by the Supreme Court of India flowing across the Indian subcontinent. In 2003,
specifically to look into, and speedily decide on, WPSI received reports that RIL were planning to
environmental matters. The CEC has shown keen carry out exploratory drilling for natural gas off
interest in the case. In March 2003, after a site visit to the Orissa coast. A Multi-Disciplinary Expert Group
Orissa, it passed 13 interim directions to the State of (MEG) was constituted by the Ministry of
Orissa asking them to implement various measures Environment and Forests to look into the effects
for the protection of turtles including purchase or hire of exploratory drilling on the Orissa sea turtles.
of patrol boats, police protection for patrol staff, Operation Kachhapa’s Project Co-ordinator is a
support faciltliies , forest department camps, coast member of the MEG. However, even while the
guard patrols, etc to beef up the turtle protection MEG was deliberating on the issue, RIL went ahead
January, 2005 17
with its drilling, and announced that it had OpK has joined the recently formed Orissa Marine
discovered gas in block NEC-25 in June 2004. This Resources Conservation Consortium (OMRCC)
has been brought to the attention of the CEC and which is a coalition of turtle scientists, local fishermen
a hearing is expected in January, 2005. unions and conservation groups. This new group
has been formed with the initiative of the Ashoka
OpK’s future plans Trust for Research in Ecology and theEnvironment,
Bangalore and is a first step towards forging a
OpK is carrying on its planned activities though partnership and common platform among different
the scale is much lower this year due to a reduced groups who are interested in turtle conservation. OpK
budget. Awareness and education for the local is also closely monitoring the implementation of the
fishermen by the wandering minstrels is being Supreme Court’s orders passed for turtle protection
conducted. OpK is also supporting local initiatives on the Orissa coast. OpK has been made a member
by turtle protection clubs and youth groups at Devi of the monitoring committee to be set up by the
and Rushikulya River mouth nesting beaches. Such state government for monitoring the implementation
groups provide much needed data on turtle of the Court’s orders. Sadly, this committee is yet to
casualties and fishing activity in the prohibited areas be formed. Prodded by the Supreme Court of India
so that these issues can be brought to the attention in 2003, the government shook off its languor and
of the enforcement authorities. Their members also finally decided to be serious. Last year, due to increased
assist the forest department in nest protection and enforcement, the casualties plunged to a level of 7,000,
hatchling rescue. Such groups shall be empowered which is half of the average casualties noticed a few
to carry on turtle conservation activities in the future. years earlier. Though it sounds good, the figures are
OpK is in touch with forest, fisheries and coast guard clearly unacceptably high and OpK is determined to
officials to ensure that patrolling is carried out in ensure that the number of casualties are brought
the prohibited areas to protect the congregating sea down.
turtles.
Profile of NGOS working on sea turtle conservation and

fisheries in Orissa
RUSHIKULYA SEA TURTLE PROTECTION COMMITTEE
The Rushikulya Sea Turtle Protection Committee conservation of olive ridley turtles at the Rushikulya
(RSTPC) plays a pivotal role in saving the sea turtles rookery with minimal funding support. Many of
of the Rushikulya rookery. A group of motivated these village boys were actively involved with the
village boys of Purunabandha village, Ganjam, near Wildlife Institute of India’s sea turtle project along
the Rushikulya sea turtle rookery have formed this the Orissa coast during 1994 – 1999.
group which is a non-government non-profit
organisation registered under the Societies Projects undertaken by the RSTPC and
Registration Act, 1860. The group was initiated in supporting agencies:
1998 and has a total membership of 50, mostly
from fishing communities. The RSTPC works with • Conservation of olive ridley sea turtles along the
technical support from many sea turtle biologists Orissa coast – supported by Operation Kachhapa
including Dr. Bivash Pandav, Dr. S.K. Dutta, Mr. B. & WSO, Orissa.
C. Choudhury and Mr. Basudev Tripathy.
• Rescue operation for olive ridley hatchlings at
Over the years, RSTPC and its members have done Rushikulya Rookery – Supported by Wild Orissa,
considerable work on the protection and Bhubaneswar (2003-2004).
January, 2005 18
• Sea turtles and their habitat protection at Rushikulya • Sea turtle interpretation centre at Rushikulya
Rookery – Wildlife Trust of India, New Delhi rookery – Vasant V. Sheth Memorial Trust,
(Basudev Tripathy, Investigator of the above Mumbai (Eastern Shipping Corporation) (2003-
project supported through the Wildlife Trust of 2004).
India) (2003-2004).
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : Purunabandha, PO – Palibandha,

Via/Dist – Ganjam - 761 021 (Orissa)
Telephone Number : 06811 – 254148 (O), 09437204384 (m)
Fax Number : 06811-254070 (O)
E-Mail : [email protected]
Organisational Affiliation : Non-profit, Non-Governmental Organisation;
Registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860,
established in 1998; Regd. No. GJM 7285-107/2003-04
Total members : ~ 50
Area of operation : Ganjam District, Orissa
Contact Person : Mr. Rabindranath Sahu
MAA GANGA DEVI SANTI MAITRI YUVAK SANGA
Over the years, Rushikulya has emerged as one of the 2001. The MDSMJS has a total membership of 25
most important sea turtle nesting beaches in India. and the youth from this NGO are supported by
However, this area is subject to severe natural as well Operation Kachhapa’s conservation programme.
as human-related disturbances. A multitude of They also work in close association with the Orissa
problems ranging from artificial illumination to Forest Department. This organisation comprising
extensive beach erosion exist in this area. The olive of village members is also involved in social activities
ridleys and their nesting beaches need more protection such as cleanliness campaigns and other small
and involvement of local communities. With this in environmental programmes with larger
mind and with a vision of community development, organisations such as the Nehru Yuva Kendra – a
the Maa Ganga Devi Santi Maitri Juvak Sangha national youth organisation.
(MDSMFS) started functioning in Purunabandha in
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : Purunabandha, PO – Palibandha,

Via/Dist – Ganjam - 761 021 (Orissa)
Organisational Affiliation : Non-profit, Non-Governmental Organisation
Registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, established in
1998.
Contact person : Mr. Budhhimantha Rao
President
January, 2005 19
ORISSA TRADITIONAL FISH WORKERS’ UNION
Since 1989, the leaders from the fishing community • Strengthening affiliated district unions to exert
have worked toward uniting the various marine pressure on the district administration and
fishworker groups across the six districts of Orissa. Panchayati Raj Institutions.
Finally, in 1995, the ‘Orissa Traditional Fishworkers • Generating awareness among traditional fishers
Union (OTFWU)’ took birth with the representation on education, health and environment.
of fisher leaders from all six districts. For better • Developing capacity of district and state union
coordination and effective functioning, the OTFWU leaders to identify common issues and strategise
formed district level unions and has linked up with campaign techniques to address micro and
‘Samudram’, an active federation of women macro issues that affect the lives and livelihoods
fishworkers working towards the welfare of fisher of traditional fishers.
women and children since 1992 in the districts of • Liaison and network with other like-minded
Ganjam and Puri. Since 1995, the Union in groups and movements to fight for common
association with the National Fishworkers Forum causes.
has been active along the coast of Orissa and acts
as a pressure group to mobilise government The OTFWU has spearheaded advocacy efforts to
resources for the benefit of traditional fishers. ensure that the rights of the traditional fishworkers
are not impacted by turtle conservation measures.
The vision of the OTFWU is to foster harmony, They have negotiated on behalf of the traditional
fraternity and brotherhood among traditional fishworkers with the state government and have
fishworkers, preserve their cultural heritage and petitioned the Supreme Court appointed Central
support needy fellows to lead a dignified life with Empowered Committee on this matter. The
self-reliance along with other communities in Orissa. OTFWU has also highlighted their experiences on
mitigating the adverse impacts of conservation on
The objectives of the OTFWU include: the livelihoods of traditional fishworkers to other
• Mobilising all traditional fishworkers and national and international forums. At the same time,
bringing them to the fold of OTFWU. the OTFWU along with Samudram has expressed
• Promoting unity among traditional fishworkers it’s interest in being part of turtle conservation
from the grassroots level to the State level. measures and is pressing for conservation that does
not impact the traditional sector of fishers.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : OTFWU, At: Sana Aryapali, PO: Bada Aryapali, Via: Ganjam, Orissa,
India, Pin: 761 020
Telephone Number : +91-6811-262286
Fax Number : + 91-6811- 254314
Members Traditional fishworkers from all 6 districts of Orissa. This includes
fisherfolk operating almost all categories of fishing crafts except
trawlers.
Area of operation : Orissa
Contact person : K. Aleya, General Secretary, OTWFU
January, 2005 20
SAMUDRAM - THE WOMEN’S COLLECTIVE
Samudram is a state level federation of women • Enhancing the socio-economic, political and
fishworkers’ organisations working in Orissa for the cultural status of traditional marine women
development of marine fisherfolk. The organisation fishworkers.
started functioning in the year 1993 from the village • Capacity building of traditional marine
of Sana Nolia Nuagam as a federation of women’s fisherwomen to counter confidently any law or
organisations of Ganjam district and was registered system that is detrimental to their interest.
in the year 1995-96 under Societies Registration Act • To improve the quality of life by developing
XXI of 1860. The formation of Samudram was due the living conditions of traditional marine
to the intervention of the United Artists Association fisherwomen through the spread of education
with support from Action Aid from 1993 to 2002 and better health practices. These are promoted
through a project named Marine Fisher Folk by member organisations in collaboration with
Development Project (MFFDP). However, both like-minded organisations and the Government.
Samudram and its counterpart, the Orissa Traditional • To act as a nodal point for the collection,
Fish Workers’ Union now are independent functioning compilation & dissemination of relevant
entities. information.
• Promoting networking among other like-
At present, the head quarters of the organisation is at minded organisations working for a common
Katuru village in Chatrapur Block of Ganjam district. cause.
The organisation is active in both Ganjam and Puri
Samudram has addressed issues at the micro level
districts and has contacts in Balasore & Bhadrak districts
of Orissa. Samudram aims at empowering traditional such as the sale of country liquor, illiteracy, child
marine fisherwomen in all aspects of life and fostermarriage, influence of moneylenders, gambling etc.
At the macro level, the women have taken up issues
unity, solidarity, love, peace and mutual concern among
them. related to marine resource conservation through
activities such as stopping the illegal collection of
The objectives of the organisation include: prawn seeds, violations of fishing regulations by
• Promoting self-esteem and dignity among the trawlers etc. In future they hope to take up issues
traditional marine women fishworkers. such as procuring land titles, licensing of liquor shops
in marine villages, etc.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : Samudram,

