[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 16, 2010)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 12598-12656]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-5370]



[[Page 12597]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part II





Department of the Interior





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Fish and Wildlife Service



-----------------------------------------------------------------------





Department of Commerce





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration



-----------------------------------------------------------------------



50 CFR Parts 17, 223, and 224



Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Listing of Nine Distinct 
Population Segments of Loggerhead Sea Turtles as Endangered or 
Threatened; Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 75 , No. 50 / Tuesday, March 16, 2010 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 12598]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Parts 223 and 224

[Docket No. 100104003-0004-01]
RIN 0648-AY49


Endangered and Threatened Species; Proposed Listing of Nine 
Distinct Population Segments of Loggerhead Sea Turtles as Endangered or 
Threatened

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce; United States Fish and 
Wildlife Service (USFWS), Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rules; 12-month petition findings; request for 
comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We (NMFS and USFWS; also collectively referred to as the 
Services) have determined that the loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta 
caretta) is composed of nine distinct population segments (DPSs) that 
qualify as ``species'' for listing as endangered or threatened under 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA), and we propose to list two as 
threatened and seven as endangered. This also constitutes the 12-month 
findings on a petition to reclassify loggerhead turtles in the North 
Pacific Ocean as a DPS with endangered status and designate critical 
habitat, and a petition to reclassify loggerhead turtles in the 
Northwest Atlantic as a DPS with endangered status and designate 
critical habitat. We will propose to designate critical habitat, if 
found to be prudent and determinable, for the two loggerhead sea turtle 
DPSs occurring within the United States in a subsequent Federal 
Register notice.

DATES: Comments on this proposal must be received by June 14, 2010. 
Public hearing requests must be received by June 1, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by the RIN 0648-AY49, by 
any of the following methods:
     Electronic Submissions: Submit all electronic public 
comments via the Federal eRulemaking Portal.
     Mail: NMFS National Sea Turtle Coordinator, Attn: 
Loggerhead Proposed Listing Rule, Office of Protected Resources, 
National Marine Fisheries Service, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13657, 
Silver Spring, MD 20910 or USFWS National Sea Turtle Coordinator, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, 7915 Baymeadows Way, Suite 200, 
Jacksonville, FL 32256.
     Fax: To the attention of NMFS National Sea Turtle 
Coordinator at 301-713-0376 or USFWS National Sea Turtle Coordinator at 
904-731-3045.
    Instructions: All comments received are a part of the public record 
and will generally be posted to http://www.regulations.gov without 
change. All Personal Identifying Information (for example, name, 
address, etc.) voluntarily submitted by the commenter may be publicly 
accessible. Do not submit Confidential Business Information or 
otherwise sensitive or protected information.
    NMFS and USFWS will accept anonymous comments (enter N/A in the 
required fields, if you wish to remain anonymous). Attachments to 
electronic comments will be accepted in Microsoft Word, Excel, 
WordPerfect, or Adobe PDF file formats only. The proposed rule is 
available electronically at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Barbara Schroeder, NMFS (ph. 301-713-
1401, fax 301-713-0376, e-mail [email protected]), Sandy 
MacPherson, USFWS (ph. 904-731-3336, e-mail [email protected]), 
Marta Nammack, NMFS (ph. 301-713-1401, fax 301-713-0376, e-mail [email protected]), or Emily Bizwell, USFWS (ph. 404-679-7149, fax 404-
679-7081, e-mail [email protected]). Persons who use a 
Telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal 
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7 
days a week.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited

    We solicit public comment on this proposed listing determination. 
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal will be as 
accurate and as effective as possible and informed by the best 
available scientific and commercial information. Therefore, we request 
comments or information from the public, other concerned governmental 
agencies, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested 
party concerning this proposed rule. We are seeking information and 
comments on whether the nine proposed loggerhead sea turtle DPSs 
qualify as DPSs and, if so, whether they should be classified as 
threatened or endangered as described in the ``Listing Determinations 
Under the ESA'' section provided below. Specifically, we are soliciting 
information in the following areas relative to loggerhead turtles 
within the nine proposed DPSs: (1) Historical and current population 
status and trends, (2) historical and current distribution, (3) 
migratory movements and behavior, (4) genetic population structure, (5) 
current or planned activities that may adversely impact loggerhead 
turtles, and (6) ongoing efforts to protect loggerhead turtles. We are 
also soliciting information and comment on the status and effectiveness 
of conservation efforts and the approach that should be used to weigh 
the risk of extinction of each DPS. Comments and new information will 
be considered in making final determinations whether listing of each 
DPS is warranted and if so whether it is threatened or endangered. We 
request that all data, information, and comments be accompanied by 
supporting documentation such as maps, bibliographic references, or 
reprints of pertinent publications.

Background

    We issued a final rule listing the loggerhead sea turtle as 
threatened throughout its worldwide range on July 28, 1978 (43 FR 
32800). On July 12, 2007, we received a petition to list the ``North 
Pacific populations of loggerhead sea turtle'' as an endangered species 
under the ESA. NMFS published a notice in the Federal Register on 
November 16, 2007 (72 FR 64585), concluding that the petitioners 
(Center for Biological Diversity and Turtle Island Restoration Network) 
presented substantial scientific information indicating that the 
petitioned action may be warranted. Also, on November 15, 2007, we 
received a petition to list the ``Western North Atlantic populations of 
loggerhead sea turtle'' as an endangered species under the ESA. NMFS 
published a notice in the Federal Register on March 5, 2008 (73 FR 
11849), concluding that the petitioners (Center for Biological 
Diversity and Oceana) presented substantial scientific information 
indicating that the petitioned action may be warranted.
    On March 12, 2009, the petitioners (Center for Biological 
Diversity, Turtle Island Restoration Network, and Oceana) sent a 60-day 
notice of intent to sue to the Services for failure to make 12-month 
findings on the petitions. The statutory deadlines for the 12-month 
findings were July 16, 2008, for the North Pacific petition and 
November 16, 2008, for the Northwest Atlantic petition. On May 28, 
2009, the petitioners filed a Complaint for

[[Page 12599]]

Declaratory and Injunctive Relief to compel the Services to complete 
the 12-month findings. On October 8, 2009, the petitioners and the 
Services reached a settlement in which the Services agreed to submit to 
the Federal Register a 12-month finding on the two petitions on or 
before February 19, 2010. On February 16, 2010, the United States 
District Court for the Northern District of California modified the 
February 19, 2010 deadline to March 8, 2010.
    In early 2008, NMFS assembled a Loggerhead Biological Review Team 
(BRT) to complete a status review of the loggerhead sea turtle. The BRT 
was composed of biologists from NMFS, USFWS, the Florida Fish and 
Wildlife Conservation Commission, and the North Carolina Wildlife 
Resources Commission. The BRT was charged with reviewing and evaluating 
all relevant scientific information relating to loggerhead population 
structure globally to determine whether DPSs exist and, if so, to 
assess the status of each DPS. The findings of the BRT, which are 
detailed in the ``Loggerhead Sea Turtle (Caretta caretta) 2009 Status 
Review under the U.S. Endangered Species Act'' (Conant et al., 2009; 
hereinafter referred to as the Status Review), addressed DPS 
delineations, extinction risks to the species, and threats to the 
species. The Status Review underwent independent peer review by nine 
scientists with expertise in loggerhead sea turtle biology, genetics, 
and modeling. The Status Review is available electronically at http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/species/statusreviews.htm.
    This Federal Register document announces 12-month findings on the 
petitions to list the North Pacific populations and the Northwest 
Atlantic populations of the loggerhead sea turtle as DPSs with 
endangered status and includes a proposed rule to designate nine 
loggerhead DPSs worldwide.

Policies for Delineating Species Under the ESA

    Section 3 of the ESA defines ``species'' as including ``any 
subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population 
segment of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds 
when mature.'' The term ``distinct population segment'' is not 
recognized in the scientific literature. Therefore, the Services 
adopted a joint policy for recognizing DPSs under the ESA (DPS Policy; 
61 FR 4722) on February 7, 1996. Congress has instructed the Secretary 
of the Interior or of Commerce to exercise this authority with regard 
to DPSs ``* * * sparingly and only when the biological evidence 
indicates such action is warranted.'' The DPS Policy requires the 
consideration of two elements when evaluating whether a vertebrate 
population segment qualifies as a DPS under the ESA: (1) The 
discreteness of the population segment in relation to the remainder of 
the species or subspecies to which it belongs; and (2) the significance 
of the population segment to the species or subspecies to which it 
belongs.
    A population segment of a vertebrate species may be considered 
discrete if it satisfies either one of the following conditions: (1) It 
is markedly separated from other populations of the same taxon (an 
organism or group of organisms) as a consequence of physical, 
ecological, or behavioral factors. Quantitative measures of genetic or 
morphological discontinuity may provide evidence of this separation; or 
(2) it is delimited by international governmental boundaries within 
which differences in control of exploitation, management of habitat, 
conservation status, or regulatory mechanisms exist that are 
significant in light of section 4(a)(1)(D) of the ESA (i.e., inadequate 
regulatory mechanisms).
    If a population segment is found to be discrete under one or both 
of the above conditions, its biological and ecological significance to 
the taxon to which it belongs is evaluated. This consideration may 
include, but is not limited to: (1) Persistence of the discrete 
population segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the 
taxon; (2) evidence that loss of the discrete population segment would 
result in a significant gap in the range of a taxon; (3) evidence that 
the discrete population segment represents the only surviving natural 
occurrence of a taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an 
introduced population outside its historic range; or (4) evidence that 
the discrete population segment differs markedly from other population 
segments of the species in its genetic characteristics.

Listing Determinations Under the ESA

    The ESA defines an endangered species as one that is in danger of 
extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range, and a 
threatened species as one that is likely to become endangered in the 
foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range 
(sections 3(6) and 3(20), respectively). The statute requires us to 
determine whether any species is endangered or threatened because of 
any of the following five factors: (1) The present or threatened 
destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range; (2) 
overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes; (3) disease or predation; (4) the inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (5) other natural or manmade factors 
affecting its continued existence (section 4(a)(1)(A-E)). We are to 
make this determination based solely on the best available scientific 
and commercial data available after conducting a review of the status 
of the species and taking into account any efforts being made by States 
or foreign governments to protect the species.

Biology and Life History of Loggerhead Turtles

    A thorough account of loggerhead biology and life history may be 
found in the Status Review, which is incorporated here by reference. 
The following is a succinct summary of that information.
    The loggerhead occurs throughout the temperate and tropical regions 
of the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans (Dodd, 1988). However, the 
majority of loggerhead nesting is at the western rims of the Atlantic 
and Indian Oceans. The most recent reviews show that only two 
loggerhead nesting aggregations have greater than 10,000 females 
nesting per year: Peninsular Florida, United States, and Masirah 
Island, Oman (Baldwin et al., 2003; Ehrhart et al., 2003; Kamezaki et 
al., 2003; Limpus and Limpus, 2003; Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
Nesting aggregations with 1,000 to 9,999 females nesting annually are 
Georgia through North Carolina (United States), Quintana Roo and 
Yucatan (Mexico), Brazil, Cape Verde Islands (Cape Verde), Western 
Australia (Australia), and Japan. Smaller nesting aggregations with 100 
to 999 nesting females annually occur in the Northern Gulf of Mexico 
(United States), Dry Tortugas (United States), Cay Sal Bank (The 
Bahamas), Tongaland (South Africa), Mozambique, Arabian Sea Coast 
(Oman), Halaniyat Islands (Oman), Cyprus, Peloponnesus (Greece), 
Zakynthos (Greece), Crete (Greece), Turkey, and Queensland (Australia). 
In contrast to determining population size on nesting beaches, 
determining population size in the marine environment has been very 
localized. A summary of information on distribution and habitat by 
ocean basin follows.

Pacific Ocean

    Loggerheads can be found throughout tropical to temperate waters in 
the Pacific; however, their breeding grounds include a restricted 
number of sites in the North Pacific and South Pacific. Within the 
North Pacific, loggerhead nesting has been documented only in Japan 
(Kamezaki et al., 2003), although

[[Page 12600]]

low level nesting may occur outside of Japan in areas surrounding the 
South China Sea (Chan et al., 2007). In the South Pacific, nesting 
beaches are restricted to eastern Australia and New Caledonia and, to a 
much lesser extent, Vanuatu and Tokelau (Limpus and Limpus, 2003).
    Based on tag-recapture studies, the East China Sea has been 
identified as the major habitat for post-nesting adult females (Iwamoto 
et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997; Balazs, 2006), while satellite 
tracking of juvenile loggerheads indicates the Kuroshio Extension 
Bifurcation Region to be an important pelagic foraging area for 
juvenile loggerheads (Polovina et al., 2006). Other important juvenile 
turtle foraging areas have been identified off the coast of Baja 
California Sur, Mexico (Pitman, 1990; Peckham and Nichols, 2006).
    Nesting females tagged on the coast of eastern Australia have been 
recorded foraging in New Caledonia; Queensland, New South Wales, and 
Northern Territory, Australia; Solomon Islands; Papua New Guinea; and 
Indonesia (Limpus and Limpus, 2003). Foraging Pacific loggerheads 
originating from nesting beaches in Australia are known to migrate to 
Chile and Peru (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004, 2008a; Donoso and Dutton, 
2006; Boyle et al., 2009).

Indian Ocean

    In the North Indian Ocean, Oman hosts the vast majority of 
loggerhead nesting. The majority of the nesting in Oman occurs on 
Masirah Island, on the Al Halaniyat Islands, and on mainland beaches 
south of Masirah Island all the way to the Oman-Yemen border (IUCN--The 
World Conservation Union, 1989a, 1989b; Salm, 1991; Salm and Salm, 
1991). In addition, nesting probably occurs on the mainland of Yemen on 
the Arabian Sea coast, and nesting has been confirmed on Socotra, an 
island off the coast of Yemen (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). Limited 
information exists on the foraging habitats of North Indian Ocean 
loggerheads; however, foraging individuals have been reported off the 
southern coastline of Oman (Salm et al., 1993). Satellite telemetry 
studies of post-nesting migrations of loggerheads nesting on Masirah 
Island, Oman, have revealed extensive use of the waters off the Arabian 
Peninsula, with the majority of telemetered turtles traveling 
southwest, following the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, and 
circling well offshore in nearby oceanic waters (Environment Society of 
Oman and Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished 
data). A minority traveled north as far as the western Persian 
(Arabian) Gulf or followed the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen as 
far west as the Gulf of Aden and the Bab-el-Mandab.
    The only verified nesting beaches for loggerheads on the Indian 
subcontinent are found in Sri Lanka. A small number of nesting females 
use the beaches of Sri Lanka every year (Deraniyagala, 1939; Kar and 
Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, 1988); however, there are no records indicating 
that Sri Lanka has ever been a major nesting area for loggerheads 
(Kapurusinghe, 2006). No confirmed nesting occurs on the mainland of 
India (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006). The Gulf of Mannar provides 
foraging habitat for juvenile and post-nesting adult turtles (Tripathy, 
2005; Kapurusinghe, 2006).
    In the East Indian Ocean, western Australia hosts all known 
loggerhead nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting distributions in western 
Australia span from the Shark Bay World Heritage Area northward through 
the Ningaloo Marine Park coast to the North West Cape and to the nearby 
Muiron Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from Dirk 
Hartog Island have been recorded foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth 
Gulf, while other adults range much farther (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    In the Southwest Indian Ocean, loggerhead nesting occurs on the 
southeastern coast of Africa, from the Paradise Islands in Mozambique 
southward to St. Lucia in South Africa, and on the south and 
southwestern coasts of Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003). Foraging 
habitats are only known for post-nesting females from Tongaland, South 
Africa; tagging data show these loggerheads migrating eastward to 
Madagascar, northward to Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya, and southward 
to Cape Agulhas at the southernmost point of Africa (Baldwin et al., 
2003; Luschi et al., 2006).