At: Katuru, P.O.: Bada Aryapalli, Dist: Ganjam – 761020
1998.Regd. No. GJM 7285-107/2003-04
Total members : Exceeds 2000

Contact person : Smt. B. Chitamma, President
January, 2005 21
UNITED ARTISTS’ ASSOCIATION, GANJAM

In 1965, different youth groups in Ganjam town has been nominated to the National Task Force on
came together to work under a single umbrella and the Large Marine Ecosystem of the Bay of Bengal
raised funds through cultural programmes and Program . Currently UAA provides support service
drama to be used for welfare programmes, to 22-block level NGOs.
emergency relief and for the establishment of
educational institutions. This united youth group Areas of work of the United Artists Association:
became an organisation named the United Artists’ • Community organisation
Association (UAA) which has been functioning since • Promotion of voluntarism
then from Ganjam, Orissa. UAA is committed to • Education and development of appropriate
the promotion of non-exploitative gender and teaching aids
human rights, a sensitive, environment friendly, • Health and sanitation
hunger free and self-reliant society in Orissa. In 1995, • Training, research and documentation
the Government of Orissa and the UNICEF • Protection of the environment and development
recognised the organisation as a nodal NGO and of social forestry
channeled their funds through UAA to develop the • Development and dissemination of low cost and
status of water and sanitation in the rural areas. Since eco/user friendly technology
then the organisation has been working with a • Emergency relief and rehabilitation.
network of grassroots NGO/CBOs and has played
a catalytic role in developing capacities in managerial, Supporting agencies
and technical skills of its network members. UAA • Government of India, Government of Orissa,
Action Aid, UNICEF, SEEDS, AICF, CWS
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : United Artists’ Association
At/Po/Dist – Ganjam - 761 026 (Orissa)
Telephone Number : 06811 – 254314 254164
Fax Number : 06811 – 254314 254164
E-Mail : [email protected] , [email protected]
1967
Contact person : Mangaraj Panda, Secretary
PROJECT SWARAJYA
Founded in August 1988, Project Swarajya (PS) is a protection activities have been undertaken by PS
non-profit Non-Government Organisation based • Study and campaign for prevention of water
at Cuttack, Orissa with branches and activities in pollution in Taldanda Canal in 1993.
other districts of the state and beyond. Right since • Survey and conservation of mangrove forests
its inception, the organisation has engaged itself in on the Orissa coast in 1992-94.
multifarious social welfare activities such as human • Survey and conservation of the Indian horse shoe
rights, women’s empowerment, child welfare and crabs on the Orissa coast in 1992-94.
environment and biodiversity protection. • Protection of olive ridley sea turtles on the Orissa
coast: ongoing since 1996
The following environment and biodiversity
January, 2005 22
• Presently engaged in popularising the Trawl Guard • PIL in Orissa High Court against pollution by
as a bycatch reduction device among the trawling PPL (admitted in 1995 and disposed off in
community. 2002) and litigation against Oswal Fertilisers at
• Installation of Fish Aggregating Devices along Paradip (admitted in 2002 ).
Orissa coast in 1993-95.
• Integrated paddy-cum-fish far ming in Supporting agencies
waterlogged areas in Orissa coast in 1994-95. • Government of India, Government of Orissa
• Running of Eco-Clubs in Cuttack from 1997-99. • DANIDA, SIDA, NORAD, CEBEMO,
UNDP, WORLD BANK
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : Project Swarajya
Ganesh Ghat, Bakharabad, Cuttack-753002, Orissa, India
Telephone Number : 0671-2621097, 2623518
Fax Number : 0671-2623518
E-Mail : [email protected], [email protected]
Website : http://www.projectswarajya.com
Organisational Affiliation : Non-profit, Non-Governmental Organisation; Registered under
the Societies Registration Act, 1860, established in 1988.
Contact person : Mrs. Dolli Dash, Secretary
WILD ORISSA
Wild Orissa, an organisation registered under the • Associating and assisting the Government and
Societies Registration Act as well as the Income Tax other organisations in matters related to
Act, has been actively involved in the conservation of enumeration of tigers, leopards, elephants etc.
wildlife and nature in the country since 1997. Wild during census.
Orissa was set up with an objective to create awareness • Conducting annual waterfowl/bird census in
among the general public and youth about the the state of Orissa and adjoining areas
importance of conserving nature and the natural • Undertaking conser vation programmes
environment and its bearing on all life and life support including campaigns for the preservation of
systems. This includes participation in activities towards species like the tiger, elephant, mouse deer, olive
the improvement of the environment of urban and ridley, chowsingha etc.
semi-urban areas, arresting the decline of major • Organising inter school competitions on wildlife
wildlife forms, field studies, workshops, camps etc. and nature to inculcate love for our wild heritage.
in an effort to study the status of our wild flora and • Creating public awareness on issues relating to
fauna. Important activities include: wildlife and their habitat through mass media.
• Monitoring of wildlife sanctuaries, national • Organising meetings, symposiums, seminars,
parks, forests and protected areas workshops to address issues relating to wildlife.
• Carrying out surveys, studies and research on wild • Ensuring community participation in
floral and faunal species conservation and preservation of wildlife and
their habitats by interacting with and motivating
local communities.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : Wild Orissa
BJ-29, Mezzanine Floor, BJB Nagar, Bhubaneswar, Orissa
Registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860,
established in 1998.
Contact person : Mrs. Monalisa Bhujbal, Secretary
January, 2005 23
GREENPEACE
In November 2004, “Rainbow Warrior II”, the At Orissa, the Rainbow Warrior and Greenpeace were
legendary flagship of Greenpeace, was on a tour involved in: -
of the eastern coast of India to raise the profile of • Meeting on the CEC directives – In a well-
the rich marine ecosystems, fragile habitats and attended meeting with representatives from
endangered creatures of the world’s oceans. Her concerned constituents such as environmental
third voyage to India, the Rainbow Warrior docked groups, enforcement and regulatory bodies and
at Chennai and Paradip, witnessing a surging spirit fishermen’s collectives, the problems and
of participation from different groups and coastal potential solutions with respect to Orissa and
communities. Through the tour, the focus the olive ridley turtles were discussed.
increasingly rested on the Gulf of Mannar and the • Fact-finding – The most immediate threat to the
Bhitarkanika Sanctuary, highlighting the biodiversity Gahirmatha Sanctuary- the proposed Dhamra
and the threats these iconic marine hotspots face. port was highlighted. In a cyber-petition
The mainstay of the tour was the series of dialogues coordinated by Greenpeace, more than 1000
on the management of a network of marine people endorsed their support, calling for the
reserves and an introduction to seamounts – the concerned corporations and the Government to
submerged mountains of our seas. reconsider the project.
• World Fisheries Day – Greenpeace joined the
The Rainbow Warrior provided a unique platform deliberation and celebrations in an event
for the convergence of a cross-section of groups coordinated by the Orissa Traditional
and communities directly involved in the protection Fishworkers’ Union at Bhubaneshwar. Given
of our seas. Given the importance of awareness Greenpeace’s global experience with respect to
building and outreach, the tour made it possible to marine reserves, the team was invited to make a
reach out to more than 2500 people inclusive of presentation on a community based approach
students from schools, colleges and academic to marine reserves and conservation.
institutions, eco-clubs and interested and concerned
public. The “Save our Seas” tour of November In the coming year, Greenpeace will look forward to
2004 was Greenpeace India’s first step to network, coordinating with local communities and groups in
research and further it’s understanding of marine Orissa. Greenpeace also looks forward to continuing
issues (coastal and high seas) pertinent to India. It the documentation of turtles through the nesting and
was also an opportunity to build upon the prevailing hatching season, and hopes to identify areas of work
community work and their persistent labour in to add synergistic value to the ongoing campaign to
protecting the seas. champion the cause of the turtles and local
communities.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : #3360, 13th B Main,HAL II Stage

Indira Nagar, Bangalore
Karnataka, India
Telephone Number : +91-98455 35416 / 080-511 54861
Website : http://www.greenpeace.org/india_en/
Contact person : Sanjiv Gopal, Oceans Campaigner
January, 2005 24
WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE INDIA
The World Wide Fund for Nature India (WWF-India) Marine turtles are flagship species for WWF world
has been working to promote harmony between over. WWF-India engages with multiple stakeholders
humankind and nature for almost three decades. and partners like government agencies, NGOs,
Today, it is recognised as the premier conservation research institutes, coastal communities and the
NGO in the country dealing with conservation and private sector for an integrated approach to
development issues. At a time when the web of life conservation.
has come under increasing threats, WWF-India’s
attempts have been to find and implement solutions WWF-India initiated its marine turtle conservation
so that human beings can live in harmony with nature, programme in 2003 at the Rushikulya rookery with
and leave for future generations, a world rich in natural the collection of disoriented hatchlings and release
resources and natural wonders. as a programme with the communities. WWF’s
marine turtle conservation initiative aims to
WWF -India (formerly known as World Wildlife Fund) minimise/reduce threats to the marine turtles from
was established as a Charitable Trust in 1969. With its unsustainable fishing practices and coastal
network of State/Divisional and Field Offices spread development through community participation.
across the country to implement its programme, WWF hopes to facilitate a consultative mechanism
WWF-India is the largest and one of the most between trawler operators, other fishing
experienced conservation organisations in the country. communities, government agencies and other
WWF-India articulated its mission statement to suit NGOs to adopt by-catch reduction devices. Other
India’s specific ecological and socio-cultural programme objectives include reducing turtle
circumstances: mortality; building the capacities of the fishing
“The promotion of nature conservation and environmental communities to manage turtle nesting areas and the
protection as the basis for sustainable development” conservation of the marine eco-system by adopting
friendly fishing practices. Finally, WWF hopes to
The WWF India has five broad programme promote the Rushikulya rookery as a community
components: conserved area. The private sector such as the
• Promoting India’s ecological security – restoring tourism and hotel industry will be engaged as part
the ecological balance of WWF’s conservation programme. WWF-India
• Conserving biological diversity also seeks to facilitate the Government of India
• Ensuring sustainable use of the natural resource (GOI) policy initiatives to conserve marine turtle
base habitats and populations.
• Minimising pollution and wasteful consumption
• Promoting sustainable life-styles.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Mailing Address : WWF – India Secretariat