Atlantic Ocean

    In the Northwest Atlantic, the majority of loggerhead nesting is 
concentrated along the coasts of the United States from southern 
Virginia through Alabama. Additional nesting beaches are found along 
the northern and western Gulf of Mexico, eastern Yucatan Peninsula, at 
Cay Sal Bank in the eastern Bahamas (Addison and Morford, 1996; 
Addison, 1997), on the southwestern coast of Cuba (F. Moncada-Gavilan, 
personal communication, cited in Ehrhart et al., 2003), and along the 
coasts of Central America, Colombia, Venezuela, and the eastern 
Caribbean Islands. In the Southwest Atlantic, loggerheads nest in 
significant numbers only in Brazil. In the eastern Atlantic, the 
largest nesting population of loggerheads is in the Cape Verde Islands 
(L.F. Lopez-Jurado, personal communication, cited in Ehrhart et al., 
2003), and some nesting occurs along the West African coast (Fretey, 
2001).
    As post-hatchlings, Northwest Atlantic loggerheads use the North 
Atlantic Gyre and enter Northeast Atlantic waters (Carr, 1987). They 
are also found in the Mediterranean Sea (Carreras et al., 2006; Eckert 
et al., 2008). In these areas, they overlap with animals originating 
from the Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea (Laurent et al., 
1993, 1998; Bolten et al., 1998; LaCasella et al., 2005; Carreras et 
al., 2006; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert 
et al., 2008). The oceanic juvenile stage in the North Atlantic has 
been primarily studied in the waters around the Azores and Madeira 
(Bolten, 2003). In Azorean waters, satellite telemetry data and flipper 
tag returns suggest a long period of residency (Bolten, 2003), whereas 
turtles appear to be moving through Madeiran waters (Dellinger and 
Freitas, 2000). Preliminary genetic analyses indicate that juvenile 
loggerheads found in Moroccan waters are of western Atlantic origin (M. 
Tiwari, NMFS, and A. Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data). 
Other concentrations of oceanic juvenile turtles exist in the Atlantic 
(e.g., in the region of the Grand Banks off Newfoundland). Genetic 
information indicates the Grand Banks are foraging grounds for a 
mixture of loggerheads from all the North Atlantic rookeries (LaCasella 
et al., 2005; Bowen et al., 2005), and a large size range is 
represented (Watson et al., 2004, 2005).
    After departing the oceanic zone, neritic juvenile loggerheads in 
the Northwest Atlantic inhabit continental shelf waters from Cape Cod 
Bay, Massachusetts, south through Florida, The Bahamas, Cuba, and the 
Gulf of Mexico (neritic refers to the inshore marine environment from 
the surface to the sea floor where water depths do not exceed 200 
meters).
    Habitat preferences of Northwest Atlantic non-nesting adult 
loggerheads in the neritic zone differ from the juvenile stage in that 
relatively enclosed, shallow water estuarine habitats with limited 
ocean access are less frequently used. Areas such as Pamlico Sound and 
the Indian River Lagoon in the United States, regularly used by 
juvenile loggerheads, are only rarely frequented by adults. In 
comparison, estuarine areas with more open ocean access, such as 
Chesapeake Bay in the U.S. mid-Atlantic, are also regularly used by 
juvenile loggerheads, as well as by adults primarily during

[[Page 12601]]

warmer seasons. Shallow water habitats with large expanses of open 
ocean access, such as Florida Bay, provide year-round resident foraging 
areas for significant numbers of male and female adult loggerheads. 
Offshore, adults primarily inhabit continental shelf waters, from New 
York south through Florida, The Bahamas, Cuba, and the Gulf of Mexico. 
The southern edge of the Grand Bahama Bank is important habitat for 
loggerheads nesting on the Cay Sal Bank in The Bahamas, but nesting 
females are also resident in the bights of Eleuthera, Long Island, and 
Ragged Islands as well as Florida Bay in the United States, and the 
north coast of Cuba (A. Bolten and K. Bjorndal, University of Florida, 
unpublished data). Moncada et al. (in press) reported the recapture in 
Cuban waters of five adult female loggerheads originally flipper tagged 
in Quintana Roo, Mexico, indicating that Cuban shelf waters likely also 
provide foraging habitat for adult females that nest in Mexico.
    In the Northeast Atlantic, satellite telemetry studies of post-
nesting females from Cape Verde identified two distinct dispersal 
patterns; larger individuals migrated to benthic foraging areas off the 
northwest Africa coast and smaller individuals foraged primarily 
oceanically off the northwest Africa coast (Hawkes et al., 2006). 
Monzon-Arguello et al. (2009) conducted a mixed stock analysis of 
juvenile loggerheads sampled from foraging areas in the Canary Islands, 
Madeira, Azores, and Andalusia and concluded that while juvenile 
loggerheads from the Cape Verde population were distributed among these 
four sites, a large proportion of Cape Verde juvenile turtles appear to 
inhabit as yet unidentified foraging areas.
    In the South Atlantic, relatively little is known about the at-sea 
behavior of loggerheads originating from nesting beaches in Brazil. 
Recaptures of tagged juvenile turtles and nesting females have shown 
movement of animals up and down the coast of South America (Almeida et 
al., 2000; Marcovaldi et al., 2000; Laporta and Lopez, 2003; Almeida et 
al., 2007). Juvenile loggerheads, presumably of Brazilian origin, have 
also been captured on the high seas of the South Atlantic (Kotas et 
al., 2004; Pinedo and Polacheck, 2004) and off the coast of Atlantic 
Africa (Bal et al., 2007; Petersen, 2005; Petersen et al., 2007) 
suggesting that loggerheads of the South Atlantic may undertake 
transoceanic developmental migrations (Bolten et al., 1998; Peckham et 
al., 2007).

Mediterranean Sea

    Loggerhead turtles are widely distributed in the Mediterranean Sea. 
However, nesting is almost entirely confined to the eastern 
Mediterranean basin, with the main nesting concentrations in Cyprus, 
Greece, and Turkey (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Preliminary surveys in 
Libya suggested nesting activity comparable to Greece and Turkey, 
although a better quantification is needed (Laurent et al., 1999). 
Minimal to moderate nesting also occurs in other countries throughout 
the Mediterranean including Egypt, Israel, Italy (southern coasts and 
islands), Lebanon, Syria, and Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
Recently, isolated nesting events have been recorded in the western 
Mediterranean basin, namely in Spain, Corsica (France), and in the 
Tyrrhenian Sea (Italy) (Tomas et al., 2002; Delaugerre and Cesarini, 
2004; Bentivegna et al., 2005).
    Important neritic habitats have been suggested for the large 
continental shelves of: (1) Tunisia-Libya, (2) northern Adriatic Sea, 
(3) Egypt, and (4) Spain (Margaritoulis, 1988; Argano et al., 1992; 
Laurent and Lescure, 1994; Lazar et al., 2000; Gomez de Segura et al., 
2006; Broderick et al., 2007; Casale et al., 2007b; Nada and Casale, 
2008). At least the first three constitute shallow benthic habitats for 
adults (including post-nesting females). Some other neritic foraging 
areas include Amvrakikos Bay in western Greece, Lakonikos Bay in 
southern Greece, and southern Turkey. Oceanic foraging areas for small 
juvenile loggerheads have been identified in the south Adriatic Sea 
(Casale et al., 2005b), Ionian Sea (Deflorio et al., 2005), Sicily 
Strait (Casale et al., 2007b), and western Mediterranean (Spain) (e.g., 
Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2006). In addition, tagged juvenile loggerheads 
have been recorded crossing the Mediterranean from the eastern to the 
western basin and vice versa, as well as in the Eastern Atlantic 
(Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al., 2007b).
    Reproductive migrations have been confirmed by flipper tagging and 
satellite telemetry. Female loggerheads, after nesting in Greece, 
migrate primarily to the Gulf of Gab[egrave]s and the northern Adriatic 
(Margaritoulis, 1988; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004; 
Zbinden et al., 2008). Loggerheads nesting in Cyprus migrate to Egypt 
and Libya, exhibiting fidelity in following the same migration route 
during subsequent nesting seasons (Broderick et al., 2007). In 
addition, directed movements of juvenile loggerheads have been 
confirmed through flipper tagging (Argano et al., 1992; Casale et al., 
2007b) and satellite tracking (Rees and Margaritoulis, 2009).

Overview of Information Used To Identify DPSs

    In the Status Review, the BRT considered a vast array of 
information to assess whether there are any loggerhead population 
segments that satisfy the DPS criteria of both discreteness and 
significance. First, the BRT examined whether there were any loggerhead 
population segments that were discrete. Data relevant to the 
discreteness question included physical, ecological, behavioral, and 
genetic data. Given the physical separation of ocean basins by 
continents, the BRT evaluated these data by ocean basin (Pacific Ocean, 
Indian Ocean, and Atlantic Ocean). This was not to preclude any larger 
or smaller DPS delineation, but to aid in data organization and 
assessment. The BRT then evaluated genetic information by ocean basin. 
The genetic data consisted of results from studies using maternally 
inherited mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) and biparentally inherited nuclear 
DNA microsatellite markers. Next, tagging data (both flipper and PIT 
tags) and telemetry data were reviewed. Additional information, such as 
potential differences in morphology, was also evaluated. Finally, the 
BRT considered whether the available information on loggerhead 
population segments was bounded by any oceanographic features (e.g., 
current systems) or geographic features (e.g., land masses).
    In accordance with the DPS policy, the BRT also reviewed whether 
the population segments identified in the discreteness analysis were 
significant. If a population segment is considered discrete, its 
biological and ecological significance must then be considered. NMFS 
and USFWS must consider available scientific evidence of the discrete 
segment's importance to the taxon to which it belongs. Data relevant to 
the significance question include morphological, ecological, 
behavioral, and genetic data, as described above. The BRT considered 
the following factors, listed in the DPS policy, in determining whether 
the discrete population segments were significant: (a) Persistence of 
the discrete segment in an ecological setting unusual or unique for the 
taxon; (b) evidence that loss of the discrete segment would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon; (c) evidence that the 
discrete segment represents the only surviving natural occurrence of a 
taxon that may be more abundant elsewhere as an introduced

[[Page 12602]]

population outside its historical range; and (d) evidence that the 
discrete segment differs markedly from other populations of the species 
in its genetic characteristics.
    A discrete population segment needs to satisfy only one of these 
criteria to be considered significant. The DPS policy also allows for 
consideration of other factors if they are appropriate to the biology 
or ecology of the species. As described below, the BRT evaluated the 
available information and considered items (a), (b) and (d), as noted 
above, to be most applicable to loggerheads.

Discreteness Determination

    As described in the Status Review, the loggerhead sea turtle is 
present in all tropical and temperate ocean basins, and has a life 
history that involves nesting on coastal beaches and foraging in 
neritic and oceanic habitats, as well as long-distance migrations 
between and within these areas. As with other globally distributed 
marine species, today's global loggerhead population has been shaped by 
a sequence of isolation events created by tectonic and oceanographic 
shifts over geologic time scales, the result of which is population 
substructuring in many areas (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). 
Globally, loggerhead turtles comprise a mosaic of populations, each 
with unique nesting sites and in many cases possessing disparate 
demographic features (e.g., mean body size, age at first reproduction) 
(Dodd, 1988). However, despite these differences, loggerheads from 
different nesting populations often mix in common foraging areas during 
certain life stages (Bolten and Witherington, 2003), thus creating 
unique challenges when attempting to delineate distinct population 
segments for management or listing purposes.
    Bowen et al. (1994) examined the mtDNA sequence diversity of 
loggerheads across their global distribution and found a separation of 
loggerheads in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from those in the 
Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene period. The divergence 
between these two primary lineages corresponds to approximately three 
million years (2 percent per million years; Dutton et al., 1996; 
Encalada et al., 1996). Geography and climate appear to have shaped the 
evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial 
cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier 
between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water 
off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier between the 
Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003). Recent warm temperatures 
during interglacial periods allowed bi-directional invasion by the 
temperate-adapted loggerheads into the respective basins (Bowen et al., 
1994; J.S. Reece, Washington University, personal communication, 2008). 
Today, it appears that loggerheads within a basin are effectively 
isolated from populations in the other basin, but some dispersal from 
the Tongaland rookery in the Indian Ocean into feeding and 
developmental habitat in the South Atlantic is possible via the Agulhas 
Current (G.R. Hughes, unpublished data, cited in Bowen et al., 1994). 
In the Pacific, extensive mtDNA studies show that the northern 
loggerhead populations are isolated from the southern Pacific 
populations, and that juvenile loggerheads from these distinct genetic 
populations do not disperse across the equator (Hatase et al., 2002a; 
Dutton, 2007, unpublished data).
    Mitochondrial DNA data indicate that regional turtle rookeries 
within an ocean basin have been strongly isolated from one another over 
ecological timescales (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen and Karl, 2007). These 
same data indicate strong female natal homing and suggest that each 
regional nesting population is an independent demographic unit (Bowen 
and Karl, 2007). It is difficult to determine the precise boundaries of 
these demographically independent populations in regions, such as the 
eastern U.S. coast, where rookeries are close to each other and range 
along large areas of a continental coastline. There appear to be 
varying levels of connectivity between proximate rookeries facilitated 
by imprecise natal homing and male mediated gene flow (Pearce, 2001; 
Bowen, 2003; Bowen et al., 2005). Regional genetic populations often 
are characterized by allelic frequency differences rather than fixed 
genetic differences.
    Through the evaluation of genetic data, tagging data, telemetry, 
and demography, the BRT determined that there are at least nine 
discrete population segments of loggerhead sea turtles globally. These 
discrete population segments are markedly separated from each other as 
a consequence of physical, ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic 
factors, and given the genetic evidence, the BRT concluded that each 
regional population identified is discrete from other populations of 
loggerheads. Information considered by the BRT in its delineation of 
discrete population segments is presented below by ocean basin.

Pacific Ocean

    In the North Pacific Ocean, the primary loggerhead nesting areas 
are found along the southern Japanese coastline and Ryukyu Archipelago 
(Kamezaki et al., 2003), although low level nesting may occur outside 
Japan in areas surrounding the South China Sea (Chan et al., 2007). 
Loggerhead turtles hatching on Japanese beaches undertake extensive 
developmental migrations using the Kuroshio and North Pacific Currents 
(Balazs, 2006; Kobayashi et al., 2008), and some turtles reach the 
vicinity of Baja California in the eastern Pacific (Uchida and Teruya, 
1988; Bowen et al., 1995; Peckham et al., 2007). After spending years 
foraging in the central and eastern Pacific, loggerheads return to 
their natal beaches for reproduction (Resendiz et al., 1998; Nichols et 
al., 2000) and remain in the western Pacific for the remainder of their 
life cycle (Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997; Sakamoto et 
al., 1997; Hatase et al., 2002c).
    Despite the long-distance developmental movements of loggerheads in 
the North Pacific, current scientific evidence, based on genetic 
analysis, flipper tag recoveries, and satellite telemetry, indicates 
that individuals originating from Japan remain in the North Pacific for 
their entire life cycle, never crossing the equator or mixing with 
individuals from the South Pacific (Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and 
Dutton, 2006; Dutton, 2007, unpublished data). This apparent, almost 
complete separation of two adjacent populations most likely results 
from: (1) The presence of two distinct Northern and Southern Gyre 
(current flow) systems in the Pacific (Briggs, 1974), (2) near-passive 
movements of post-hatchlings in these gyres that initially move them 
farther away from areas of potential mixing among the two populations 
along the equator, and (3) the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles that 
prevents turtles from returning to non-natal nesting areas.
    Pacific loggerheads are further partitioned evolutionarily from 
other loggerheads throughout the world based on additional analyses of 
mtDNA. The haplotypes (a haplotype refers to the genetic signature, 
coded in mtDNA, of an individual) from both North and South Pacific 
loggerheads are distinguished by a minimum genetic distance (d) equal 
to 0.017 from other conspecifics, which indicates isolation of 
approximately one million years (Bowen, 2003).
    Within the Pacific, Bowen et al. (1995) used mtDNA to identify two 
genetically distinct nesting populations in the Pacific--a northern 
hemisphere population nesting in Japan and a southern hemisphere 
population nesting primarily in Australia. This study also

[[Page 12603]]

suggested that some loggerheads sampled as bycatch in the North Pacific 
might be from the Australian nesting population (Bowen et al., 1995). 
However, more extensive mtDNA rookery data from Japan (Hatase et al., 
2002a) taken together with preliminary results from microsatellite 
(nuclear) analysis confirms that loggerheads inhabiting the North 
Pacific actually originate from nesting beaches in Japan (P. Dutton, 
NMFS, unpublished data). LeRoux et al. (2008) reported additional 
genetic variation in North Pacific loggerheads based on analyses using 
new mtDNA primers designed to target longer mtDNA sequences, and 
suggested finer scale population structure in North Pacific loggerheads 
may be present.
    Although these studies indicate genetic distinctness between 
loggerheads nesting in Japan versus those nesting in Australia, Bowen 
et al. (1995) did identify individuals with the common Australian 
haplotype at foraging areas in the North Pacific, based on a few 
individuals sampled as bycatch in the North Pacific. More recently, 
Hatase et al. (2002a) detected this common haplotype at very low 
frequency at Japanese nesting beaches. However, the presence of the 
common Australian haplotype does not preclude the genetic 
distinctiveness of Japanese and Australian nesting populations, and is 
likely the result of rare gene flow events occurring over geologic time 
scales.
    The discrete status of loggerheads in the North Pacific is further 
supported by results from flipper tagging in the North Pacific. Flipper 
tagging of loggerheads has been widespread throughout this region, 
occurring on adults nesting in Japan and bycaught in the coastal pound 
net fishery (Y. Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle Association of Japan, personal 
communication, 2006), juvenile turtles reared and released in Japan 
(Uchida and Teruya, 1988; Hatase et al., 2002a), juvenile turtles 
foraging near Baja California, Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Seminoff et al., 
2004), and juvenile and adult loggerheads captured in and tagged from 
commercial fisheries platforms in the North Pacific high seas (NMFS, 
unpublished data). To date, there have been at least three transPacific 
tag recoveries showing east-west and west-east movements (Uchida and 
Teruya, 1988; Resendiz et al., 1998; W.J. Nichols, Ocean Conservancy, 
and H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula, unpublished data) and several recoveries 
of adults in the western Pacific (Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et 
al., 1997). However, despite the more than 30,000 marked individuals, 
not a single tag recovery has been reported outside the North Pacific.
    A lack of movements by loggerheads south across the equator has 
also been supported by extensive satellite telemetry. As with flipper 
tagging, satellite telemetry has been conducted widely in the North 
Pacific, with satellite transmitters being placed on adult turtles 
departing nesting beaches (Sakamoto et al., 1997; Japan Fisheries 
Resource Conservation Association, 1999; Hatase et al., 2002b, 2002c), 
on adult and juvenile turtles bycaught in pound nets off the coast of 
Japan (Sea Turtle Association of Japan, unpublished data), on 
headstarted juvenile turtles released in Japan (Balazs, 2006), on 
juvenile and adult turtles bycaught in the eastern and central North 
Pacific (e.g., Kobayashi et al., 2008), and on juvenile turtles 
foraging in the eastern Pacific (Nichols, 2003; Peckham et al., 2007; 
J. Seminoff, NMFS, unpublished data). Of the nearly 200 loggerheads 
tracked using satellite telemetry in the North Pacific, none have moved 
south of the equator. These studies have demonstrated the strong 
association loggerheads show with oceanographic mesoscale features such 
as the Transition Zone Chlorophyll Front or the Kuroshio Current 
Bifurcation Region (Polovina et al., 2000, 2001, 2004, 2006; Etnoyer et 
al., 2006; Kobayashi et al., 2008). Kobayashi et al. (2008) 
demonstrated that loggerheads strongly track these zones even as they 
shift in location, suggesting that strong habitat specificity during 
the oceanic stage also contributes to the lack of mixing. Telemetry 
studies in foraging areas of the eastern Pacific, near Baja California, 
Mexico (Nichols, 2003; Peckham et al., 2007; H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula, 
unpublished data) and Peru (J. Mangel, Pro Delphinus, unpublished data) 
similarly showed a complete lack of long distance north or south 
movements.
    The North Pacific population of loggerheads appears to occupy an 
ecological setting distinct from other loggerheads, including those of 
the South Pacific population. This is the only known population of 
loggerheads to be found north of the equator in the Pacific Ocean, 
foraging in the eastern Pacific as far south as Baja California Sur, 
Mexico (Seminoff et al., 2004; Peckham et al., 2007) and in the western 
Pacific as far south as the Philippines (Limpus, 2009) and the mouth of 
Mekong River, Vietnam (Sadoyama et al., 1996). Pelagic juvenile turtles 
spend much of their time foraging in the central and eastern North 
Pacific Ocean. The Kuroshio Extension Current, lying west of the 
international date line, serves as the dominant physical and biological 
habitat in the North Pacific and is highly productive, likely due to 
unique features such as eddies and meanders that concentrate prey and 
support food webs. Juvenile loggerheads originating from nesting 
beaches in Japan exhibit high site fidelity to an area referred to as 
the Kuroshio Extension Bifurcation Region, an area with extensive 
meanders and mesoscale eddies (Polovina et al., 2006). Juvenile turtles 
also were found to correlate strongly with areas of surface chlorophyll 
a levels in an area known as the Transition Zone Chlorophyll Front, an 
area concentrating surface prey for loggerheads (Polovina et al., 2001; 
Parker et al., 2005; Kobayashi et al., 2008). Another area found 
ecologically unique to the North Pacific population of loggerheads, 
likely because of the high density of pelagic red crabs (Pleuronocodes 
planipes), is located off the Pacific coast of the Baja California 
Peninsula, Mexico, where researchers have documented a foraging area 
for juvenile turtles based on aerial surveys and satellite telemetry 
(Seminoff et al., 2006; Peckham et al., 2007). Tag returns show post-
nesting females migrating into the East China Sea off South Korea, 
China, and the Philippines, and the nearby coastal waters of Japan 
(Iwamoto et al., 1985; Kamezaki et al., 1997, 2003). Clearly, the North 
Pacific population of loggerheads is uniquely adapted to the ecological 
setting of the North Pacific Ocean and serves as an important part of 
the ecosystem it inhabits.
    In summary, loggerheads inhabiting the North Pacific Ocean are 
derived primarily, if not entirely, from Japanese beaches (although low 
level nesting may occur outside Japan in areas surrounding the South 
China Sea), with the possible exception of rare waifs over evolutionary 
time scales. Further, nesting colonies of Japanese loggerheads are 
found to be genetically distinct based on mtDNA analyses, and when 
compared to much larger and more genetically diverse loggerhead 
populations in the Atlantic and Mediterranean, Pacific loggerheads have 
likely experienced critical bottlenecks (in Hatase et al., 2002a), 
underscoring the importance of conservation and management to retain 
this genetically distinct population.
    In the South Pacific Ocean, loggerhead turtles nest primarily in 
Queensland, Australia, and, to a lesser extent, New Caledonia and 
Vanuatu (Limpus and Limpus, 2003; Limpus et al., 2006; Limpus, 2009). 
Loggerheads from these rookeries undertake an oceanic developmental 
migration,

[[Page 12604]]

traveling to habitats in the central and southeastern Pacific Ocean 
where they may reside for several years prior to returning to the 
western Pacific for reproduction. Loggerheads in this early life 
history stage differ markedly from those originating from western 
Australia beaches in that they undertake long west-to-east migrations, 
likely using specific areas of the pelagic environment of the South 
Pacific Ocean. An unknown portion of these loggerheads forage off Chile 
and Peru, and preliminary genetic information from foraging areas in 
the southeastern Pacific confirms that the haplotype frequencies among 
juvenile turtles in these areas closely match those found at nesting 
beaches in eastern Australia (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004; Donoso and 
Dutton, 2006, 2007; Boyle et al., 2009). Large juvenile and adult 
loggerheads generally remain in the western South Pacific, inhabiting 
neritic and oceanic foraging sites during non-nesting periods (Limpus 
et al., 1994; Limpus, 2009).
    Loggerheads from Australia and New Caledonia apparently do not 
travel north of the equator. Flipper tag recoveries from nesting 
females have been found throughout the western Pacific, including sites 
north of Australia, the Torres Straight, and the Gulf of Carpentaria 
(Limpus, 2009). Of approximately 1,000 (adult and juvenile; male and 
female) loggerheads that have been tagged in eastern Australian feeding 
areas, only two have been recorded nesting outside of Australia; both 
traveled to New Caledonia (Limpus, 2009). Flipper tagging programs in 
Peru and Chile tagged approximately 500 loggerheads from 1999 to 2006, 
none of which have been reported from outside of the southeastern 
Pacific (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008a; S. Kelez, Duke University 
Marine Laboratory, unpublished data; M. Donoso, ONG Pacifico Laud--
Chile, unpublished data). Limited satellite telemetry data from 12 
turtles in the area show a similar trend (J. Mangel, Pro Delphinus, 
unpublished data).
    The spatial separation between the North Pacific and South Pacific 
loggerhead populations has contributed to substantial differences in 
the genetic profiles of the nesting populations in these two regions. 
Whereas the dominant mtDNA haplotypes among loggerheads nesting in 
Japan are CCP2 and CCP3 (equivalent to B and C respectively in Bowen et 
al., 1995 and Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux et al., 2008; P. Dutton, 
NMFS, unpublished data), loggerheads nesting in eastern Australia have 
a third haplotype (CCP1, previously A) which is dominant (98 percent of 
nesting females) (Bowen et al., 1994; FitzSimmons et al., 1996; Boyle 
et al., 2009). Further, preliminary genetic analysis using 
microsatellite markers (nuclear DNA) indicates genetic distinctiveness 
between nesting populations in the North versus South Pacific (P. 
Dutton, NMFS, personal communication, 2008).
    The separateness between nesting populations in eastern Australia 
(in the South Pacific Ocean) and western Australia (in the East Indian 
Ocean) is less clear, although these too are considered to be 
genetically distinct from one another (Limpus, 2009). For example, 
mtDNA haplotype CCP1, which is the overwhelmingly dominant haplotype 
among eastern Australia nesting females (98 percent), is also found in 
western Australia, although at much lower frequency (33 percent) 
(FitzSimmons et al., 1996, 2003). The remaining haplotype for both 
regions was the CCP5 haplotype. Further, FitzSimmons (University of 
Canberra, unpublished data) found significant differences in nuclear 
DNA microsatellite loci from females nesting in these two regions. 
Estimates of gene flow between eastern and western Australian 
populations was an order of magnitude less than gene flow within 
regions. These preliminary results based on nuclear DNA indicate that 
male-mediated gene flow between eastern and western Australia may be 
insignificant, which, when considered in light of the substantial 
disparity in mtDNA haplotype frequencies between these two regions, 
provides further evidence of population separation.
    At present, there is no indication from genetic studies that the 
loggerhead turtles nesting in eastern Australia are distinct from those 
nesting in New Caledonia. Of 27 turtles sequenced from New Caledonia, 
93 percent carried the CCP1 haplotype and the remaining had the CCP5 
haplotype; similar to eastern Australia (Boyle et al., 2009).
    The South Pacific population of loggerheads occupies an ecological 
setting distinct from other loggerheads, including the North Pacific 
population; however, less is known about the ecosystem on which South 
Pacific oceanic juvenile and adult loggerheads depend. Sea surface 
temperature and chlorophyll frontal zones in the South Pacific have 
been shown to dramatically affect the movements of green turtles, 
Chelonia mydas (Seminoff et al., 2008) and leatherback turtles, 
Dermochelys coriacea (Shillinger et al., 2008), and it is likely that 
loggerhead distributions are also affected by these mesoscale 
oceanographic features.
    Loggerheads in the South Pacific are substantially impacted by 
periodic environmental perturbations such as the El Ni[ntilde]o 
Southern Oscillation (ENSO). This 3- to 6-year cycle within the coupled 
ocean-atmosphere system of the tropical Pacific brings increased 
surface water temperatures and lower primary productivity, both of 
which have profound biological consequences (Chavez et al., 1999). 
Loggerheads are presumably adversely impacted by the reduced food 
availability that often results from ENSO events, although data on this 
subject are lacking. Although ENSO may last for only short periods and 
thus not have a long-term effect on loggerheads in the region, recent 
studies by Chaloupka et al. (2008) suggested that long-term increases 
in sea surface temperature within the South Pacific may influence the 
ability of the Australian nesting population to recover from historic 
population declines.
    Loggerheads originating from nesting beaches in the western South 
Pacific are the only population of loggerheads to be found south of the 
equator in the Pacific Ocean. As post-hatchlings, they are generally 
swept south by the East Australian Current (Limpus et al., 1994), spend 
a large portion of time foraging in the oceanic South Pacific Ocean, 
and some migrate to the southeastern Pacific Ocean off the coasts of 
Peru and Chile as juvenile turtles (Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2004; 
Donoso et al., 2000; Boyle et al., 2009). As large juveniles and 
adults, these loggerheads' foraging range encompasses the eastern 
Arafura Sea, Gulf of Carpentaria, Torres Strait, Gulf of Papua, Coral 
Sea, and western Tasman Sea to southern New South Wales including the 
Great Barrier Reef, Hervey Bay, and Moreton Bay. The outer extent of 
this range includes the coastal waters off eastern Indonesia 
northeastern Papua New Guinea, northeastern Solomon Islands, and New 
Caledonia (in Limpus, 2009).
    In summary, all loggerheads inhabiting the South Pacific Ocean are 
derived from beaches in eastern Australia and a lesser known number of 
beaches in southern New Caledonia, Vanuatu, and Tokelau (Limpus and 
Limpus, 2003; Limpus, 2009). Furthermore, nesting colonies of the South 
Pacific population of loggerheads are found to be genetically distinct 
from loggerheads in the North Pacific and Indian Ocean.
    Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we 
concur, that two discrete population segments exist in the Pacific 
Ocean: (1) North Pacific Ocean and (2) South Pacific Ocean. These two 
population segments are markedly separated from