172 B, Lodhi Estate
New Delhi 110 003
Telephone Number : 91-11-51504806/4821
Fax Number : 91-11-51504795/4779
Website : http://wwfindia.org
Contact person : Dr. (Ms.) Swayam Prabha Das
Coordinator, Oceans & Coasts Programme
January, 2005 25
Letters to the Editor

Lighting and sea turtle hatchlings in Rushikulya
Sir, other sea turtle biologists pointed out that such

practices might tamper with the life history parameters
This refers to the article “Showing The Way: Mass of sea turtle hatchlings, particularly the phenomenon
hatching of olive ridleys in Rushikulya, Orissa” by of natal beach imprinting. He stated that such practices
Belinda Wright and Biswajit Mohanty (Kachhapa 9: must be discontinued and new turtle friendly and
1-2, Editorial). The article describes a method of community-based methods be developed. The
preventing disoriented turtle hatchlings from moving presently practiced method was developed then
towards land. It claims that Operation Kachhapa primarily by Dr. Pandav and Dr. Jack Frazier but was
was the first organisation to have tried this method not used in the year 2001 as the hatching season was
in the year 2003. I would like to clarify that the already over by then.
Rushikulya Sea Turtle Protection Committee
(RSTPC), a local NGO in Purunabandha village was In 2002, based on the suggestions of Dr. Frazier and
the first organisation to use this method on the first others, Dr. Bivash Pandav of the WII refined the
day of the mass hatching of olive ridleys at the method of creating a soft and supple barrier on the
Rushikulya rookery in 2003. landward side of the beach to prevent hatchlings from
reaching the grass fields beyond the barrier. Dr.
In fact, the genesis of development of this method Pandav’s suggestion was to create a 400 to 500 meter
dates back to April 2001. Following my M.Sc length flexible wall on the landward side of the beach,
dissertation work in 1996 which quantified 80% employing used cement bags. The Purunabandha
hatchling disorientation towards the landward side village based RSTPC volunteers prepared some
(published in Hamadryad 27: 185-192, 2003), the flexible walls. However, one member of the RSTPC,
Wildlife Institute of India’s sea turtle research project Shri Dambaru Behera suggested replacement of the
continued to quantify the disorientation of hatchlings cement bags with nylon mosquito nets, which were
till 2000. In April 2001, the GOI-UNDP Sea Turtle then extensively used in the Purunabandha area for
Project, implemented by the Wildlife Institute of collection of prawn seeds. In fact, Dr. Pandav met
India, invited Dr. Jack Frazier of the Smithsonian the entire cost of production of this 500 meter
Institution to assist in satellite telemetry experiments improvised flexible wall made of mosquito nets.
on olive ridley turtles in Orissa. In the coconut grove Unfortunately, this improved method could not be
of Purunabandha village near the Rushikulya rookery, used in 2002 due to the failure of mass nesting at
amongst the range of topics on sea turtle research Rushikulya and the nets remained with the RSTPC.
and management, the discussion moved to
developing a mechanism to assist emerging In 2003, the RSTPC successfully installed the
hatchlings to reach the sea in the context of landward improvised flexible nets on the Rushikulya rookery
illumination. The participants in this discussion were from the first day of mass hatching. Sadly, for reasons
Dr. Jack Frazier from Smithsonian Institution, Mr. unknown, the Orissa Forest Department prevented
B.C. Choudhury, Dr. Bivash Pandav, Dr. Kartik the RSTPC from using their flexible nets shortly
Shanker and myself from Wildlife Institute of India thereafter. Ironically, in their joint protection efforts,
and Dr. Chandrasekhar Kar from Orissa Forest the Orissa Forest Department and Operation
Department. Operation Kachhapa was by then Kachhapa used the very same method for preventing
already involved in the hatchling rescue operation in hatchling mortality from disorientation.
Rushikulya and methods employed by the field staff
even included collection of the hatchlings What is surprising and unfortunate in this whole
prematurely from the nest to prevent them from episode is the complete obstruction of the
crawling towards the landward side. Dr. Frazier and participation of local communities on one hand and
January, 2005 26
the appropriation of credit for innovations and ideas Basudev Tripathy

rightfully belonging to others. One fails to understand Ph.D Student
how wildlife conservation can progress if community Berhampur University, Berhampur, Orissa.
participation is systematically thwarted by both non Email: [email protected]
government organisations and the state machinery.
Casuarina plantations along sea turtle nesting beaches in Orissa
Sir, Though I did not walk the beach between Paradeep

and Devi River mouth, I was carrying out
While carrying out field work for the research project experimental trawling very close to the shore line in
“A quantitative analysis of incidental sea turtle captures this area. From a distance I could see extensive
during commercial shrimp trawling in coastal waters Casuarina plantations that were coming up close to
off Orissa” I visited some of the sea turtle nesting the high tide line in this sector. The coastal stretch in
beaches in Orissa during August 2002. During this this sector, particularly between the mouth of the
period I covered a distance of approximately 65 km Jatadhara River and the mouth of the Devi River
on foot and walked along the Gahirmatha, Devi and has been recorded as a good sporadic nesting
Rushikulya coasts. ground of the olive ridley turtle. Plantation of
Casuarina close to the high tide line in this sector is
Casuarina made inroads into the coastal areas of Orissa going to have an having adverse impact on sea turtle
after 1971. A severe cyclone devastated the Orissa coast nesting in this area.
in October 1971. After this cyclone, the coastal
afforestation branch of the Orissa Forest Department In my view, Casuarina plantations have impacted the
started planting Casuarina along the Orissa coast. The nesting habitats of sea turtles the most in the sector
objective of planting Casuarina was two-fold: to act as between the Devi River mouth and the mouth of
a barrier to cyclonic storm and to prevent beach the Kadua River. I came across recent Casuarina
erosion. This plantation drive was renewed once again plantations all along the 14 km stretch from Devi
after the super cyclone that swept across Orissa coast River mouth (19.9N & 86.4 E) till Gundalaba village
in October 1999. (19.9 N & 86.3 E). Most of these plantations were
very much within the high tide line. This stretch of
During my walk along the sea turtle nesting beaches in beach is a known mass nesting area for the olive
Orissa in August 2002, I came across extensive one to ridley turtle in Orissa. With this Casuarina plantation,
two year old Casuarina plantations. Except for the old I doubt if any space is left for turtles to nest in this
plantations, no recent Casuarina plantation has come area.
up in and around the Gahirmatha mass nesting beach.
However, I came across new plantations on the Thankfully, the mass nesting beach near the mouth
southern most portion of the Gahirmatha coast of the Rushikulya River has been spared from
between Kanpur village and Pentha. The beach near Casuarina plantations. However, good sporadic
Pentha has witnessed mass nesting twice during 1999 nesting beaches adjoining the Rushikulya mass nesting
and 2000. Planting of Casuarina in this area is definitely beach are under Casuarina plantations. Recent
a cause for concern. Casuarina plantations in this area are located
immediately after the Kantiagada village (19.4 N &
The coastal stretch between the mouth of river Hansua 85.1 E) and extend up to Prayagi village in the north
and Mahanadi is a good nesting area for ridley turtles (19.5 N & 85.2 E). Most plantations in this area
and the entire area comes under the jurisdiction of the have been carried out either inside or in close
Mangrove Forest Division (Wildlife), Rajnagar. I have proximity to the high tide line (within 10 meters). I
not visited this area for the last five years and am not personally have not visited the 40 km stretch
aware of the exact status of Casuarina plantations in between Prayagi village and the mouth of Chilka
this stretch.
January, 2005 27
Lake in the recent past and am not aware of the planted all along the Orissa coast, it is apparent that
status of recent Casuarina plantations in this area. the need for sea turtles to use the beach for nesting
has not been considered at all.
Based on my observations, I conclude that Casuarina
has been planted along most parts of the Orissa Bivash Pandav
coast either inside or very close to the high tide line. Department of Endangered Species Management
The fact that sea turtles prefer to nest in wide, open Wildlife Institute of India
beaches, devoid of artificial vegetation is well known. PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India.
However, the way in which Casuarina has been Email: [email protected]
A bibliography of literature on sea turtles in Orissa, India
Basudev Tripathy1, Meera Anna Oommen1, Bivash Pandav2 and Kartik Shanker1
1-Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)

659, 5th A Main Road, Hebbal, Bangalore 560024. India.
2- Wildlife Institute of India
PO Box 18, Chandrabani, Dehradun 248001. India
Acharya, B.C., P.K. Panigrahy, B.B. Nayak & R.K. Anonymous. 1986. Rockets and Ridleys: False Alarm?
Sahoo. 1998. Heavy mineral placer deposits of Marine Turtle Newsletter 38:4.
Ekakula beach, Gahirmatha coast, Orissa. Resource
Geology 48: 125-136. Anonymous. 1989. On the ridley trail. Hamadryad
14(1): 11.
Andrews, H.V. 1993. Olive ridleys threatened in
India: Letters needed. Marine Turtle Newsletter 61: 5- Anonymous. 1990. On the ridley trail. Marine Turtle
6. Newsletter 48:30.
Anonymous. 1977. Newspaper clippings: Rookery Anonymous. 1994. Concern rises over threat to Indian
of turtle in Orissa discovered. Newsletter of the Madras turtles. Marine Turtle Newsletter 64: 1-2.
Snake Park Trust and Conservation Centre 2(2): 5.
Anonymous. 1997. Legal Briefs: Gahirmatha beach
Anonymous. 1977. Notes on turtle conservation in declared a marine sanctuary. Marine Turtle Newsletter
India. Marine Turtle Newsletter 5:3. 79:32.
Anonymous. 1978. Mass slaughter of sea turtles. Anonymous. 1999. News and Legal Briefs: Olive
Hamadryad 3(3): 8. ridley turtles return to Orissa. Marine Turtle Newsletter
85:27-30.
Anonymous. 1979. Sea turtle slaughter in Orissa.
Hamadryad 4(1): 6. Anonymous. 2000. News & Legal Briefs: Arribada -
2000 in Gahirmatha marine sanctuary. Marine Turtle
Anonymous. 1982. Stop Press: More from India. Newsletter 88: 32.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 23:6. Anonymous. 2000. News & Legal Briefs: Cyclone
hits Indian state of Orissa. Marine Turtle Newsletter
Anonymous. 1984. Arribada – the arrival. 87:23-25.
Hamadryad 9(2): 12.
Anonymous. 2000. News from Orissa. Kachhapa 3: 6.
Anonymous. 1984. Mrs. Gandhi writes about turtles.
Hamadryad 9(3):21.
January, 2005 28
Anonymous. 2001. News & Legal Briefs: India: Behera, C. 2002. News & Reports: TED workshop
Carcasses of 3,500 turtles found strewn on Orissa in Orissa. Kachhapa 6: 21.
beach. Marine Turtle Newsletter 93: 45-48
Bhaskar, S. 1984. Sea turtles in eastern India. WWF
Anonymous. 2001. News And Reports: A national Monthly Report, August 1984:185-189.
workshop for the development of a national sea turtle
conservation action plan for India, GOI UNDP Sea Bhaskar, S. 1984. The distribution of sea turtles in
Turtle Project. Kachhapa 5: 28. India. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Sea turtle
Conservation (ed. E.G. Silas), pp. 36-48. Central
Anonymous. 2001. News And Reports: Satellite Marine Fisheries Research Institute Special
telemetry of olive ridley sea turtles on the east coast Publication 18, Cochin, India.
of India, GOI UNDP Sea Turtle Project. Kachhapa 5:
28. Bhaskar, S. 1981. Preliminary report on the status
and distribution of sea turtles in Indian waters. Indian
Anonymous. 2001. Urgent and immediate action Forester 107: 11.
needed to safeguard the world’s largest aggregation
of nesting sea turtles. Marine Turtle Newsletter 63:1-2. Biswas, S., L.N. Acharyo & B.C. Mahapatra. 1977.
Observation on incubating eggs of Lepidochelys
Anonymous. 2003. News & Legal Briefs. Endangered olivacea (Eschscoltz) from Orissa coast in natural and
olive ridley sea turtles begin mass nesting on India coast. artificial condition. Science & Culture 143: 43-45.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 101:50-53
Biswas, S. 1982. A report on the olive ridley,
Anonymous. 2003. Operation Kachhapa: Education Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscoltz) [Testudines:
& Awareness Activities. Kachhapa 9: 22. Chelonidae] of Bay of Bengal. Records of the Zoological
Survey of India 79: 275 – 302.
Anonymous. 2003. Operation Kachhapa News.
Kachhapa 8: 26-27. Bjorndal, K. 1993. Future of the Gahrimatha
arribadas a matter of international concern. Marine
Anonymous. 2003. Operation Kachhapa News: CEC Turtle Newsletter 63: S3
on the olive ridleys in Orissa. Kachhapa 9: 221
Bustard, H.R. 1974. India: A preliminary survey of the
Anonymous. 2003. Workshop-cum-Demonstration on prospects of crocodile farming (based on the work of Dr.
Turtle Excluder Device for trawl owners and H. R. Bustard). F.A.O., Rome, 1-50.
operators of the Orissa coast, February 2002. Kachhapa
8: 24 Bustard, H.R. 1976. World’s largest sea turtle
rookery? Tiger Paper 3(3): 25.
Anonymous1. 2003. Central Empowered Committee,
Government of India, New Delhi. Interim Directions Bustard, H.R. 1980. Should sea turtles be exploited?
Dated 7th March 2003, in the Matter of Application Marine Turtle Newsletter 15: 3-5.
No 46.
Bustard, H.R. & C.S. Kar. 1980. Annual nesting of
Anonymous2. 2004. Central Empowered Committee, the Pacific ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) in
Government of India, New Delhi. Site Visit Report, Orissa, India. British Journal of Herpetology 6: 139.
February 2004.
1
The Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court of India evaluated the protection of the olive ridley
turtle under the Indian Wild Life Act, 1972. See also Kachhapa 9: 22
2
The Central Empowered Committee of the Supreme Court of India visited Orissa to evaluate the
implementation of its orders with regard to the protection of the olive ridley turtle in Orissa
January, 2005 29
Chadha, S. & C.S. Kar. 1999. Bhitarkanika: Myth & Das, I. 1986. Rockets at the Gahirmatha rookery?
Reality. Nataraj Publishers, Dehradun, India. Hamadryad 11(1/2): 17.
Chadha, S.K. & Mohanty, B. 2001. The management Dash M.C. & C.S. Kar. 1987. Conservation and
of olive ridley sea turtles at Devi river mouth, Orissa. management of sea turtle resource in Orissa coast.
Kachhapa 5: 24. In: Environment & Ecotoxicology. Proceedings of the 6th
Annual Session of the Academy of Environmental Biology
Choudhury, B.C. 2003. Editorial: TEDs in India: pp. 303-316.
from conflict to consultation. Kachhapa 8: 1-2.
Dash, M.C. & C.S. Kar. 1990. The Turtle Paradise –
Choudhury, B.C. S.C. Sharma, & S.K. Mukherjee. Gahirmatha. Interprint, New Delhi, 295 p.
2000. The sea turtle conservation agenda of India.
In: Sea turtles of the Indo-Pacific: Research, Conservation Davis, T.A. & R. Bedi. 1978. The sea turtle rookery
and Management (eds. N.J. Pilcher & G. Ismail), pp. of Orissa. Environmental Awareness 1.
100-106. ASEAN Academic Press, London.
Dimond, M.T. & P. Mohanty-Hejmadi. 1983.
Cornelius, S.E, R. Arauz, J. Fretey, M.H. Godfrey, Incubation temperature and sex differentiation in a
R. Márquez-M & K. Shanker. in press. Effect of land- sea turtle. American Zoologist 23: 1017.
based harvest of Lepidochelys. In: Biology and
Conservation of ridley turtles (eds. P. Plotkin and S. Epperly, S. & J. Frazier. 2000. Resolutions of the
Morreale). Johns Hopkins Press, USA. members of the 20th annual symposium on sea turtle
biology and conservation. Marine Turtle Newsletter 88:
Dani, C.S. & C.S. Kar. 1999. Conservation of sea 22-26.
turtles and environmental relationship of arribadas
of olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschsholtz, 1829) Frazier, J. & M. Tiwari. 1999. Workshop on olive
in relation to Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem of ridley turtles in the Indian Ocean (4th march 1999).
Orissa coast. In: Bhitarkanika - The Wonderland of Marine Turtle Newsletter 85: 15-17.
Orissa, pp. 98-120. Nature & Wildlife Conservation
Society of Orissa, Bhubaneswar. Frazier, J.G. 1980. Sea turtle faces extinction in India:
Crying ‘wolf ’ or saving sea-turtles? Environmental
Daniel, J.C. 1984. Problems of sea turtle Conservation 7: 239-240.
conservation in India. In: Proceedings of the Workshop
on Sea turtle Conservation (ed. E.G. Silas), pp. 13-20. Frazier, J.G., R. Arauz, J. Chevalier, A. Formia, J.
Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute Special Fretey, M.H. Godfrey, R. Marquez-M., B. Pandav &
Publication 18, Cochin, India. K. Shanker. in press. Exploitation of Lepidochelys at sea.
In: Biology and Conservation of ridley turtles (eds. P. Plotkin
Das, B.B. 1997. Struggle to protect the Bhitarkanika and S. Morreale). Johns Hopkins Press, USA.
ecosystem is ongoing. Marine Turtle Newsletter 76:
18-20. James, P.S.B.R., M. Rajagopalan, S.S. Dan, A.B.
Fernando & V. Selvaraj. 1989. On the mortality of
Das, B.B. 1998. Present status of Gahirmatha beach marine mammals and turtles at Gahirmatha, Orissa
in Bhitarakanika sanctuary, Orissa. Marine Turtle from 1983 to 1987. Journal of the Marine Biological
Newsletter 79: 1-2. Association of India 31: 28–35.
Das, I. 1984. Ridley hatchlings at Gahirmatha. James, P.S.B.R., M. Rajagopalan, S.S. Dan, A.B.
Hamadryad 9(2): 20. Fernando & V. Selvaraj. 1991. Observations on mass
nesting of the Lepidochelys olivacea at Gahirmatha,
Das, I. 1986. Action alert: Rockets to dislodge ridleys Orissa during the 1987 season. Journal of the Marine
at Gahirmatha. Marine Turtle Newsletter 36: 1 Biological Association of India 33(1&2): 69-75.
January, 2005 30
Kar, C.S. 1980. Another notched ridley found. Marine Kar, C.S & M.C. Dash. 1984. Mass nesting beaches
Turtle Newsletter 14: 5. of the olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz,
1829) in Orissa and the behaviour during an arribada.
Kar, C.S. 1980. The Gahirmatha turtle rookery along In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Sea turtle Conservation
the coast of Orissa, India. Marine Turtle Newsletter 15: (ed. E.G. Silas), pp. 21-35. Central Marine Fisheries
2-3. Research Institute Special Publication 18, Cochin,
India.
Kar, C.S. 1981. Discovery of second mass nesting
ground of the pacific olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys Kar, C.S. & M.C. Dash. 1984. Conservation and
olivacea) in Orissa. Tiger Paper 9: 6-7. status of sea turtles in Orissa. In: Proceedings of the
Workshop on Sea turtle Conservation (ed. E.G. Silas),
Kar, C.S. 1982. Discovery of second mass nesting pp. 93-107. Central Marine Fisheries Research