[[Page 12605]]

each other and from population segments within the Indian Ocean and 
Atlantic Ocean basins as a consequence of physical, ecological, 
behavioral, and oceanographic factors. Information supporting this 
conclusion includes genetic analysis, flipper tag recoveries, and 
satellite telemetry, which indicate that individuals originating from 
Japan remain in the North Pacific for their entire life cycle, never 
crossing the equator or mixing with individuals from the South Pacific 
(Hatase et al., 2002a; LeRoux and Dutton, 2006; Dutton, 2007, 
unpublished data). This apparent, almost complete separation most 
likely results from: (1) The presence of two distinct Northern and 
Southern Gyre (current flow) systems in the Pacific (Briggs, 1974), (2) 
near-passive movements of post-hatchlings in these gyres that initially 
move them farther away from areas of potential mixing along the 
equator, and (3) the nest-site fidelity of adult turtles that prevents 
turtles from returning to non-natal nesting areas. The separation of 
the Pacific Ocean population segments from population segments within 
the Indian Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins is believed to be the result 
of land barriers and oceanographic barriers. Based on mtDNA analysis, 
Bowen et al. (1994) found a separation of loggerheads in the Atlantic-
Mediterranean basins from those in the Indo-Pacific basins since the 
Pleistocene period. Geography and climate appear to have shaped the 
evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial 
cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier 
between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water 
off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier between the 
Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003).

Indian Ocean

    Similar to loggerheads in the Pacific and Atlantic, loggerheads in 
the Indian Ocean nest on coastal beaches, forage in neritic and oceanic 
habitats, and undertake long-distance migrations between and within 
these areas. The distribution of loggerheads in the Indian Ocean is 
limited by the Asian landmass to the north (approximately 30[deg] N 
latitude); distributions east and west are not restricted by landmasses 
south of approximately 38[deg] S latitude.
    Historical accounts of loggerhead turtles in the Indian Ocean are 
found in Smith (1849), who described the species in South Africa, and 
Deraniyagala (1933, 1939) who described Indian Ocean loggerheads within 
the subspecies C. c. gigas. Hughes (1974) argued that there was little 
justification for this separation.
    In the North Indian Ocean, Oman hosts the vast majority of 
loggerhead nesting. The largest nesting assemblage is at Masirah 
Island, Oman, in the northern tropics at 21[deg] N latitude (Baldwin et 
al., 2003). Other key nesting assemblages occur on the Al Halaniyat 
Islands, Oman (17[deg] S latitude) and on Oman's Arabian Sea mainland 
beaches south of Masirah Island to the Oman-Yemen border (17-20[deg] S 
latitude) (IUCN--The World Conservation Union, 1989a, 1989b; Salm, 
1991; Salm and Salm, 1991; Baldwin et al., 2003). In addition, nesting 
probably occurs on the mainland of Yemen on the Arabian Sea coast, and 
nesting has been confirmed on Socotra, an island off the coast of Yemen 
(Pilcher and Saad, 2000).
    Outside of Oman, loggerhead nesting is rare in the North Indian 
Ocean. The only verified nesting beaches for loggerheads on the Indian 
subcontinent are found in Sri Lanka (Deraniyagala, 1939; Kar and 
Bhaskar, 1982; Dodd, 1988; Kapurusinghe, 2006). Reports of regular 
loggerhead nesting on the Indian mainland are likely misidentifications 
of olive ridleys (Lepidochelys olivacea) (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 
2006). Although loggerheads have been reported nesting in low numbers 
in Myanmar, these data may not be reliable because of misidentification 
of species (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000).
    Limited information exists on foraging locations of North Indian 
Ocean loggerheads. Foraging individuals have been reported off the 
southern coastline of Oman (Salm et al., 1993) and in the Gulf of 
Mannar, between Sri Lanka and India (Tripathy, 2005; Kapurusinghe, 
2006). Satellite telemetry studies of post-nesting migrations of 
loggerheads nesting on Masirah Island, Oman, have revealed extensive 
use of the waters off the Arabian Peninsula, with the majority of 
telemetered turtles (15 of 20) traveling southwest, following the 
shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen, and circling well offshore in 
nearby oceanic waters (Environment Society of Oman and Ministry of 
Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished data). A minority 
traveled north as far as the western Persian (Arabian) Gulf (3 of 20) 
or followed the shoreline of southern Oman and Yemen as far west as the 
Gulf of Aden and the Bab-el-Mandab (2 of 20). These preliminary data 
suggest that post-nesting migrations and adult female foraging areas 
may be centered within the region (Environment Society of Oman and 
Ministry of Environment and Climate Change, Oman, unpublished data). No 
tag returns or satellite tracks indicated that loggerheads nesting in 
Oman traveled south of the equator.
    In the East Indian Ocean, western Australia hosts all known 
loggerhead nesting (Dodd, 1988). Nesting distributions in western 
Australia span from the Shark Bay World Heritage Area northward through 
the Ningaloo Marine Park coast to the North West Cape and to the nearby 
Muiron Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting individuals from Dirk 
Hartog Island have been recorded foraging within Shark Bay and Exmouth 
Gulf, while other adults range into the Gulf of Carpentaria (Baldwin et 
al., 2003). At the eastern extent of this apparent range, there is 
possible overlap with loggerheads that nest on Australia's Pacific 
coast (Limpus, 2009). However, despite extensive tagging at principal 
nesting beaches on Australia's Indian Ocean and Pacific coasts, no 
exchange of females between nesting beaches has been observed (Limpus, 
2009).
    Loggerhead nesting in the Southwest Indian Ocean includes the 
southeastern coast of Africa from the Paradise Islands in Mozambique 
southward to St. Lucia in South Africa, and on the south and 
southwestern coasts of Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003). Foraging 
habitats are only known for the Tongaland, South Africa, adult female 
loggerheads. Returns of flipper tags describe a range that extends 
eastward to Madagascar, northward to Mozambique, Tanzania, and Kenya, 
and southward to Cape Agulhas at the southernmost point of Africa 
(Baldwin et al., 2003). Four post-nesting loggerheads satellite tracked 
by Luschi et al. (2006) migrated northward, hugging the Mozambique 
coast and remained in shallow shelf waters off Mozambique for more than 
2 months. Only one post-nesting female from the Southwest Indian Ocean 
population (South Africa) has been documented migrating north of the 
equator (to southern Somalia) (Hughes and Bartholomew, 1996).
    The available genetic information relates to connectivity and broad 
evolutionary relationships between ocean basins. There is a lack of 
genetic information on population structure among rookeries within the 
Indian Ocean. Bowen et al. (1994) described mtDNA sequence diversity 
among eight loggerhead nesting assemblages and found one of two 
principal branches in the Indo-Pacific basins. Using additional 
published and unpublished data, Bowen (2003) estimated divergence 
between these two lineages to be approximately three million years. 
Bowen pointed out evidence for more recent colonizations (12,000-
250,000 years ago) between the Indian Ocean and the Atlantic-

[[Page 12606]]

Mediterranean. For example, the sole mtDNA haplotype (among eight 
samples) identified by Bowen et al. (1994) at Masirah Island, Oman, is 
known from the Atlantic and suggests some exchange between oceans some 
250,000 years ago. The other principal Indian Ocean haplotype reported 
by Bowen et al. (1994) was seen in all loggerheads sampled (n=15) from 
Natal, South Africa. Encalada et al. (1998) reported that this 
haplotype was common throughout the North Atlantic and Mediterranean, 
thus suggesting a similar exchange between the Atlantic and Indian 
Oceans as recently as 12,000 years ago (Bowen et al., 1994). Bowen 
(2003) speculated that Indian-Atlantic Ocean exchanges took place via 
the temperate waters south of South Africa and became rare as the ocean 
shifted to cold temperate conditions in this region.
    To estimate loggerhead gene flow in and out of the Indian Ocean, 
J.S. Reece (Washington University, personal communication, 2008) 
examined 100 samples from Masirah Island, 249 from Atlantic rookeries 
(from Encalada et al., 1998), and 311 from Pacific rookeries (from 
Hatase et al., 2002a and Bowen et al., 1995). Reece estimated that gene 
flow, expressed as number of effective migrants, or exchanges of 
breeding females between Indian Ocean rookeries and those from the 
Atlantic or Pacific occurred at the rate of less than 0.1 migrant per 
generation. Reece estimated gene flow based on coalescence of combined 
mtDNA and nuclear DNA data to be approximately 0.5 migrants per 
generation. These unpublished results, while somewhat theoretical, may 
indicate that there is restricted gene flow into and out of the Indian 
Ocean. The low level of gene flow most likely reflects the historical 
connectivity over geological timescales rather than any contemporary 
migration, and is consistent with Bowen's hypothesis that exchange 
occurred most recently over 12,000-3,000,000 years ago, and has been 
restricted over recent ecological timescales.
    The discrete status of three loggerhead populations in the Indian 
Ocean is primarily supported by observations of tag returns and 
satellite telemetry. The genetic information currently available based 
on mtDNA sequences does not allow for a comprehensive analysis of 
genetic population structure analysis for Indian Ocean rookeries, 
although Bowen et al. (1994) indicated the Oman and South African 
rookeries are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are 
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be 
genetically distinct from the rookeries in western Australia. Based on 
multiple lines of evidence, discrete status is supported for the North 
Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, and Southwest Indian Ocean 
loggerhead populations. Although there is not a sufficiently clear 
picture of gene flow between these regions, significant vicariant 
barriers likely exist between these three Indian Ocean populations that 
would prevent migration of individuals on a time scale relative to 
management and conservation efforts. These vicariant barriers are the 
oceanographic phenomena associated with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, 
and the large expanse between continents in the South Indian Ocean 
without suitable benthic foraging habitat.
    Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we 
concur, that three discrete population segments exist in the Indian 
Ocean: (1) North Indian Ocean, (2) Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, and 
(3) Southwest Indian Ocean. These three population segments are 
markedly separated from each other and from population segments within 
the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins as a consequence of 
physical, ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic factors. 
Information supporting this conclusion is primarily based on 
observations of tag returns and satellite telemetry. The genetic 
information currently available based on mtDNA sequences does not allow 
for a comprehensive analysis of genetic population structure for Indian 
Ocean rookeries; however, the Oman and South African rookeries are 
genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are completed for 
these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be determined 
genetically distinct from the rookeries in western Australia (Bowen et 
al. 1994). Furthermore, significant vicariant barriers (i.e., 
oceanographic phenomena associated with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, 
and the large expanse between continents in the South Indian Ocean 
without suitable benthic foraging habitat) likely exist between these 
three Indian Ocean populations that would prevent migration of 
individuals on a time scale relative to management and conservation 
efforts. The separation of the Indian Ocean population segments from 
population segments within the Pacific Ocean and Atlantic Ocean basins 
is believed to be the result of land barriers and oceanographic 
barriers. Based on mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. (1994) found a 
separation of loggerheads in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from 
those in the Indo-Pacific basins since the Pleistocene period. 
Geography and climate appear to have shaped the evolution of these two 
matriarchal lineages with the onset of glacial cycles, the appearance 
of the Panama Isthmus creating a land barrier between the Atlantic and 
eastern Pacific, and upwelling of cold water off southern Africa 
creating an oceanographic barrier between the Atlantic and Indian 
Oceans (Bowen, 2003). In the East Indian Ocean, although there is 
possible overlap with loggerheads that nest on Australia's Indian Ocean 
and Pacific Ocean coasts, extensive tagging at the principal nesting 
beaches on both coasts has revealed no exchange of females between 
these nesting beaches (Limpus, 2009).

Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea

    Within the Atlantic Ocean, loss and re-colonization of nesting 
beaches over evolutionary time scales has been influenced by climate, 
natal homing, and rare dispersal events (Encalada et al., 1998; Bowen 
and Karl, 2007). At times, temperate beaches were too cool to incubate 
eggs and nesting could have succeeded only on tropical beaches. Thus, 
the contemporary distribution of nesting is the product of colonization 
events from the tropical refugia during the last 12,000 years. 
Apparently, turtles from the Northwest Atlantic colonized the 
Mediterranean and at least two matrilines were involved (Schroth et 
al., 1996); these rookeries became isolated from the Atlantic 
populations in the last 10,000 years (Encalada et al., 1998). A similar 
colonization event appears to have populated the Northeast Atlantic (C. 
Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal 
communication, 2008).
    Nesting in the western South Atlantic occurs primarily along the 
mainland coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro, with 
peak concentrations in northern Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and 
northern Rio de Janeiro (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007). In the 
eastern South Atlantic, diffuse nesting may occur along the mainland 
coast of Africa (Fretey, 2001), with more than 200 loggerhead nests 
reported for Rio Longa beach in central Angola in 2005 (Brian, 2007). 
However, other researchers have been unable to confirm nesting by 
loggerheads in the last decade anywhere along the south Atlantic coast 
of Africa, including Angola (Fretey, 2001; Weir et al., 2007). There is 
the possibility that reports of nesting loggerheads from Angola and 
Namibia (M[aacute]rquez M., 1990; Brian, 2007) may have arisen from 
misidentified olive ridley turtles (Brongersma, 1982; Fretey, 2001). At 
the current time, it is not possible to confirm that regular, if any, 
nesting of