ground for pacific ridley sea turtles in Orissa, India. Institute Special Publication 18, Cochin, India.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 23:3.
Kar, C.S. & S. Bhaskar. 1982. The status of sea turtles
Kar, C.S. 1982. The Gahirmatha sea turtle rookery, in the Eastern Indian Ocean. In: The biology and
Orissa. Makara 31: 20-23. conservation of sea turtles (ed. K. Bjorndal), pp. 365-
372. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C.,
Kar, C.S. 1988. Ecological studies on the olive ridley sea turtles, USA.
Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, 1829) of Orissa coast.
Ph.D. Thesis. Sambalpur University, Orissa. Kar, S.K. 1993. Studies on the mass nesting (arribada)
of pacific ridley turtles, Lepidochelys olivacea in
Kar, C.S. 1992. Ecological studies on the olive ridley Bhitarkanika wildlife sanctuary, Orissa, India. Indian
sea turtles, Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschsholtz, 1829) of Forester 119(10): 853-857.
Orissa coast. ZoosPrint 61: 28-30.
Kar, SK. 1998. Gahirmatha beach declared as a
Kar, C.S. 1999. Ecological relationship between Marine Sanctuary. Marine Turtle Newsletter 79: 3-4.
mangroves and mass nesting of olive ridley sea turtle
Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, 1829) in relation to Kar, S.K., C.S. Kar & S.K. Patnaik. 1998. Biodiversity
Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem of Orissa coast. In: conservation in Bhitarkanika mangrove ecosystem
Bhitarkanika - The Wonderland of Orissa, pp. 83-97. of Orissa, India: problems and prospects. In:
Nature & Wildlife Conservation Society of Orissa, Biodiversity Conservation: Problems and Prospects (ed. H.K.
Bhubaneswar. Patra), pp. 68-74. Orissa Environmental Society
Publication, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India.
Kar, C.S. 2001. Review of threats to sea turtles in
Orissa. In: Proceedings of the Workshop for the Development Mishra, S.K. & S.K. Kar. 1986. Research report on
of a National Sea Turtle Conservation Action Plan, sea turtles at Gahirmatha beach. Unpublished
Bhubaneswar, Orissa (eds. K. Shanker & B.C. Choudhury), report. Orissa Forest Department, Bhubaneswar,
pp 15-19. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun. India.
Kar, C.S. & G.R. Satpathy. 1996. Mangrove ecosystems Mohanty, B. 2000. More news from Dhamra.
and its biodiversity in Orissa with special reference to Kachhapa 3: 6-7.
Bhitarkanika. In: Advances in ecology and environmental
sciences. pp. 419-438. Ashish Publication, New Delhi. Mohanty, B. 2000. Operation Kachhapa: First work
report for 1999-2000 turtle season. Reporting
Kar, C.S. & G.S. Padhi. 1992. Biology, life history and period: 1st November 1999 to 24th November
conservation strategy of the olive ridley sea turtles in 1999. Kachhapa 2: 2-3.
Orissa. Oriforest 1(2): 36 - 40.
January, 2005 31
Mohanty, B. 2000. The importance of mangroves Action Plan, Bhubaneswar, Orissa (eds. K. Shanker & B.C.
on the Orissa coast. Kachhapa 2: 12-13. Choudhury), pp. 4-8. Wildlife Institute of India,
Dehradun.
Mohanty, B. 2001. All at sea. Sanctuary Asia 21(2):
56-57. Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 2003. Saturation of olive ridley
nesting sites. Current Science 84: 972.
Mohanty, B. 2002. Casuarina forests ruin turtle
nesting beaches in Orissa. Kachhapa 7: 20-21. Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. & G. Sahoo. 1994. Biology of
the olive ridleys of Gahirmatha, Orissa, India. In:
Mohanty, B. 2002. News & Reports: Effluents from Proceedings of the Fourteenth Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle
Oswal fertilizers threatens olive ridley sea turtles on Biology and Conservation (compilers K.A. Bjorndal, A.B.
the Orissa coast. Kachhapa 6: 20. Bolten, D. Johnson & P. Eliazar), pp. 351. NOAA
Technical Memorandum. NMFS-SEFSC-351.
Mohanty, B. & B. Wright. 2001. The wandering
minstrels of Orissa – singing to save sea turtles. Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. & M.T. Dimond. 1986.
Kachhapa 5: 19 Temperature dependent sex determination in the olive
ridley turtle. In: Progress in Clinical and Biological
Mohanty-Hejamdi, P. 1983. SOS from sea turtles Research, Progress in Developmental Biology, vol.
from Orissa. Marine Turtle Newsletter 25: 2. Part A (ed. H.C. Slavkin), pp. 159-162. Alan R. Liss
Inc., New York, USA.
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 1986. Sea turtle work in
Orissa, India. Marine Turtle Newsletter 38:4 Mohanty-Hejmadi, P., M. Behera & M.T. Dimond.
1985. Temperature dependent sex differentiation in
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 1987. Unique second arribada the olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea and its implications
at Gahirmatha. Marine Turtle Newsletter 40: 7-8. for conservation. In: Proceedings of the Symposium on
Endangered Marine Animals and Marine Parks, Cochin, India
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 1988. A study of ecology, (ed. E.G. Silas) pp. 260-263. Marine Biological
breeding patterns, development and karyotype Association of India, Cochin, India.
patterns of the olive ridley, Lepidochelys olivacea, of
Gahirmatha, Orissa. Pranikee 9. Mohanty-Hejmadi, P., M. Behera and S.K. Dutta. 1989.
Commensals on the olive ridley sea turtle. Marine Turtle
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 1994. Latest word on the Newsletter 45: 11-13.
Talachua Jetty, Orissa, India. Marine Turtle Newsletter
67: 1. Mohanty-Hejmadi, P., M.T. Dimond & J. Kanungo.
1984. Biochemical constituents of serum of young
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 1999. Agonies & ecstasies of female hatchlings of olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea.
25 years of sea turtle research and conservation in Marine Turtle Newsletter 27:4-5
India. In: Proceedings of the Nineteenth Annual Symposium
on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation (compilers H. Moll, E.O., S. Bhaskar & J. Vijaya. 1984. Update on
Kalb & T. Wibbels), pp. 83-85. NOAA Technical the olive ridley on the east coast of India, Marine Turtle
Memorandum NMFS-SEFSC 443. Newsletter 25: 2-4.
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 2000. Earliest record of Mrosovsky, N. 1983. Olive ridleys in India. Marine
Gahirmatha turtles. Marine Turtle Newsletter 88: 11- Turtle Newsletter 24: 17.
12.
Mrosovsky, N. 1982. Editorial. Marine Turtle Newsletter
Mohanty-Hejmadi, P. 2001. The history of sea turtle 23: 1-2.
conservation in Orissa. In: Proceedings of the Workshop
for the development of a National Sea Turtle Conservation
January, 2005 32
Mrosovsky, N. 2001. When arribadas fail to arrive. in Orissa. Final Report. Wildlife Institute of India,
Kachhapa 5: 17. Dehradun.
Naik, B.N. 1993. Information on mass nesting of olive Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & C.S. Kar. 1994. A
ridley turtles in Orissa. Unpublished notes. Orissa status survey of olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys
Forest Department, Bhubaneswar, Orissa, India. olivacea) and its nesting habitats along the Orissa coast,
India. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.
Nayak, A.K. 2003. Possible factors leading to non-
occurrence of ‘arribada’ at Gahirmatha, Orissa, India Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & C.S. Kar. 1994.
in 2001-02. Marine Turtle Newsletter 101: 29-30. Discovery of a new sea turtle rookery in Orissa.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 67: 15-16.
Pandav, B. 1995. Wildlife Institute of India starts new
research project on sea turtles in Orissa. ZoosPrint 10(7): Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & C.S. Kar. 1995.
50. Occurrence of juvenile olive ridley sea turtles along
the Gahirmatha coast, Orissa, India. Marine Turtle
Pandav, B. 2000. Post cyclone impact in Orissa with reference Newsletter 71: 15-17.
to marine turtle conservation. A GOI-UNDP sea turtle
project report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & C.S. Kar. 1995. A
India. note on the occurrence of sub-adult olive ridley
turtles along the Gahirmatha coast. Marine Turtle
Pandav, B. 2000. Conservation & management of olive ridley Newsletter 71:15-17.
sea turtles on the Orissa coast. PhD thesis. Utkal University,
Bhubaneswar, India. Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & C.S. Kar. 1997.
Mortality of olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys
Pandav, B. 2001. An overview of Wildlife Institute of olivacea) due to incidental capture in fishing nets along
India’s sea turtle research program in Orissa. Kachhapa Orissa coast, India. Oryx. 31(1): 32-36.
5: 10-11.
Pandav, B., B.C. Choudhury & K. Shanker. 1998.
Pandav, B. 2001. Rushikulya rookery – A status report. The olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) in
Kachhapa 4: 5-7. Orissa: An urgent call for an intensive and integrated
conservation programme. Current Science 75: 1323-
Pandav, B. 2002. A report on the capacity building 1328.
training workshop for the frontline staff involved in
sea turtle conservation along the east coast maritime Pandav, B., K. Banugopan, D. Sutaria & B. C.
states held at Rambha and Barkul, Orissa from 27-29 Choudhury. 2000. Fidelity of male olive ridley sea
June 2002. Kachhapa 7: 25. turtles to a breeding ground. Marine Turtle Newsletter
87: 9-10.
Pandav, B. 2003. Letter to the Editors. Kachhapa 8: 26.
Pandav, B. & K. Shanker. 2001. Review of threats
Pandav, B. & B. C. Choudhury. 1998. Olive ridley to sea turtles estimating numbers accurately. In:
tagged in Orissa recovered in coastal waters of eastern Proceedings of the Workshop for the Development of a
Sri Lanka. Marine Turtle Newsletter 82: 9-10. National Sea Turtle Conservation Action Plan,
Bhubaneswar, Orissa (eds. K. Shanker & B.C.