[[Page 12607]]

loggerheads occurs along the Atlantic coast of Africa, south of the 
equator.
    Genetic surveys of loggerheads have revealed that the Brazilian 
rookeries have a unique mtDNA haplotype (Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 
2001). The Brazilian mtDNA haplotype, relative to North Atlantic 
haplotypes, indicates isolation of South Atlantic loggerheads from 
North Atlantic loggerheads on a scale of 250,000-500,000 years ago, and 
microsatellite DNA results show divergence on the same time scale 
(Bowen, 2003). Brazil's unique haplotype has been found only in low 
numbers in foraging populations of juvenile loggerheads of the North 
Atlantic (Bass et al., 2004). Other lines of evidence support a deep 
division between loggerheads from the South Atlantic and from the North 
Atlantic, including: (1) A nesting season in Brazil that peaks in the 
austral summer around December-January (Marcovaldi and Laurent, 1996), 
as opposed to the April-September nesting season in the southeastern 
United States in the northern hemisphere (Witherington et al., 2009); 
and (2) no observations of tagged loggerheads moving across the equator 
in the Atlantic, except a single case of a captive-reared animal that 
was released as a juvenile from Esp[iacute]rito Santo and was 
recaptured 3 years later in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). Post-
nesting females from Esp[iacute]rito Santo, Brazil, moved either north 
or south along the coast, but remained between 10[deg] S latitude and 
30[deg] S latitude (Projeto TAMAR, unpublished data).
    Relatively little is known about the at-sea behavior of loggerheads 
originating from nesting beaches in Brazil. Recaptures of tagged 
juvenile turtles and nesting females have shown movement of animals up 
and down the coast of South America (Almeida et al., 2000; Marcovaldi 
et al., 2000; Laporta and Lopez, 2003; Almeida et al., 2007). Juvenile 
loggerheads, presumably of Brazilian origin, have also been captured on 
the high seas of the South Atlantic (Kotas et al., 2004; Pinedo and 
Polacheck, 2004) and off the coast of Atlantic Africa (Petersen, 2005; 
Petersen et al., 2007; Weir et al., 2007) suggesting that, like their 
North Pacific and Northwest Atlantic counterparts, loggerheads of the 
South Atlantic may undertake transoceanic developmental migrations 
(Bolten et al., 1998; Peckham et al., 2007).
    The mean size of reproductive female loggerheads in Brazil is 92.9 
cm straight carapace length (SCL), which is comparable to the size of 
nesting females in the Northwest Atlantic, but larger than nesting 
females in the Northeast Atlantic and Mediterranean (Tiwari and 
Bjorndal, 2000; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Varo Cruz et al., 2007). 
Egg size and mass of Brazilian loggerheads are smaller than those from 
the Northwest Atlantic, but larger than those of the Mediterranean 
(Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000).
    Within the Northwest Atlantic, the majority of nesting activity 
occurs from April through September, with a peak in June and July 
(Williams-Walls et al., 1983; Dodd, 1988; Weishampel et al., 2006). 
Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of North 
America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles, and The 
Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern United States and on 
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Sternberg, 1981; Ehrhart, 1989; 
Ehrhart et al., 2003; NMFS and USFWS, 2008). Many nesting beaches 
within the Northwest Atlantic have yet to be sampled for genetic 
analysis. Five recovery units (subpopulations) have been identified 
based on genetic differences and a combination of geographic 
distribution of nesting densities and geographic separation. These 
recovery units are: Northern Recovery Unit (Florida/Georgia border 
through southern Virginia), Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit (Florida/
Georgia border through Pinellas County, Florida), Northern Gulf of 
Mexico Recovery Unit (Franklin County, Florida, through Texas), Greater 
Caribbean Recovery Unit (Mexico through French Guiana, The Bahamas, 
Lesser Antilles, and Greater Antilles), and Dry Tortugas Recovery Unit 
(islands located west of Key West, Florida) (NMFS and USFWS, 2008). 
There is limited exchange of nesting females among these recovery units 
(Encalada et al., 1998; Foote et al., 2000; J. Richardson personal 
communication cited in NMFS, 2001; Hawkes et al., 2005). Based on the 
number of haplotypes, the highest level of loggerhead mtDNA genetic 
diversity in the Atlantic has been observed in females of the Greater 
Caribbean Recovery Unit that nest at Quintana Roo, Mexico (Encalada et 
al., 1999; Nielsen et al., in press). However, genetic diversity should 
be evaluated further using haplotype and nucleotide diversity 
calculated similarly for each recovery unit. Genetic data are not 
available for all the nesting assemblages in the region, including a 
key nesting assemblage in Cuba. New genetic markers have recently been 
developed, including primers that produce additional mtDNA sequence 
data (Abreu-Grobois et al., 2006; LeRoux et al., 2008), and an array of 
microsatellite markers (Shamblin et al., 2008) that will enable finer 
resolution of population boundaries.
    Loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic display complex population 
structure based on life history stages. Based on mtDNA, oceanic 
juveniles show no structure, neritic juveniles show moderate structure, 
and nesting colonies show strong structure (Bowen et al., 2005). In 
contrast, a survey using microsatellite (nuclear DNA) markers showed no 
significant population structure among nesting populations (Bowen et 
al., 2005), indicating that while females exhibit strong philopatry, 
males may provide an avenue of gene flow between nesting colonies in 
this region. However, the power to detect structure with the nuclear 
markers used in this study may have been limited due to the few markers 
used and small sample sizes. Nevertheless, Bowen et al. (2005) argued 
that male-mediated gene flow within the Northwest Atlantic does not 
detract from the classification of breeding areas as independent 
populations (e.g., recovery units) because the production of progeny 
depends on female nesting success. All Northwest Atlantic recovery 
units are reproductively isolated from populations within the Northeast 
Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea.
    As oceanic juveniles, loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic use 
the North Atlantic Gyre and often are associated with Sargassum 
communities (Carr, 1987). They also are found in the Mediterranean Sea. 
In these areas, they overlap with animals originating from the 
Northeast Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea (Laurent et al., 1993, 
1998; Bolten et al., 1998; Bowen et al., 2005; LaCasella et al., 2005; 
Carreras et al., 2006; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 
2007). In the western Mediterranean, they tend to be associated with 
the waters off the northern African coast and the northeastern Balearic 
Archipelago, areas generally not inhabited by turtles of Mediterranean 
origin (Carreras et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007; Eckert et al., 
2008). As larger neritic juveniles, they show more structure and tend 
to inhabit areas closer to their natal origins (Bowen et al., 2004), 
but some do move to and from oceanic foraging grounds throughout this 
life stage (Mansfield, 2006; McClellan and Read, 2007), and some 
continue to use the Mediterranean Sea (Casale et al., 2008a; Eckert et 
al., 2008). Adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in 
distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, 
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and

[[Page 12608]]

Mediterranean. Carapace epibionts suggest the adult females of 
different subpopulations use different foraging habitats (Caine, 1986). 
In the Northwest Atlantic, based on satellite telemetry studies and 
flipper tag returns, non-nesting adult females from the Northern 
Recovery Unit reside primarily off the east coast of the United States; 
movement into the Bahamas or the Gulf of Mexico is rare (Bell and 
Richardson, 1978; Williams and Frick, 2001; Mansfield, 2006; Turtle 
Expert Working Group, 2009). Adult females of the Peninsular Florida 
Recovery Unit are distributed throughout eastern Florida, The Bahamas, 
Greater Antilles, the Yucatan Peninsula of Mexico, and the Gulf of 
Mexico, as well as along the Atlantic seaboard of the United States 
(Meylan, 1982; Meylan et al., 1983; Foley et al., 2008; Turtle Expert 
Working Group, 2009). Adult females from the Northern Gulf of Mexico 
Recovery Unit remained in the Gulf of Mexico, including off the Yucatan 
Peninsula of Mexico, based on satellite telemetry and flipper tag 
returns (Foley et al., 2008; Turtle Expert Working Group, 2009; M. 
Lamont, Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, personal 
communication, 2009; M. Nicholas, National Park Service, personal 
communication, 2009).
    Nesting in the Northeast Atlantic is concentrated in the Cape Verde 
Archipelago, with some nesting occurring on most of the islands, and 
the highest concentration on the beaches of Boa Vista Island (Lopez-
Jurado et al., 2000; Varo Cruz et al., 2007; Loureiro, 2008). On 
mainland Africa, there is minor nesting on the coasts of Mauritania to 
Senegal (Brongersma, 1982; Arvy et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001). Earlier 
reports of loggerhead nesting in Morocco (Pasteur and Bons, 1960) have 
not been confirmed in recent years (Tiwari et al., 2001). Nesting has 
not been reported from Macaronesia (Azores, Madeira Archipelago, The 
Selvagens Islands, and the Canary Islands), other than in the Cape 
Verde Archipelago (Brongersma, 1982). In Cape Verde, nesting begins in 
mid June and extends into October (Cejudo et al., 2000), which is 
somewhat later than when nesting occurs in the Northwest Atlantic.
    Based on an analysis of mtDNA of 196 nesting females from Boa Vista 
Island, the Cape Verde nesting assemblage is genetically distinct from 
other studied rookeries (C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de 
Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello 
et al., 2009). The results also indicate that despite the close 
proximity of the Mediterranean, the Boa Vista rookery is most closely 
related to the rookeries of the Northwest Atlantic.
    The distribution of juvenile loggerheads from the Northeast 
Atlantic is largely unknown but they have been found on the oceanic 
foraging grounds of the North Atlantic (A. Bolten, University of 
Florida, personal communication, 2008, based on Bolten et al., 1998 and 
LaCasella et al., 2005; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009; M. Tiwari, NMFS, 
and A. Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data) and in the 
western and central Mediterranean (A. Bolten, University of Florida, 
personal communication, 2008, based on Carreras et al., 2006), along 
with small juvenile loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic. The size 
of nesting females in the Northeast Atlantic is comparable to those in 
the Mediterranean (average 72-80 cm SCL; Margaritoulis et al., 2003) 
and smaller than those in the Northwest Atlantic or the South Atlantic; 
91 percent of the nesting turtles are less than 86.5 cm curved carapace 
length (CCL) (Hawkes et al., 2006) and nesting females average 77.1 cm 
SCL (Cejudo et al., 2000). Satellite-tagged, post-nesting females from 
Cape Verde foraged in coastal waters along northwest Africa or foraged 
oceanically, mostly between Cape Verde and the African shelf from 
Mauritania to Guinea Bissau (Hawkes et al., 2006).
    In the Mediterranean, nesting occurs throughout the central and 
eastern basins on the shores of Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, 
Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai, Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia (Sternberg, 1981; 
Margaritoulis et al., 2003; SWOT, 2007). Sporadic nesting also has been 
reported in the western Mediterranean on Corsica (Delaugerre and 
Cesarini, 2004), southwestern Italy (Bentivegna et al., 2005), and on 
the Spanish Mediterranean coast (Tomas et al., 2003, 2008). Nesting in 
the Mediterranean is concentrated between June and early August 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003).
    Within the Mediterranean, a recent study of mitochondrial and 
nuclear DNA in nesting assemblages from Greece to Israel indicated 
genetic structuring, philopatry by both females and males, and limited 
gene flow between assemblages (Carreras et al., 2007). Genetic 
differentiation based on mtDNA indicated that there are at least four 
independent nesting subpopulations within the Mediterranean and usually 
they are characterized by a single haplotype: (1) Mainland Greece and 
the adjoining Ionian Islands, (2) eastern Turkey, (3) Israel, and (4) 
Cyprus. There is no evidence of adult female exchange among these four 
subpopulations (Carreras et al., 2006). In studies of the foraging 
grounds in the western and central Mediterranean, seven of the 17 
distinct haplotypes detected had not yet been described, indicating 
that nesting beach data to describe the natal origins of juveniles 
exploiting the western Mediterranean Sea are incomplete (Carreras et 
al., 2006; Casale et al., 2008a). Gene flow among the Mediterranean 
rookeries estimated from nuclear DNA was significantly higher than that 
calculated from mtDNA, consistent with the scenario of female 
philopatry maintaining isolation between rookeries, offset by male-
mediated gene flow. Nevertheless, the nuclear data show there was a 
higher degree of substructuring among Mediterranean rookeries compared 
to those in the Northwest Atlantic (Bowen et al., 2005; Carreras et 
al., 2007).
    Small oceanic juveniles from the Mediterranean Sea use the eastern 
basin (defined as inclusive of the central Mediterranean, Ionian, 
Adriatic, and Aegean Seas) and the western basin (defined as inclusive 
of the Tyrrhenian Sea) along the European coast (Laurent et al., 1998; 
Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Carreras et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 
2007). Larger juveniles also use the eastern Atlantic and the eastern 
Mediterranean, especially the Tunisia-Libya shelf and the Adriatic Sea 
(Laurent et al., 1993; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Monz[oacute]n-
Arg[uuml]llo et al., 2006; Revelles et al., 2007). Adults appear to 
forage closer to the nesting beaches in the eastern basin; most tag 
recoveries from females nesting in Greece have occurred in the Adriatic 
Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004).
    Loggerheads nesting in the Mediterranean were significantly smaller 
than loggerheads nesting in the Northwest Atlantic and the South 
Atlantic. Within the Mediterranean, straight carapace lengths ranged 
from 58 to 95 cm SCL (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Greece's loggerheads 
averaged 77-80 cm SCL (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000; Margaritoulis et al., 
2003), whereas Turkey's loggerheads averaged 72-73 cm SCL 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003). The Greece turtles also produced larger 
clutches (relative to body size) than those produced by Florida or 
Brazil nesters (Tiwari and Bjorndal, 2000). The authors suggested that 
sea turtles in the Mediterranean encounter environmental conditions 
significantly different from those experienced by populations elsewhere 
in the Atlantic Ocean basin.
    Given the information presented above, the BRT concluded, and we 
concur, that four discrete population

[[Page 12609]]

segments exist in the Atlantic Ocean/Mediterranean: (1) Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean, (2) Northeast Atlantic Ocean, (3) South Atlantic Ocean, 
and (4) Mediterranean Sea. These four population segments are markedly 
separated from each other and from population segments within the 
Pacific Ocean and Indian Ocean basins as a consequence of physical, 
ecological, behavioral, and oceanographic factors. Information 
supporting this conclusion includes genetic analysis, flipper tag 
recoveries, and satellite telemetry. Genetic studies have shown that 
adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in distribution 
among adult loggerheads in these four population segments (Bowen et 
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; 
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas-Spain, 
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). Although 
loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, and 
Mediterranean Sea population segments may comingle on oceanic foraging 
grounds as juveniles, adults are apparently isolated from each other; 
they also differ demographically. Data from satellite telemetry studies 
and flipper tag returns have shown that nesting females from the 
Northwest Atlantic return to the same nesting areas; they reveal no 
evidence of movement of adults south of the equator or east of 40[deg] 
W longitude. Similarly, there is no evidence of movement of Northeast 
Atlantic adults south of the equator, west of 40[deg] W longitude, or 
east of the Strait of Gibraltar, a narrow strait that connects the 
Atlantic Ocean to the Mediterranean Sea. Also, there is no evidence of 
movement of adult Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of the Strait of 
Gibraltar. With regard to South Atlantic loggerheads, there have been 
no observations of tagged loggerheads moving across the equator in the 
Atlantic, except a single case of a captive-reared animal that was 
released as a juvenile from Esp[iacute]rito Santo and was recaptured 3 
years later in the Azores (Bolten et al., 1990). The separation of the 
Atlantic Ocean/Mediterranean Sea population segments from population 
segments within the Indian Ocean and Pacific Ocean basins is believed 
to be the result of land barriers and oceanographic barriers. Based on 
mtDNA analysis, Bowen et al. (1994) found a separation of loggerheads 
in the Atlantic-Mediterranean basins from those in the Indo-Pacific 
basins since the Pleistocene period. Geography and climate appear to 
have shaped the evolution of these two matriarchal lineages with the 
onset of glacial cycles, the appearance of the Panama Isthmus creating 
a land barrier between the Atlantic and eastern Pacific, and upwelling 
of cold water off southern Africa creating an oceanographic barrier 
between the Atlantic and Indian Oceans (Bowen, 2003).