Pandav, B & B.C. Choudhury. 1999. An update on the Choudhury), pp. 20. Wildlife Institute of India,
mortality of the olive ridley sea turtles in Orissa, India. Dehradun.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 83: 10-12.
Panigrahy, R.C., R. Gouda, S. Misra & L. Nayak.
Pandav, B. & B.C. Choudhury. 2000. Conservation & 1990. Availability of marine turtle eggs near
management of olive ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea)
January, 2005 33
Rushikulya River mouth, east coast of India. Indian Sahoo, G., B.K. Mohapatra, R.K. Sahoo & P.
Forester 116(6): 515-516. Mohanty-Hejmadi. 1996. Ultra structure and
characteristics of eggshells of the olive ridley turtle
Patnaik, S.K. & C.S. Kar. 2000. Status and (Lepidochelys olivacea) from Gahirmatha, India. Acta
conservation of sea turtles in Orissa, India. In: Sea Anatomica 156(4): 261-67.
turtles of the Indo-Pacific: Research, Conservation and
Management (eds N.J. Pilcher & G. Ismail), pp. 13- Sahoo, G., B.K. Mohapatra, R.K. Sahoo & P.
24. ASEAN Academic Press, London. Mohanty-Hejmadi. 1996. Contrasting ultra structures
in the eggshells of olive ridley sea turtles Lepidochelys
Patnaik, S.K., C. S. Kar & S.K. Kar. 2001. A quarter olivacea from Gahirmatha, Orissa. Current Science 70(3):
century of sea turtle conservation in Orissa. Wildlife Wing, 246-249.
Forest Department, Government of Orissa,
Bhubaneswar. Sahoo, G., R.K. Sahoo & P. Mohanty-Hejmadi. 1998.
Calcium metabolism in olive ridley turtle eggs during
Plotkin, P. 1999. Resolutions of the participants at embryonic development. Comparative Biochemistry and
the 19th Annual Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology Physiology A - Molecular and Integrative Physiology 121(1):
and Conservation. Marine Turtle Newsletter 85: 20- 91-97.
24.
Sahoo, G., R.K. Sahoo & P. Mohanty-Hejmadi. 1996.
Prusty, B.G., R.K. Sahoo & S.D. Mehta. 2000. Natural Distribution of heavy metals in the eggs and hatchlings
causes lead to mass exodus of olive ridley turtles of olive ridley sea turtle, Lepidochelys olivacea, from
from Ekakulanasi, Orissa, India: A need for Gahirmatha, Orissa. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences
identification of alternate sites. In: Sea turtles of the 25(4): 371-372.
Indo-Pacific: Research, Conservation and Management (eds.
N.J. Pilcher & G. Ismail), pp. 189-197. ASEAN Sekhsaria, P. 2004. Caught in a corporate web. The
Academic Press, London. Hindu Sunday Magazine 28thMarch 2004.
Rajagopalan, M., E. Vivekanandan, K. Balan & K. Sekhsaria, P. 2004. Arribadas and goodbyes. Sanctuary
Narayana Kurup. 2001. Threats to sea turtles in Asia 24(6): 38-43
India through incidental catch. In: Proceedings of the
Workshop for the Development of a National Sea Turtle Shanker, K. 1999. It’s turtle time in Orissa again.
Conservation Action Plan, Bhubaneswar, Orissa (eds. K. Kachhapa 1: 1.
Shanker & B.C. Choudhury), pp. 12-14. Wildlife
Institute of India, Dehradun. Shanker, K. 1999. Birth and Death: the olive ridleys
in Orissa. Sanctuary Asia 19(3): 8-14.
Rajagopalan, M., E. Vivekanandan, S. Krishna Pillai,
M. Srinath & A.B. Fernando. 1996. Incidental catches Shanker, K. 1999. The odyssey of the olive ridley.
of sea turtles in India. Marine Fisheries Information Resonance 4(7): 68-78.
Service Technical & Extension Service 143: 8-16.
Shanker, K. 2001. Solving the ridley riddle. Sanctuary
Ram, K. 2000. Behavioural ecology of the olive ridley sea Asia 21(4): 32-35.
turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, 1827) during
the breeding period. M. Sc. Dissertation, Salim Ali Shanker, K. 2002. Tracking turtles through time and
School of Ecology, Pondicherry University, space. Resonance7(6): 53-66.
Pondicherry, India.
Shanker, K. 2003. Tracking olive ridleys on the coast
Ram, K. 2000. Offshore studies on olive ridley sea of India. Reptile Rap 5: 3.
turtles in Gahirmatha, Orissa. Kachhapa 3: 11-13.
January, 2005 34
Shanker, K. 2003. What ails the ridley ? The Hindu (Lepidochelys olivacea) on the east coast of India: A
Sunday Magazine 8th June 2003. report. Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India.
Shanker, K. & B.C. Choudhury (eds.) 2001. Proceedings Silas, E.G., M. Rajagopalan & A.B. Fernando. 1983.
of the National Workshop For The Development Of Sea turtles of India – Need for a crash programme
A National Sea Turtle Conservation Action Plan For on conservation & effective management of the
India, GOI UNDP Sea Turtle Project, April 2001, resource. Marine Fisheries Information Service Technical
Bhubaneshwar, India. Wildlife Institute of India, & Extension Service 50: 1–12.
Dehradun. India.
Silas, E.G., M. Rajagopalan, A.B. Fernando & S. S.
Shanker, K. & B.C. Choudhury (eds.) in press. Sea Dan. 1985. Marine turtle conservation &
turtles of the Indian subcontinent. Universities Press, management: A survey of the situation in Orissa
Hyderabad. India. 1981/82 & 1982/83. Marine Fisheries Information
Service Technical & Extension Service 50: 13-23.
Shanker, K. & B. Mohanty. 1999. Operation Kachhapa:
In search of a solution for the olive ridley of Orissa. Silas, E.G., M. Rajagopalan, S.S. Dan & A.B.
Marine Turtle Newsletter 86: 1-3. Fernando. 1984. Observations on the mass nesting
and immediate post-mass nesting influxes of the
Shanker, K. & B. Wright. 2000. Editorial: Operation olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea at Gahirmatha, Orissa
Kachhapa: New problems, new solutions? Kachhapa 2: – 1984 Season. Bulletin of Central Marine Fisheries
1. Research Institute 35: 76-82.
Shanker, K. & N.J. Pilcher. 2003. Marine turtle Silas, E.G., M. Rajagopalan, S.S. Dan & A.B.
conservation in South and Southeast Asia: hopeless Fernando. 1985. On the large and mini arribada of
cause or cause for hope? Marine Turtle Newsletter 100: the olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea at Gahirmatha,
43-51. Orissa during the 1985 season. Marine Fisheries
Information Service Technical & Extension Service 64: 1-
Shanker, K. & R. Kutty. in press. Sailing the flagship 16.
fantastic: myth and reality of sea turtle conservation
in India. Maritime Studies (Special Issue) 3(2): Silas, E. G. M. Rajagopalan, S. S. Dan & A.B.
Fernando.. 1985. On the continued exploitation of
Shanker, K., B. Pandav & B.C. Choudhury. 1999. Olive olive ridley Lepidochelys olivacea and its second mass
Ridleys in Orissa: further comments. Current Science 76: nesting at Gahirmatha, Orissa during 1984. In:
1522-1523. Proceedings of the Symposium on Endangered Marine
Animals and Marine Parks, Cochin, India (ed. E.G. Silas)
Shanker, K., B. Pandav & B.C. Choudhury. 2004. An pp. 227-233. Marine Biological Association of India,
assessment of the olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) Cochin, India.
nesting population in Orissa, India. Biological Conservation
115: 149–160. Silas, E.G. 1984. Sea turtle research and conservation
– some problem areas. Bulletin of Central Marine
Shanker, K., J. Rama Devi, B.C. Choudhury, L. Singh Fisheries Research Institute 35: 3-8.
& R.K. Aggarwal. 2004. Phylogeography of olive
ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) on the east coast of Singh, C. 1996. Bhitarkanika ecosystem protected
India: implications for conservation theory. Molecular by court’s decision. Marine Turtle Newsletter 73: 1-2.
Ecology 13: 1899-1909.
Tripathy, B. 1996. Mass hatching of olive ridley sea
Shanker, K., R.K. Aggarwal, B.C. Choudhury & L. turtle (Lepidochelys olivacea) along the Rushikulya
Singh. 2000. Conservation genetics of the olive ridley muhana, East coast of India. Masters Dissertation.
Berhampur University, Berhampur, Orissa. India.
January, 2005 35
Tripathy, B. 2000. Behavioral ecology of olive ridley sea hatchlings at Rushikulya rookery, Orissa, India.
turtle hatchlings at Rushikulya rookery, Orissa. Master Hamadryad 27: 185-192
of Philosophy thesis, Berhampur University,
Berhampur, Orissa. India Vijaya, J. 1982. Turtle slaughter in India. Marine Turtle
Newsletter 23: 2.
Tripathy, B. 2002. Is Gahirmatha the world’s largest
sea turtle rookery ? Current Science 83: 1299. Whitaker, R. & C.S. Kar. 1984. Arribada - The arrival
of the turtles. Sanctuary Asia 4(2): 140-149.
Tripathy, B. 2004. A study of the offshore distribution of
olive ridley turtles (Lepidochelys olivacea) in the coastal Whitaker, R. 1977. Sea turtles in Indian waters. Cheetal
waters of Rushikulya rookery along the Orissa coast, India. 16: 1.
Wildlife Conservation Society – India Program
Small Grant, Centre For Wildlife Studies, Bangalore, Whitaker, R. 1984. Note on the observations at the
India. olive ridley rookery at Gahirmatha, Orissa. Hamadryad
9(3): 19-20.
Tripathy, B. 2004. Distress call of an ancient mariner
– the sea turtle story. Science Reporter 41: 16-19. Wright, B. & B. Mohanty. 2003. Editorial: Showing
the way: Mass hatching of olive ridleys in Rushikulya,
Tripathy, B. 2004. Sea turtle and their habitat protection Orissa. Kachhapa 9: 1-2.
at Rushikulya rookery, Orissa, India. Wildlife Trust of
India, New Delhi, India.18 p. Wright, B. & B. Mohanty. 2002. Olive ridley mortality
in gill nets in Orissa. Kachhapa 6:18.
Tripathy, B. 2004. The olive ridley sea turtle: Towards an
integrated community-based conservation program along the Wright, B. 1993. Olive ridleys threatened in India,
Rushikulya rookery of Orissa, India. World Turtle Trust, Bhitarkanika, Orissa. Compiled notes.
Honolulu, USA, 23 P.
Wright, B., B. Mohanty & S. Matheson. 2001. An
Tripathy, B., B. Pandav & R.C. Panigrahy. 2003. update on turtle conservation activities in Orissa.
Hatching success and orientation of olive ridley sea Kachhapa 4: 8-11.
turtle Lepidochelys olivacea (Eschscholtz, 1829)
January, 2005 36
Book Review
The Chelonian Emperor has no Clothes: When and where did Red Listing go
Wrong?
A Review of Predicting extinction: Fundamental flaws in IUCN’s Red List System,