Significance Determination

    As stated in the preceding section, the BRT identified nine 
discrete population segments. As described below by ocean basin, the 
BRT found that each of the nine discrete population segments is 
biologically and ecologically significant. They each represent a large 
portion of the species range, sometimes encompassing an entire 
hemispheric ocean basin. The range of each discrete population segment 
represents a unique ecosystem, influenced by local ecological and 
physical factors. The loss of any individual discrete population 
segment would result in a significant gap in the loggerhead's range. 
Each discrete population segment is genetically unique, often 
identified by unique mtDNA haplotypes, and the BRT indicated that these 
unique haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; the loss of any 
one discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of 
genetic diversity. Therefore, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that 
these nine population segments are both discrete from other conspecific 
population segments and significant to the species to which they 
belong, Caretta caretta.
    The geographic delineations given below for each discrete 
population segment were determined primarily based on nesting beach 
locations, genetic evidence, oceanographic features, thermal tolerance, 
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution and 
migrations from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. With 
rare exception, adults from discrete population segments remain within 
the delineated boundaries. In some cases, juvenile turtles from two or 
more discrete population segments may mix on foraging areas and 
therefore, their distribution and migrations may extend beyond the 
geographic boundaries delineated below for each discrete population 
segment (e.g., juvenile turtles from the Northwest Atlantic Ocean, 
Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea discrete population 
segments share foraging habitat in the western Mediterranean Sea).

Pacific Ocean

    The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, of the North Pacific Ocean 
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead 
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on 
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging 
studies. The BRT determined that the North Pacific Ocean discrete 
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because 
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly 
from other population segments of the species in its genetic 
characteristics. The North Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses 
an entire hemispheric ocean basin and its loss would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon. There is no evidence or 
reason to believe that female loggerheads from South Pacific nesting 
beaches would repopulate the North Pacific nesting beaches should those 
nesting assemblages be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Tagging 
studies show that the vast majority of nesting females return to the 
same nesting area. As summarized by Hatase et al. (2002a), of 2,219 
tagged nesting females from Japan, only five females relocated their 
nesting sites. In addition, flipper tag and satellite telemetry 
research, as described in detail in the Discreteness Determination 
section above, has shown no evidence of north-south movement of 
loggerheads across the equator. This discrete population segment is 
genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section above) and 
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive 
differences; thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would 
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this 
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the North Pacific 
Ocean population segment is significant to the taxon to which it 
belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of 
the DPS policy.
    The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 67[deg] W longitude and 
139[deg] E longitude as the east and west boundaries, respectively, of 
the South Pacific Ocean population segment based on oceanographic 
features, loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch 
data, and information on loggerhead distribution from satellite 
telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the 
South Pacific Ocean discrete population segment is biologically and 
ecologically significant because the loss

[[Page 12610]]

of this population segment would result in a significant gap in the 
range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from 
other population segments of the species in its genetic 
characteristics. The South Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses 
an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon. The South Pacific Ocean 
population is the only population of loggerheads found south of the 
equator in the Pacific Ocean and there is no evidence or reason to 
believe that female loggerheads from North Pacific nesting beaches 
would repopulate the South Pacific nesting beaches should those nesting 
assemblages be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). In addition, 
flipper tag and satellite telemetry research, as described in detail in 
the Discreteness Determination section above, has shown no evidence of 
north-south movement of loggerheads across the equator. The BRT also 
stated that it does not expect that recolonization from Indian Ocean 
loggerheads would occur in eastern Australia within ecological time 
frames. Despite evidence of foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria by 
adult loggerheads from the nesting populations in eastern Australia 
(South Pacific Ocean population segment) and western Australia 
(Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment), the nesting females 
from these two regions are considered to be genetically distinct from 
one another (Limpus, 2009). In addition to a substantial disparity in 
mtDNA haplotype frequencies between these two populations, FitzSimmons 
(University of Canberra, unpublished data) found significant 
differences in nuclear DNA microsatellite loci between females nesting 
in these two regions, indicating separation between the South Pacific 
Ocean and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segments. Long-
term studies show a high degree of site fidelity by adult females in 
the South Pacific, with most females returning to the same beach within 
a nesting season and in successive nesting seasons (Limpus, 1985, 2009; 
Limpus et al., 1994). This has been documented as characteristic of 
loggerheads from various rookeries throughout the world (Schroeder et 
al., 2003). This discrete population segment is genetically unique and 
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive 
differences. Thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would 
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this 
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the South Pacific 
Ocean population segment is significant to the taxon to which it 
belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of 
the DPS policy.

Indian Ocean

    The BRT considered 30[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, of the North Indian Ocean 
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead 
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on 
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging 
studies. The BRT determined that the North Indian Ocean discrete 
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because 
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly 
from other population segments of the species in its genetic 
characteristics. The North Indian Ocean population segment encompasses 
an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic information 
currently available for Indian Ocean populations indicates that the 
Oman rookery in the North Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in 
the Southwest Indian Ocean are genetically distinct, and once 
sequencing studies are completed for these rookeries, it is likely that 
they will also be determined to be genetically distinct from the 
western Australia rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen 
et al., 1994). In addition, oceanographic phenomena associated with 
Indian Ocean equatorial waters exist between the North Indian Ocean 
population segment and the two population segments in the South Indian 
Ocean, which likely prevent migration of individuals across the equator 
on a time scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant 
et al., 2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe 
that female loggerheads from the Southwest Indian Ocean or Southeast 
Indo-Pacific Ocean would repopulate the North Indian Ocean nesting 
beaches should those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 
2003). Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, 
that the North Indian Ocean population segment is significant to the 
taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the 
significance element of the DPS policy.
    The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 20[deg] E longitude at Cape 
Agulhas on the southern tip of Africa and 80[deg] E longitude as the 
east and west boundaries, respectively, of the Southwest Indian Ocean 
population segment based on oceanographic features, thermal tolerance, 
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution from 
satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined 
that the Southwest Indian Ocean discrete population segment is 
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this 
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of 
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other 
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The 
Southwest Indian Ocean population segment encompasses half of an 
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon. Genetic information currently available for 
Indian Ocean populations indicates that the Oman rookery in the North 
Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in the Southwest Indian 
Ocean are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are 
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be 
determined to be genetically distinct from the western Australia 
rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen et al., 1994). In 
addition, vicariant barriers (i.e., oceanographic phenomena associated 
with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, and the large expanse between 
continents in the South Indian Ocean without suitable benthic foraging 
habitat) likely exist between the three Indian Ocean populations that 
would prevent migration of individuals between populations on a time 
scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant et al., 
2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe that female 
loggerheads from the North Indian Ocean or Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
would repopulate the Southwest Indian Ocean nesting beaches should 
those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is 
also no evidence of movement of adult Southwest Indian Ocean 
loggerheads west of 20[deg] E longitude at Cape Agulhas, the 
southernmost point on the African continent, or east of 80[deg] E 
longitude within the Indian Ocean. Based on this information, the BRT 
concluded, and we concur, that the Southwest Indian Ocean population 
segment is significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and, 
therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of the DPS 
policy.
    The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 139[deg] E

[[Page 12611]]

longitude and 80[deg] E longitude as the east and west boundaries, 
respectively, of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment 
based on oceanographic features, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch 
data, and information on loggerhead distribution from satellite 
telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the 
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean discrete population segment is 
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this 
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of 
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other 
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The 
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment encompasses half of an 
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon. Genetic information currently available for 
Indian Ocean populations indicates that the Oman rookery in the North 
Indian Ocean and the South African rookery in the Southwest Indian 
Ocean are genetically distinct, and once sequencing studies are 
completed for these rookeries, it is likely that they will also be 
determined to be genetically distinct from the western Australia 
rookeries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean (Bowen et al., 1994). In 
addition, vicariant barriers (i.e., oceanographic phenomena associated 
with Indian Ocean equatorial waters, and the large expanse between 
continents in the South Indian Ocean without suitable benthic foraging 
habitat) likely exist between the three Indian Ocean populations that 
would prevent migration of individuals between populations on a time 
scale relative to management and conservation efforts (Conant et al., 
2009). Therefore, there is no evidence or reason to believe that female 
loggerheads from the North Indian Ocean or Southwest Indian Ocean would 
repopulate the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean nesting beaches should 
those populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is 
also no evidence of movement of adult Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
loggerheads west of 80[deg] E longitude within the Indian Ocean. 
Despite evidence of foraging in the Gulf of Carpentaria by adult 
loggerheads from the nesting populations in eastern Australia (South 
Pacific Ocean population segment) and western Australia (Southeast 
Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment), the nesting females from these 
two regions are considered to be genetically distinct from one another 
(Limpus, 2009). In addition to a substantial disparity in mtDNA 
haplotype frequencies between these two regions, FitzSimmons 
(University of Canberra, unpublished data) found significant 
differences in nuclear DNA microsatellite loci from females nesting in 
these two regions, indicating separation between the South Pacific 
Ocean population segment and the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
population segment. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and 
we concur, that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean population segment is 
significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it 
satisfies the significance element of the DPS policy.

Atlantic Ocean and Mediterranean Sea

    The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 40[deg] W longitude as the east 
boundary of the Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment based on 
oceanographic features, loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, 
fishery bycatch data, and information on loggerhead distribution from 
satellite telemetry and flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined 
that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean discrete population segment is 
biologically and ecologically significant because the loss of this 
population segment would result in a significant gap in the range of 
the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly from other 
population segments of the species in its genetic characteristics. The 
Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment encompasses half of an 
hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies have shown that adult 
populations are highly structured with no overlap in distribution among 
adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, 
South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et al., 1994; Encalada et 
al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; C. Monzon-Arguello, 
Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain, personal communication, 
2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is no evidence or reason to 
believe that female loggerheads from the Northeast Atlantic, 
Mediterranean Sea, or South Atlantic nesting beaches would repopulate 
the Northwest Atlantic nesting beaches should these populations be lost 
(Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). Data from satellite telemetry 
studies and flipper tag returns, as described in detail in the 
Discreteness Determination section above, have shown that the vast 
majority of nesting females from the Northwest Atlantic return to the 
same nesting area; they reveal no evidence of movement of adults south 
of the equator or east of 40[deg] W longitude. This discrete population 
segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section 
above) and the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could 
represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this discrete 
population segment would represent a significant loss of genetic 
diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, 
that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean population segment is significant to 
the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the 
significance element of the DPS policy.
    The BRT considered 60[deg] N latitude and the equator as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 40[deg] W longitude as the west 
boundary of the Northeast Atlantic Ocean population segment. The BRT 
considered the boundary between the Northeast Atlantic Ocean and 
Mediterranean Sea population segments as 5[deg]36' W longitude (Strait 
of Gibraltar). These boundaries are based on oceanographic features, 
loggerhead sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and 
information on loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and 
flipper tagging studies. The BRT determined that the Northeast Atlantic 
Ocean discrete population segment is biologically and ecologically 
significant because the loss of this population segment would result in 
a significant gap in the range of the taxon, and the population segment 
differs markedly from other population segments of the species in its 
genetic characteristics. The Northeast Atlantic Ocean population 
segment encompasses half of an hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss 
would result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic 
studies have shown that adult populations are highly structured with no 
overlap in distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest 
Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea 
(Bowen et al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et 
al., 2007; C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--
Spain, personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). 
There is no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from 
the Northwest Atlantic, Mediterranean Sea, or South Atlantic nesting 
beaches would repopulate the Northeast Atlantic nesting beaches should 
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). There is 
also no evidence

[[Page 12612]]

of movement of Northeast Atlantic adults west of 40[deg] W longitude or 
east of the Strait of Gibraltar (5[deg]36' W longitude). This discrete 
population segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness 
Determination section above) and the BRT indicated that these unique 
haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this 
discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of 
genetic diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we 
concur, that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean population segment is 
significant to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it 
satisfies the significance element of the DPS policy.
    The BRT considered the Mediterranean Sea west to 5[deg]36' W 
longitude (Strait of Gibraltar) as the boundary of the Mediterranean 
Sea population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead 
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on 
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging 
studies. The BRT determined that the Mediterranean Sea discrete 
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because 
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly 
from other population segments of the species in its genetic 
characteristics. The Mediterranean Sea population segment encompasses 
the entire Mediterranean Sea basin, and its loss would result in a 
significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies have shown 
that adult populations are highly structured with no overlap in 
distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, 
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et 
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; 
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas--Spain, 
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is 
no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from the 
Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, or South Atlantic nesting 
beaches would repopulate the Mediterranean Sea nesting beaches should 
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). As 
previously described, adults from the Mediterranean Sea population 
segment appear to forage closer to the nesting beaches in the eastern 
basin, and most flipper tag recoveries from females nesting in Greece 
have occurred in the Adriatic Sea and off Tunisia (Margaritoulis et 
al., 2003; Lazar et al., 2004). There is no evidence of movement of 
adult Mediterranean Sea loggerheads west of the Strait of Gibraltar 
(5[deg]36' W longitude). This discrete population segment is 
genetically unique (see Discreteness Determination section above) and 
the BRT indicated that these unique haplotypes could represent adaptive 
differences; thus, the loss of this discrete population segment would 
represent a significant loss of genetic diversity. Based on this 
information, the BRT concluded, and we concur, that the Mediterranean 
Sea population segment is significant to the taxon to which it belongs, 
and, therefore, that it satisfies the significance element of the DPS 
policy.
    The BRT considered the equator and 60[deg] S latitude as the north 
and south boundaries, respectively, and 20[deg] E longitude at Cape 
Agulhas on the southern tip of Africa and 67[deg] W longitude as the 
east and west boundaries, respectively, of the South Atlantic Ocean 
population segment based on oceanographic features, loggerhead 
sightings, thermal tolerance, fishery bycatch data, and information on 
loggerhead distribution from satellite telemetry and flipper tagging 
studies. The BRT determined that the South Atlantic Ocean discrete 
population segment is biologically and ecologically significant because 
the loss of this population segment would result in a significant gap 
in the range of the taxon, and the population segment differs markedly 
from other population segments of the species in its genetic 
characteristics. The South Atlantic Ocean population segment 
encompasses an entire hemispheric ocean basin, and its loss would 
result in a significant gap in the range of the taxon. Genetic studies 
have shown that adult populations are highly structured with no overlap 
in distribution among adult loggerheads from the Northwest Atlantic, 
Northeast Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Mediterranean Sea (Bowen et 
al., 1994; Encalada et al., 1998; Pearce, 2001; Carerras et al., 2007; 
C. Monzon-Arguello, Instituto Canario de Ciencias Marinas-Spain, 
personal communication, 2008; Monzon-Arguello et al., 2009). There is 
no evidence or reason to believe that female loggerheads from the 
Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, or Mediterranean Sea nesting 
beaches would repopulate the South Atlantic nesting beaches should 
these populations be lost (Bowen et al., 1994; Bowen, 2003). This 
discrete population segment is genetically unique (see Discreteness 
Determination section above) and the BRT indicated that these unique 
haplotypes could represent adaptive differences; thus, the loss of this 
discrete population segment would represent a significant loss of 
genetic diversity. Based on this information, the BRT concluded, and we 
concur, that the South Atlantic Ocean population segment is significant 
to the taxon to which it belongs, and, therefore, that it satisfies the 
significance element of the DPS policy.
    In summary, based on the information provided in the Discreteness 
Determination and Significance Determination sections above, the BRT 
identified nine loggerhead DPSs distributed globally: (1) North Pacific 
Ocean DPS, (2) South Pacific Ocean DPS, (3) North Indian Ocean DPS, (4) 
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, (5) Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, (6) 
Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, (7) Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS, (8) 
Mediterranean Sea DPS, and (9) South Atlantic Ocean DPS. We concur with 
the findings and application of the DPS policy described by the BRT and 
conclude that the nine DPSs identified by the BRT warrant delineation 
as DPSs (i.e., they are discrete and significant).