Exemplified by the Case of Sea Turtles. Nicholas Mrosovsky, Department of Zoology,
University of Toronto, private publication, 2004 (57 Pages)
Jeffrey A. Seminoff
Marine Turtle Research Program

NOAA – National Marine Fisheries Service,
Southwest Fisheries Science Center, La Jolla, California. USA.
For nearly 40 years, the World Conservation Union point regarding the increasingly liberal use of the
(IUCN) Red List Programme has been classifying the term ‘Endangered’: whereas the term was initially
extinction risk of imperiled animal and plant species applied to species considered to be ‘in immediate
around the globe. But according to author Nicholas danger of extinction (Honegger 1968)’, by 1979 a
Mrosovsky, these classifications are often erroneous species was considered Endangered when it was
due to inadequacies in both the Red List Programme’s simply “in danger of extinction (Honegger 1979).”
criteria for identifying species’ extinction risks as well The dropping of the term ‘immediate’ may seem
as an overly precautionary approach by those trivial to some, but it is the initial step toward an
employing the system. This argument is not new, as overly precautionary approach to Red Listing. Such
Mrosovsky and others have written about this on a precaution, as Mrosovsky argues, introduces bias
number of other occasions (eg. Mrosovsky 1983; 1996; toward listing in a higher category of threat than is
1997, Webb and Carillo 2000). However, in Predicting warranted by the facts.
Extinction, Mrosovsky goes beyond the general
problems and provides detailed accounts of why the “…a global listing for a species that is widespread is not in
system is flawed, using several of the most recent sea itself very useful or informative, and may even lead to confusion”
turtle assessments to illustrate his points. For the most
part, he focuses on four main shortcomings with the Although the IUCN would argue that the single
IUCN Red List Program: i) inadequate recognition in system employed by Red Listing is beneficial for
the differences between species, ii) inconsistency in comparing the predicaments of a wide diversity of
application of the Red List criteria among assessors, taxa, Predicting Extinction points out that this lack
iii) insufficient scientific documentation, and iv) lack of recognition of the differences among species is
of transparency in the Red Listing Process. The text is one of Red Listing’s gravest inadequacies. Why, as
filled with witty, investigative, and at times scathing Mrosovsky questions, would any system use the
passages regarding the current Red Listing system. It’s same assessment approach for species with
a rather short read that will be interesting to sea turtle dramatically different biology and demographics?
enthusiasts and wildlife biologists alike. Assessing a species with a 35-year generation time
may very well require a different approach than when
Predicting Extinction starts out chronicling the changes assessing a species with a 5-year generation time.
in Red List Categories and Definitions, from the initial Likewise, assessments of globally distributed species
Red Data Books of the 1960s with their Category 1, would surely require a different approach than
2, etc. labels to those in the new millennium with their assessments of species with restricted ranges. In
9-tiered system (Critically Endangered, Endangered, Predicting Extinction, Mrosovsky elaborates on
Vulnerable, etc.). Here, Mrosovsky makes an interesting these points, detailing why the IUCN stumbles when
January, 2005 37
from the distant past to monitor long-term changes? necessarily mean the species is going to be extinct
With globally distributed species, how can we address anytime in our lifetimes. To right these wrongs,
local and regional trends when the assessments are Mrosovsky suggests that “the entire system should be
painted with such a broad, global stroke? overhauled or replaced by a new system”. He further
explains that sea turtles should be reexamined, and
“The Critically Endangered category has become debased.” perhaps most importantly, the categories should be
restated so that they better describe extinction risks.
Certainly the more problematic cases are the ones
that open the Red List up to criticism, sea turtles Having personally undertaken the recent MTSG green
being a prime example. Of the seven species found turtle assessment (Seminoff 2004), I must say that I
worldwide, six are globally classified as vulnerable, agree with many of the points raised by Mrosovsky
endangered, or critically endangered, the seventh (the in this article. Clearly, the ‘one size fits all’ approach to
flatback turtle) is listed as Data Deficient. With respect assessing species leads to problems. And any sea turtle
to the most recent leatherback, hawksbill, and olive expert would be hard pressed to come up with an
ridley turtle global assessments, Predicting Extinction argument for why any sea turtle species is on the brink
presents stern, effective cases for why the Red List of extinction. That said, there are also several points
severely overstates the true risk of extinction. How, that I believe are missed in this document, perhaps
for example, can leatherback turtles be considered due to the timing of this writing. Namely, it is
Critically Endangered when several Atlantic important to note that the Red List criteria do have
subpopulations are actually increasing. Similarly, how the capacity to address species with different generation
can olive ridley turtles be considered Endangered times (see ’10 years or 3 generations’, IUCN 2001a),
when the Mexican subpopulation now has upwards and they have prescribed an assessment method for
of 1 million nests per annum? And with the widely distributed species (IUCN 2001b). Moreover,
hawksbill, a classification of Critically Endangered the newest criteria do in fact mandate the use of
has been used, despite the fact that several sea turtle literature and personal accounts that are either available
authorities have gone on record stating that the to the public or must be made available by assessors.
species is not going extinct any time soon. Indeed Nevertheless, as I’m sure Mrosovsky would agree,
there are fewer adult nesting hawksbill turtles today these accommodations fall far short from their
than there were, say, 50 years ago, but that does not intended goal.
Literature Cited
Honegger, R.E. (Compiler) 1968. Red Data Book. Volume Mrosovsky, N. 1983. Conserving sea turtles. British
3 – Amphibia and reptilia. IUCN, Survival Service Herpetological Society, London, UK.
Commission, Switzerland.
Mrosovsky, N. 1996. Need for clarity on species at risk. The
Honegger, R.E. (Compiler) 1979. Red Data Book. Volume Times, London. 12 November 1996
3 – Amphibia and reptilia. IUCN, Survival Service
Commission, Switzerland. Mrosovsky, N. 1997. IUCN’s credibility critically endangered.
Nature 389:436.
IUCN. 2001a. IUCN red list categories and criteria. Version
3.1. IUCN Species Sur vival Commission. Gland, Seminoff, J.A. 2004. Assessor. MTSG global assessment of
Switzerland. green turtles for the IUCN Red List. IUCN, Species Survival
Commission, Gland Switzerland.
IUCN. 2001b. Guidelines for assessing taxa with widely Webb, G.J.W. and C.E. Carillo. 2000. Risk of extinction and
distributed or multiple populations against Criterion A. categories of endangerment: perspectives from long-lived
Developed by the Standards and Petitions Subcommittee. reptiles. Population Ecology. 42:11-17.
June 2001.
January, 2005 38
Announcements
Indian Ocean Marine Turtle MOU – Meeting and Website
The third Meeting of the Signatory States will be held activities, as well as threats and mitigation
at the United Nations Conference Centre, Bangkok, measures at key sites;
from 23-31 March 2005. The Meeting of Signatory • an Interactive Mapping System (ImapS)
States will be preceded, on Monday 28 March, by a includes three decades of nesting and migration
meeting of the IOSEA Advisory Committee. data that can be queried interactively, and
overlaid with information on coral reefs,
The national reports that have already been submitted mangroves and sea grass distribution;
by most the Signatory States will serve as a good basis • the Project Database now includes entries for
for reviewing strengths and weakness in implementing more than 40 active projects and activities;
and reporting. More time will be allocated towards • an electronic library has valuable resource
identifying priorities for concerted intervention. The material, outlines of powerpoint presentations
meeting is also expected to consider, among other and other useful information;
things, progress towards the establishment of a • a new Flipper Tag Series resource contains
network of sites of importance for marine turtles, details of tag numbers in use around the region,
preparations for a 2006 Year of the Turtle campaign, with a view to promoting standardization and
a proposal to review information on fisheries-turtle eliminating duplication;
interactions in the IOSEA region, as well as policy • the latest news headlines and features are
papers on traditional and cultural use of marine turtles, added to the website on almost a daily basis;
and hatchery management. including preliminary assessments of the
damaged caused to conservation projects
The provisional agenda and registration from can be and turtle habitats by the recent Indian Ocean
found in the Meetings section of the IOSEA Website: Tsunami.
www.ioseaturtle.org. The website contains a wealth of
additional information on marine turtle conservation Source: Douglas Hykle
activities around the Indian Ocean and Southeast Asia Co-ordinator/Senior CMS Advisor
region: IOSEA Marine Turtle MOU Secretariat
• the Online Reporting Facility has detailed reports c/o UNEP Regional Office for Asia and Pacific
from nearly 20 IOSEA Signatory States, which United Nations Building, Rajdamnern Avenue
can be queried in relation to more than 100 Bangkok 10200, Thailand
Conservation and Society (http://conservationandsociety.org)