Significant Portion of the Range

    We have determined that the range of each DPS contributes 
meaningfully to the conservation of the DPS and that populations that 
may contribute more or less to the conservation of each DPS throughout 
a portion of its range cannot be identified due to the highly migratory 
nature of the listed entity.
    The loggerhead sea turtle is highly migratory and crosses multiple 
domestic and international geopolitical boundaries. Depending on the 
life stage, they may occur in oceanic waters or along the continental 
shelf of landmasses, or transit back and forth between oceanic and 
neritic habitats. Protection and management of both the terrestrial and 
marine environments is essential to recovering the listed entity. 
Management measures implemented by any State, foreign nation, or 
political subdivision likely would only affect individual sea turtles 
during certain stages and seasons of the life cycle. Management 
measures implemented by any State, foreign nation, or political 
subdivision may also affect individuals from multiple DPSs because 
juvenile turtles from disparate DPSs can overlap on foraging grounds or 
migratory corridors (e.g., Northwest Atlantic, Northeast Atlantic, and 
Mediterranean Sea DPSs). The ``significant'' term in ``significant 
portion of the range'' refers to the contribution of the population(s)

[[Page 12613]]

in a portion of the range to the conservation of the listable entity 
being considered. The BRT was unable to identify any particular portion 
of the range of any of the DPSs that was more significant to the DPS 
than another portion of the same range because of the migratory nature 
of the loggerhead turtle and the fact that different life stages 
undergo threats and benefit from conservation efforts throughout the 
geographic range of each DPS. The next section describes our evaluation 
of the status of each DPS throughout its range.

Status of the Nine Loggerhead DPSs

    Abundance estimates across all life stages do not exist for the 
nine DPSs. Within the global range of the species, and within each DPS, 
the primary data available are collected on nesting beaches, either as 
counts of nests or counts of nesting females, or a combination of both 
(either direct or extrapolated). Information on abundance and trends 
away from the nesting beaches is limited or non-existent, primarily 
because these data are, relative to nesting beach studies, logistically 
difficult and expensive to obtain. Therefore, the primary information 
source for directly evaluating status and trends of the nine DPSs is 
nesting beach data.

North Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the North Pacific, loggerhead nesting is essentially restricted 
to Japan where monitoring of loggerhead nesting began in the 1950s on 
some beaches, and expanded to include most known nesting beaches since 
approximately 1990. Kamezaki et al. (2003) reviewed census data 
collected from most of the Japanese nesting beaches. Although most 
surveys were initiated in the 1980s and 1990s, some data collection 
efforts were initiated in the 1950s. Along the Japanese coast, nine 
major nesting beaches (greater than 100 nests per season) and six 
``submajor'' beaches (10-100 nests per season) were identified. Census 
data from 12 of these 15 beaches provide composite information on 
longer-term trends in the Japanese nesting assemblage. Using 
information collected on these beaches, Kamezaki et al. (2003) 
concluded a substantial decline (50-90 percent) in the size of the 
annual loggerhead nesting population in Japan in recent decades. Snover 
(2008) combined nesting data from the Sea Turtle Association of Japan 
and data from Kamezaki et al. (2002) to provide a recent 18-year time 
series of nesting data from 1990-2007. Nesting declined from an initial 
peak of approximately 6,638 nests in 1990-1991, followed by a steep 
decline to a low of 2,064 nests in 1997. During the past decade, 
nesting increased gradually to 5,167 nests in 2005, declined and then 
rose again to a high of just under 11,000 nests in 2008. Estimated nest 
numbers for 2009 are on the order of 7,000-8,000 nests. While nesting 
numbers have gradually increased in recent years and the number for 
2009 is similar to the start of the time series in 1990, historical 
evidence indicates that there has been a substantial decline over the 
last half of the 20th century.

South Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the South Pacific, loggerhead nesting is almost entirely 
restricted to eastern Australia (primarily Queensland) and New 
Caledonia, with the majority of nesting occurring in eastern Australia, 
a population that has been well studied. The size of the annual 
breeding population (females only) has been monitored at numerous 
rookeries in Australia since 1968 (Limpus and Limpus, 2003), and these 
data constitute the primary measure of the current status of the DPS. 
The total nesting population for Queensland was approximately 3,500 
females in the 1976-1977 nesting season (Limpus, 1985; Limpus and 
Reimer, 1994). Little more than two decades later, Limpus and Limpus 
(2003) estimated this nesting population at less than 500 females in 
the 1999-2000 nesting season. There has been a marked decline in the 
number of females breeding annually since the mid-1970s, with an 
estimated 50 to 80 percent decline in the number of breeding females at 
various Australian rookeries up to 1990 (Limpus and Reimer, 1994) and a 
decline of approximately 86 percent by 1999 (Limpus and Limpus, 2003). 
Comparable nesting surveys have not been conducted in New Caledonia 
however. Information from pilot surveys conducted in 2005, combined 
with oral history information collected, suggest that there has been a 
decline in loggerhead nesting (Limpus et al., 2006). Based on data from 
the pilot study, only 60 to 70 loggerheads nested on the four surveyed 
New Caledonia beaches during the 2004-2005 nesting season (Limpus et 
al., 2006).
    Studies of eastern Australia loggerheads at their foraging areas 
provide some information on the status of non-breeding loggerheads of 
the South Pacific Ocean DPS. Chaloupka and Limpus (2001) determined 
that the resident loggerhead population on coral reefs of the southern 
Great Barrier Reef declined at 3 percent per year from 1985 to the late 
1990s. The observed decline was hypothesized as a result of recruitment 
failure, given few anthropogenic impacts and constant high annual 
survivorship measured at this foraging habitat (Chaloupka and Limpus, 
2001). Concurrently, a decline in new recruits was measured in these 
foraging areas (Limpus and Limpus, 2003).

North Indian Ocean DPS

    The North Indian Ocean hosts the largest nesting assemblage of 
loggerheads in the eastern hemisphere; the vast majority of these 
loggerheads nest in Oman (Baldwin et al., 2003). Nesting occurs in 
greatest density on Masirah Island; the number of emergences ranges 
from 27-102 per km nightly (Ross, 1998). Nesting densities have 
complicated the implementation of standardized nesting beach surveys, 
and more precise nesting data have only been collected since 2008. 
Extrapolations resulting from partial surveys and tagging in 1977-1978 
provided broad estimates of 19,000-60,000 females nesting annually at 
Masirah Island, while a more recent partial survey in 1991 provides an 
estimate of 23,000 nesting females at Masirah Island (Baldwin, 1992; 
Ross, 1979, 1998; Ross and Barwani 1982). A reinterpretation of these 
estimates, assuming 50 percent nesting success (as compared to 100 
percent in the original estimates), resulted in an estimate of 20,000 
to 40,000 females nesting annually (Baldwin et al., 2003). Reliable 
trends in nesting cannot be determined due to the lack of standardized 
surveys at Masirah Island prior to 2008. In 2008, about 50,000 nests 
were estimated based on daily surveys of the highest density nesting 
beaches and weekly surveys on all remaining island nesting beaches. 
Even using the low end of the 1977-1978 estimates of 20,000 nesting 
females at Masirah, this suggests a significant decline in the size of 
the nesting population and is consistent with observations by local 
rangers that the population has declined dramatically in the last three 
decades (E. Possardt, FWS, personal communication, 2008). If the higher 
estimates are accurate then the decline would be greater than 70 
percent.
    In addition to the nesting beaches on Masirah Island, over 3,000 
nests per year have been recorded in Oman on the Al-Halaniyat Islands 
and, along the Oman mainland of the Arabian Sea, approximately 2,000 
nests are deposited annually (Salm, 1991; Salm et al., 1993). In Yemen, 
on Socotra Island, 50-100 loggerheads were estimated to have nested in 
1999 (Pilcher and Saad, 2000). A time series of nesting data based on 
standardized surveys is not available to determine trends for these 
nesting sites.

[[Page 12614]]

    Loggerhead nesting is rare elsewhere in the northern Indian Ocean 
and in some cases is complicated by inaccurate species identification 
(Shanker, 2004; Tripathy, 2005). A small number of nesting females use 
the beaches of Sri Lanka every year; however, there are no records that 
Sri Lanka has ever been a major nesting area for loggerheads 
(Kapurusinghe, 2006). Loggerheads have been reported nesting in low 
numbers in Myanmar; however, these data may not be reliable because of 
misidentification of species (Thorbjarnarson et al., 2000).

Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the eastern Indian Ocean, loggerhead nesting is restricted to 
western Australia (Dodd, 1988), and this nesting population is the 
largest in Australia (Wirsing et al., unpublished data, cited in 
Natural Heritage Trust, 2005). Dirk Hartog Island hosts about 70-75 
percent of nesting individuals in the eastern Indian Ocean (Baldwin et 
al., 2003). Surveys have been conducted on the island for the duration 
of six nesting seasons between 1993/1994 and 1999/2000 (Baldwin et al., 
2003). An estimated 800-1,500 loggerheads nest annually on Dirk Hartog 
Island beaches (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    Fewer loggerheads (approximately 150-350 per season) are reported 
nesting on the Muiron Islands; however, more nesting loggerheads are 
reported here than on North West Cape (approximately 50-150 per season) 
(Baldwin et al., 2003). Although data are insufficient to determine 
trends, evidence suggests the nesting population in the Muiron Islands 
and North West Cape region was depleted before recent beach monitoring 
programs began (Nishemura and Nakahigashi, 1990; Poiner et al., 1990; 
Poiner and Harris, 1996).

Southwest Indian Ocean DPS

    In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the highest concentration of nesting 
occurs on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, where surveys and 
management practices were instituted in 1963 (Baldwin et al., 2003). A 
trend analysis of index nesting beach data from this region from 1965 
to 2008 indicates an increasing nesting population between the first 
decade of surveys, which documented 500-800 nests annually, and the 
last 8 years, which documented 1,100-1,500 nests annually (Nel, 2008). 
These data represent approximately 50 percent of all nesting within 
South Africa and are believed to be representative of trends in the 
region. Loggerhead nesting occurs elsewhere in South Africa, but 
sampling is not consistent and no trend data are available. The total 
number of females nesting annually in South Africa is estimated between 
500-2,000 (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, surveys have been 
instituted much more recently; likely less than 100 females nest 
annually and no trend data are available (Baldwin et al., 2003). 
Similarly, in Madagascar, loggerheads have been documented nesting in 
low numbers, but no trend data are available (Rakotonirina, 2001).

Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS

    Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of 
North America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles, 
and The Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern U.S. and on 
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico (Sternberg, 1981; Ehrhart, 1989; 
Ehrhart et al., 2003; NMFS and FWS, 2008). Collectively, the Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean hosts the most significant nesting assemblage of 
loggerheads in the western hemisphere and is one of the two largest 
loggerhead nesting assemblages in the world. NMFS and FWS (2008), 
Witherington et al. (2009), and TEWG (2009) provide comprehensive 
analyses of the status of the nesting assemblages within the Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean DPS using standardized data collected over survey 
periods ranging from 10 to 23 years. The results of these analyses, 
using different analytical approaches, were consistent in their 
findings--there has been a significant, overall nesting decline within 
this DPS.
    NMFS and FWS (2008) identified five recovery units (nesting 
subpopulations) in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean: the Northern U.S. 
(Florida/Georgia border to southern Virginia); Peninsular Florida 
(Florida/Georgia border south through Pinellas County, excluding the 
islands west of Key West, Florida); Dry Tortugas (islands west of Key 
West, Florida); Northern Gulf of Mexico (Franklin County, Florida, west 
through Texas); and Greater Caribbean (Mexico through French Guiana, 
The Bahamas, Lesser and Greater Antilles). Declining trends in the 
annual number of nests were documented for all recovery units for which 
there were adequate data. The most significant declining trend has been 
documented for the Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit, where nesting 
declined 26 percent over the 20-year period from 1989-2008, and 
declined 41 percent over the period 1998-2008 (NMFS and FWS, 2008; 
Witherington et al., 2009). The most standardized nest count from this 
recovery unit in 2009 recorded the fourth lowest loggerhead nesting in 
the 21-year monitoring period, reinforcing the assessment of nesting 
decline (B. Witherington, FWC, personal communication, 2010). The 
Peninsular Florida Recovery Unit represents approximately 87 percent of 
all nesting effort in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS (Ehrhart et al., 
2003). The Northern U.S. Recovery Unit is the second largest recovery 
unit within the DPS and is declining significantly at 1.3 percent 
annually since 1983 (NMFS and FWS, 2008). The Greater Caribbean 
Recovery Unit is the third largest recovery unit within the Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean DPS, with the majority of nesting at Quintana Roo, 
Mexico. TEWG (2009) reported a greater than 5 percent annual decline in 
loggerhead nesting from 1995-2006 at Quintana Roo.
    In an effort to evaluate loggerhead population status and trends 
beyond the nesting beach, NMFS and FWS (2008) and TEWG (2009) reviewed 
data from in-water studies within the range of the Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean DPS. NMFS and FWS (2008), in the Recovery Plan for the Northwest 
Atlantic Population of the Loggerhead Sea Turtle, summarized population 
trend data reported from nine in-water study sites, located between 
Long Island Sound, New York, and Florida Bay, Florida, where 
loggerheads were regularly captured and where efforts were made to 
provide local indices of abundance. The study periods for these nine 
sites varied. The earliest began in 1987, and the most recent were 
initiated in 2000. None included annual sampling. Results reported from 
four of the studies indicated no discernible trend, two studies 
reported declining trends, and two studies reported increasing trends. 
Trends at one study site, Mosquito Lagoon, Florida, indicated either no 
trend (all data) or a declining trend (more recent data), depending on 
whether all sample years were used or only the more recent, and likely 
more comparable sample years, were used. TEWG (2009) used raw data from 
six of the aforementioned nine in-water study sites to conduct trend 
analyses. Results from three of the four sites located in the southeast 
U.S. showed an increasing trend in the abundance of loggerheads, one 
showed no discernible trend, and the two sites located in the northeast 
U.S. showed a decreasing trend in abundance of loggerheads. Both NMFS 
and FWS (2008) and TEWG (2009) stress that population trend results 
currently available from in-water studies must be viewed with caution 
given the limited number of sampling sites, size of sampling areas, 
biases in sampling, and caveats associated with the analyses.