‘Conser vation and Society’ is a peer-reviewed Individuals are encouraged to become donor
interdisciplinary journal that aims to promote work subscribers for which they will be credited on the
on the theory and practice of conservation. journal as well as on the website. These donations
Conservation and Society was initiated two years ago subsidise free/discounted online access and hard
as an interdisciplinary journal to integrate conservation copy distribution in the developing world. As we
research from the natural and social sciences. Although are trying to produce this journal independent of a
the journal was originally visualized to have a focus on publisher, individual donations are of critical
South Asia, its geographical scope has been expanded importance in determining the future of the journal
to include issues regarding conservation from in terms of free online access and subsidized
developing countries around the world. The journal is distribution in the developing world. Please visit the
committed to disseminating information in the journal website:
developing world. Free online access is available http://www.conservationandsociety.org or email
for all articles and subscriptions are highly subsidised [email protected] for further
for Asia, Africa and latin America. details and enquiries.
January, 2005 39
Indian Ocean Tsunami Sea Turtle Fund

Make a Contribution
Help our colleagues and friends in areas affected by the recent tsunamis in the Indian Ocean. This fund will be used to help
rebuild damaged and destroyed infrastructure related to sea turtle research and conservation in the region, and in other ways that
are deemed most helpful. An advisory panel of sea turtlers from the region is being established to determine how funds should be
disbursed.
It is expected that these funds will not be needed for a few weeks as there are more important humanitarian issues to address first.
Our goal is to have a large pool of funds in place when the time comes that such help is needed.
At present we know that among the worst impacts to turtle conservation activities are the complete destruction of the work and
conservation centers in southern Sri Lanka, to a small extent in the Maldives, and we are yet to hear from our colleagues in India
on the state of their resources. As news filters in, we will update this important stream of information.
Our hearts reach out to all those affected by the Indian Ocean tsunamis.
If you prefer to help survivors and their families with humanitarian aid consider making monetary donations to these
organizations:
• Operation Wallacea Indonesia Tsunami Fund,

• Friends of the Earth Indonesia (WALHI) Earthquake and Tsunami Donation Appeal
• India Together http://www.indiatogether.org/relief/tsunami/
• The Indonesian Red Cross (Palang Merah Indonesia) (bahasa Indonesia) or (English)
• International Red Cross in Indonesia
• American Red Cross International Response Fund
• AmeriCares South Asia Earthquake Relief Fund
• Direct Relief International International Assistance Fund
• Médecins Sans Frontières International Tsunami Emergency Appeal
• Oxfam Asian Earthquake & Tsunami Fund
• Sarvodaya Relief Fund for Tsunami Tragedy
• UNICEF South Asia Tsunami Relief Efforts
OTHER RELIEF AGENCIES IN INDIA

Prime Minister’s National Relief Fund, Donations by cheques or demand drafts can be sent in
Prime Minister’s Office, favour of ‘NFF Tsunami Relief And Rehabilitation Fund’
South Block, New Delhi 110 001 , NAPM National Office, Haji Habib Bldg., A Wing, First
Floor, Naigaon Cross Road, Dadar (East), Mumbai
Thomas Kocherry, 400014.
World Forum of Fisher Peoples (WFFP) India, Tel. No: +91- 22 - 2415 0529 (Alimbhai).
National Fishorkers Forum (NFF)
Valiathura, Trivandrum-695008, India. International Collective in Support of Fishworkers
Mobile: +91-944705 2376 http://icsf.net/jsp/english/flashnews/helpPage.jsp
WFFP Office: +91- 471 -2501376
Emails: [email protected], [email protected] South Indian Federation of Fishworkers’ Societies
National Alliance of People’s Movements(NAPM) http://www.tsunami2004-india.org
January, 2005 40
Editor
Kartik Shanker
659, 5th A Main Road, Bangalore 560024. India.
Editorial Board
Sali J. Bache Jeanne A. Mortimer

University of Tasmania, Australia Marine Conservation Society Seychelles,
Seychelles
John G. Frazier
Conservation & Research Center, Nicolas J. Pilcher
Smithsonian Institution, USA Marine Research Foundation, Sabah,
Malaysia
Matthew H. Godfrey
North Carolina Wildlife Resources Pankaj Sekhsaria
Commission, USA Kalpavriksh, Pune, India
Mark Hamann
James Cook University, Australia
Country Representatives
India Sri Lanka

B.C. Choudhury Thushan Kapurusinghe
Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India. Turtle Conservation Project, Sri Lanka
Bangladesh
S.M.A. Rashid
CARINAM, Dhaka,Bangladesh.
Webmasters Editorial Assistants
Karthik Ram Aarthi Sridhar

University of California, Davis, USA Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the
Environment (ATREE), Bangalore, India
Michael Coyne
Duke University, USA Basudev Tripathy
Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the
Environment (ATREE), Bangalor, India
Design and Layout: ECOTONE, Chennai
Cover photograph: Olive ridley turtle (Bivash Pandav)

Kartik Shanker Editorial 1
Special Section: Sea turtle Conservation in Orissa
Aarthi Sridhar, B. Tripathy A review of legislation and conservation measures for sea turtles 1
& K. Shanker in Orissa, India
K. Aleya Perspectives of the traditional fishworkers on sea turtle conservation 7

in Orissa
Project Swarajya Views of the trawler owners and their association on sea turtle 8
conservation in Orissa
Kartik Shanker, B. Tripathy Biological studies on sea turtles on the coast of Orissa 10
& B. Pandav
International Collective in Views of fishworker support organisations on turtle conservation 11

Support of Fishworkers measures in Orissa
K. Aleya Initiatives towards consensus - the Orissa Marine Resources 12

Conservation Consortium
Pankaj Sekhsaria The Dhamra Port 14
Belinda Wright & B. Mohanty Operation Kachhapa and the sea turtles of Orissa 16
Profiles of NGOs working on sea turtle conservation and fisheries in Orissa 18

Rushikulya Sea Turtle Protection Committee
Maa Ganga Devi Santi Maitri Yuvak Sanga
Orissa Traditional Fish Workers' Union
Samudram - The Women's Collective
United Artists' Association, Ganjam
Project Swarajya
Wild Orissa
Greenpeace
World Wide Fund For Nature India
Letters to the Editor 26
Basudev Tripathy, A bibliography of literature on sea turtles in Orissa, India 28

M.A.Oommen, B. Pandav
& K. Shanker
Book Reviews
Jeffrey A. Seminoff The chelonian emperor has no clothes: when and where did red 37
listing go wrong?A Review of ‘Predicting extinction: Fundamental
flaws in IUCN's Red List System, Exemplified by the Case of Sea
Turtles’ By NicholasMrosovsky
Announcements 39

Flaws in Iucn'S Red List System, Exemplified by The Case of Sea Turtles' by Nicholasmrosovsky

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flaws in Iucn'S Red List System, Exemplified by The Case of Sea Turtles' by Nicholasmrosovsky

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Flaws in Iucn'S Red List System, Exemplified by The Case of Sea Turtles' by Nicholasmrosovsky

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Indian Ocean Turtle Newsletter was initiated to provide a forum for exchange of information on sea turtle

Manuscripts should be submitted by email to: [email protected]

Reference styles in list:

This newsletter is produced with support from:

IOTN ONLINE IS AVAILABLE AT http://www.seaturtle.org/iotn

Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)

A Review of Legislation and Conservation Measures for Sea Turtles in Orissa,

Aarthi Sridhar, Basudev Tripathy and Kartik Shanker

Coastal and Marine Conservation Programme

Figure 1: Fisheries regulations for sea turtle conservation in Orissa

Table 1: Turtle Conservation Measures and Related Laws

Perspectives of the Traditional Fishworkers on Sea Turtle Conservation

Secretary, Orissa Traditional Fish Worker’s Union, Ganjam

The Orissa Traditional Fish Worker’s Union (OTFWU) below:

Turtle conservation from the perspective of Orissa’s trawling industry

Ganesh Ghat, Bakharabad, Cuttack-753002, Orissa

Biological Studies on Sea Turtles on the Coast of Orissa

Kartik Shanker1, Basudev Tripathy1 and Bivash Pandav2

1-Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)

Views of Fishworker Support Organisations on Turtle Conservation Measures

International Collective in Support of Fishworkers

27, College Road, Chennai 600006. India

The International Collective in Support of Fishworkers alternative livelihood. Incentives to switch to

Initiatives towards Consensus - the Orissa Marine Resources Conservation

Coordinator, Orissa Marine Resources Conservation Consortium

The Dhamra Port in Orissa

Kalpavriksh, Apt. 5 Shree Dutta Krupa,

Chronology of events related to the Dhamra port

Mar. 1881: Dhamra notified as a port (Chandbali).

Operation Kachhapa & the Sea Turtles of Orissa

Belinda Wright1 & Biswajit Mohanty2

1 - Project Director, Operation Kachhapa

Profile of NGOS working on sea turtle conservation and

Mailing Address : Purunabandha, PO – Palibandha,

MAA GANGA DEVI SANTI MAITRI YUVAK SANGA

Mailing Address : Purunabandha, PO – Palibandha,

ORISSA TRADITIONAL FISH WORKERS’ UNION

SAMUDRAM - THE WOMEN’S COLLECTIVE

Mailing Address : Samudram,

Area of operation : Ganjam District, Orissa

UNITED ARTISTS’ ASSOCIATION, GANJAM

Mailing Address : #3360, 13th B Main,HAL II Stage

WORLD WIDE FUND FOR NATURE INDIA

Mailing Address : WWF – India Secretariat

Letters to the Editor

Sir, other sea turtle biologists pointed out that such

the appropriation of credit for innovations and ideas Basudev Tripathy

Casuarina plantations along sea turtle nesting beaches in Orissa

Sir, Though I did not walk the beach between Paradeep

A bibliography of literature on sea turtles in Orissa, India

1-Ashoka Trust for Research in Ecology and the Environment (ATREE)

A Review of Predicting extinction: Fundamental flaws in IUCN’s Red List System,

Marine Turtle Research Program

Conservation and Society (http://conservationandsociety.org)

Indian Ocean Tsunami Sea Turtle Fund

• Operation Wallacea Indonesia Tsunami Fund,

OTHER RELIEF AGENCIES IN INDIA

Sali J. Bache Jeanne A. Mortimer

India Sri Lanka