[[Page 12615]]

Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS

    In the northeastern Atlantic, the Cape Verde Islands support the 
only large nesting population of loggerheads in the region (Fretey, 
2001). Nesting occurs at some level on most of the islands in the 
archipelago with the largest nesting numbers reported from the island 
of Boa Vista where studies have been ongoing since 1998 (Lazar and 
Holcer, 1998; Lopez-Jurado et al., 2000; Fretey, 2001; Varo Cruz et 
al., 2007; Loureiro, 2008; M. Tiwari, NMFS, personal communication, 
2008). On Boa Vista Island, 833 and 1,917 nests were reported in 2001 
and 2002 respectively from 3.1 km of beach (Varo Cruz et al., 2007) and 
between 1998 and 2002 the local project had tagged 2,856 females (Varo 
Cruz et al., 2007). More recently, in 2005, 5,396 nests and 3,121 
females were reported from 9 km of beach on Boa Vista Island (Lopez-
Jurado et al., 2007). From Santiago Island, 66 nests were reported from 
four beaches in 2007 and 53 nests from five beaches in 2008 (http://tartarugascaboverde.wordpress.com/santiago). Due to limited data 
available, a population trend cannot currently be determined for the 
Cape Verde population; however, available information on the directed 
killing of nesting females suggests that this nesting population is 
under severe pressure and likely significantly reduced from historic 
levels. Loureiro (2008) reported a reduction in nesting from historic 
levels at Santiago Island, based on interviews with elders. Elsewhere 
in the northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead nesting is non-existent or 
occurs at very low levels. In Morocco, anecdotal reports indicated high 
numbers of nesting turtles in southern Morocco (Pasteur and Bons, 
1960), but a few recent surveys of the Atlantic coastline have 
suggested a dramatic decline (Tiwari et al., 2001, 2006). A few nests 
have been reported from Mauritania (Arvy et al., 2000) and Sierra Leone 
(E. Aruna, Conservation Society of Sierra Leone, personal 
communication, 2008). Some loggerhead nesting in Senegal and elsewhere 
along the coast of West Africa has been reported; however, a more 
recent and reliable confirmation is needed (Fretey, 2001).

Mediterranean Sea DPS

    Nesting occurs throughout the central and eastern Mediterranean in 
Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai, 
Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia (Sternberg, 1981; Margaritoulis et al., 2003; 
SWOT, 2007). In addition, sporadic nesting has been reported from the 
western Mediterranean, but the vast majority of nesting (greater than 
80 percent) occurs in Greece and Turkey (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
The documented annual nesting of loggerheads in the Mediterranean 
averages about 5,000 nests (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). There is no 
discernible trend in nesting at the two longest monitoring projects in 
Greece, Laganas Bay (Margaritoulis, 2005) and southern Kyparissia Bay 
(Margaritoulis and Rees, 2001). However, the nesting trend at Rethymno 
Beach, which hosts approximately 7 percent of all documented loggerhead 
nesting in the Mediterranean, shows a highly significant declining 
trend (1990-2004) (Margaritoulis et al., 2009). In Turkey, intermittent 
nesting surveys have been conducted since the 1970s with more 
consistent surveys conducted on some beaches only since the 1990s, 
making it difficult to assess trends in nesting. Ilgaz et al. (2007) 
reported a declining trend at Fethiye Beach from 1993-2004, this beach 
represents approximately 10 percent of loggerhead nesting in Turkey 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003).

South Atlantic Ocean DPS

    In the South Atlantic nesting occurs primarily along the mainland 
coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro, with peak 
concentrations in northern Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and northern 
Rio de Janeiro with peak nesting along the coast of Bahia (Marcovaldi 
and Chaloupka, 2007). Prior to 1980, loggerhead nesting populations in 
Brazil were considered severely depleted. Recently, Marcovaldi and 
Chaloupka (2007) reported a long-term, sustained increasing trend in 
nesting abundance over a 16-year period from 1988 through 2003 on 22 
surveyed beaches containing more than 75 percent of all loggerhead 
nesting in Brazil. A total of 4,837 nests were reported from these 
survey beaches for the 2003-2004 nesting season (Marcovaldi and 
Chaloupka, 2007).

Summary of Factors Affecting the Nine Loggerhead DPSs

    Section 4 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1533) and implementing regulations 
at 50 CFR part 424 set forth procedures for adding species to the 
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Species. Under section 4(a) 
of the Act, we must determine if a species is threatened or endangered 
because of any of the following five factors: (A) The present or 
threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 
range; (B) overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or 
educational purposes; (C) disease or predation; (D) the inadequacy of 
existing regulatory mechanisms; or (E) other natural or manmade factors 
affecting its continued existence.
    We have described the effects of various factors leading to the 
decline of the loggerhead sea turtle in the original listing 
determination (43 FR 32800; July 28, 1978) and other documents (NMFS 
and USFWS, 1998, 2007, 2008). In making this finding, information 
regarding the status of each of the nine loggerhead DPSs is considered 
in relation to the five factors provided in section 4(a)(1) of the ESA. 
The reader is directed to section 5 of the Status Review for a more 
detailed discussion of the factors affecting the nine identified 
loggerhead DPSs. In section 5.1., a general description of the threats 
that occur for all DPSs is presented under the relevant section 4(a)(1) 
factor. In section 5.2, threats that are specific to a particular DPS 
are presented by DPS under each section 4(a)(1) factor. That 
information is incorporated here by reference; the following is a 
summary of that information by DPS.

North Pacific Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
North Pacific result from coastal development and construction, 
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting, 
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, 
beach erosion, beach sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native 
vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (NMFS and USFWS, 
1998). Beaches in Japan where loggerheads nest are extensively eroded 
due to dredging and dams constructed upstream, and are obstructed by 
seawalls as well. Unfortunately, no quantitative studies have been 
conducted to determine the impact to the loggerhead nesting populations 
(Kamezaki et al., 2003). However, it is clear that loggerhead nesting 
habitat has been impacted by erosion and extensive beach use by 
tourists, both of which have contributed to unusually high mortality of 
eggs and pre-emergent hatchlings at many Japanese rookeries (Matsuzawa, 
2006).
    Maehama Beach and Inakahama Beach on Yakushima in Kagoshima 
Prefecture account for approximately 30 percent of loggerhead nesting 
in Japan (Kamezaki et al., 2003), making Yakushima an important area 
for nesting beach protection. However, the

[[Page 12616]]

beaches suffer from beach erosion and light pollution, especially from 
passing cars, as well as from tourists encroaching on the nesting 
beaches (Matsuzawa, 2006). Burgeoning numbers of visitors to beaches 
may cause sand compaction and nest trampling. Egg and pre-emergent 
hatchling mortality in Yakushima has been shown to be higher in areas 
where public access is not restricted and is mostly attributed to human 
foot traffic on nests (Kudo et al., 2003). Fences have been constructed 
around areas where the highest densities of nests are laid; however, 
there are still lower survival rates of eggs and pre-emergent 
hatchlings due to excessive foot traffic (Ohmuta, 2006).
    Loggerhead nesting habitat also has been lost at important 
rookeries in Miyazaki due in part to port construction that involved 
development of a groin of 1 kilometer from the coast into the sea, a 
yacht harbor with breakwaters and artificial beach, and an airport, 
causing erosion of beaches on both sides of the construction zone. This 
once excellent nesting habitat for loggerheads is now seriously 
threatened by erosion (Takeshita, 2006).
    Minabe-Senri beach, Wakayama Prefecture is a ``submajor'' nesting 
beach (in Kamezaki et al., 2003), but is one of the most important 
rookeries on the main island of Japan (Honshu). Based on unpublished 
data, Matsuzawa (2006) reported hatching success of unwashed-out 
clutches at Minabe-Senri beach to be 24 percent in 1996, 50 percent in 
1997, 53 percent in 1998, 48 percent in 1999, 62 percent in 2000, 41 
percent in 2001, and 34 percent in 2002.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the North Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging, 
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods 
not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also deplete 
invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In 
many cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide with fishing zones. For 
example, using aerial surveys and satellite telemetry, juvenile 
foraging hotspots have recently been identified off the coast of Baja 
California, Mexico; these hotspots overlap with intensive small-scale 
fisheries (Peckham and Nichols, 2006; Peckham et al., 2007, 2008). 
Comprehensive data currently are unavailable to fully understand how 
intense harvesting of fish resources changes neritic and oceanic 
ecosystems. Climate change also may result in future trophic changes, 
thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the North Pacific Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that coastal development and coastal armoring on nesting beaches in 
Japan are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    In Japan, the use of loggerhead meat for food is not popular except 
historically in local communities such as Kochi and Wakayama 
prefectures. In addition, egg collection was common in the coastal 
areas during times of hunger and later by those who valued loggerhead 
eggs as revitalizers or aphrodisiacs and acquired them on the black 
market (in Kamezaki et al., 2003; Takeshita, 2006). Currently, due in 
large part to research and conservation efforts throughout the country, 
egg harvesting no longer represents a problem in Japan (Kamezaki et 
al., 2003; Ohmuta, 2006; Takeshita, 2006). Laws were enacted in 1973 to 
prohibit egg collection on Yakushima, and in 1988, the laws were 
extended to the entire Kagoshima Prefecture, where two of the most 
important loggerhead nesting beaches are protected (Matsuzawa, 2006).
    Despite national laws, in many other countries where loggerheads 
are found migrating through or foraging, the hunting of adult and 
juvenile turtles is still a problem, as seen in Baja California Sur, 
Mexico (Koch et al., 2006). Sea turtles have been protected in Mexico 
since 1990, when a Federal law decreed the prohibition of the 
``extraction, capture and pursuit of all species of sea turtle in 
Federal waters or from beaches within national territory * * * [and a 
requirement that] * * * any species of sea turtle incidentally captured 
during the operations of any commercial fishery shall be returned to 
the sea, independently of its physical state, dead or alive'' (in 
Garcia-Martinez and Nichols, 2000). Despite the ban, studies have shown 
that sea turtles continue to be caught, both indirectly in fisheries 
and by a directed harvest of juvenile turtles. Turtles are principally 
hunted using nets, longlines, and harpoons. While some are killed 
immediately, others are kept alive in pens and transported to market. 
The market for sea turtles consists of two types: the local market 
(consumed locally) and the export market (sold to restaurants in Mexico 
cities such as Tijuana, Ensenada, and Mexicali, and U.S. cities such as 
San Diego and Tucson). Consumption is highest during holidays such as 
Easter and Christmas (Wildcoast/Grupo Tortuguero de las Californias, 
2003).
    Based on a combination of analyses of stranding data, beach and sea 
surveys, tag-recapture studies, and extensive interviews, all carried 
out between June 1994 and January 1999, Nichols (2003) conservatively 
estimated the annual take of sea turtles by various fisheries and 
through direct harvest in the Baja California, Mexico, region. Sea 
turtle mortality data collected between 1994 and 1999 indicated that 
over 90 percent of sea turtles recorded dead were either green turtles 
(30 percent of total) or loggerheads (61 percent of total), and signs 
of human consumption were evident in over half of the specimens. These 
studies resulted in an estimated 1,950 loggerheads killed annually, 
affecting primarily juvenile size classes. The primary causes for 
mortality were the incidental take in a variety of fishing gears and 
direct harvest for consumption and [illegal] trade (Nichols, 2003).
    From April 2000 to July 2003 throughout the Bahia Magdalena region 
(including local beaches and towns), researchers found 1,945 sea turtle 
carcasses, 44.1 percent of which were loggerheads. Of the sea turtle 
carcasses found, slaughter for human consumption was the primary cause 
of death for all species (63 percent for loggerheads). Over 90 percent 
of all turtles found were juvenile turtles (Koch et al., 2006). As the 
population of green turtles has declined in Baja California Sur waters, 
poachers have switched to loggerheads (H. Peckham, Pro Peninsula, 
personal communication, 2006).
    In summary, overutilization for commercial purposes in both Japan 
and Mexico likely was a factor that contributed to the historic 
declines of this DPS. Current illegal harvest of loggerheads in Baja 
California for human consumption continues as a significant threat to 
the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the North Pacific Ocean. As in other nesting 
locations, egg predation also exists in Japan, particularly by raccoon 
dogs (Nyctereutes procyonoides) and weasels (Mustela itatsi); however, 
quantitative data do not exist to evaluate the impact on loggerhead 
populations (Kamezaki et

[[Page 12617]]

al., 2003). Loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean also may be impacted 
by harmful algal blooms.
    In summary, although nest predation in Japan is known to occur, 
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of 
nest predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the North Pacific Ocean. The 
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.1.4. of the Status Review 
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and 
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle 
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority 
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and 
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle 
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Pacific Ocean is 
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North 
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due 
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported 
fisheries, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing 
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated 
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations 
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive 
bycatch reduction technologies.
    In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal development and coastal 
armoring on nesting beaches in Japan continues as a substantial threat 
(see Factor A). Coastal armoring, if left unaddressed, will become an 
even more substantial threat as sea level rises. Recently, the Japan 
Ministry of Environment has supported the local non-governmental 
organization conducting turtle surveys and conservation on Yakushima in 
establishing guidelines for surveys and minimizing impacts by humans 
encroaching on the nesting beaches. As of the 2009 nesting season, 
humans accessing Inakahama, Maehama, and Yotsuse beaches at night must 
comply with the established rules (Y. Matsuzawa, Sea Turtle Association 
of Japan, personal communication, 2009).
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of North Pacific Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threats from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development and 
coastal armoring (Factor A) are significant relative to the persistence 
of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Incidental capture in artisanal and commercial fisheries is a 
significant threat to the survival of loggerheads in the North Pacific. 
Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and demersal longlines, drift and 
set gillnets, bottom and mid-water trawling, fishing dredges, pound 
nets and weirs, haul and purse seines, pots and traps, and hook and 
line gear.
    Based on turtle sightings and capture rates reported in an April 
1988 through March 1989 survey of fisheries research and training 
vessels and extrapolated to total longline fleet effort by the Japanese 
fleet in 1978, Nishemura and Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that 21,200 
turtles, including greens, leatherbacks, loggerheads, olive ridleys, 
and hawksbills, were captured annually by Japanese tuna longliners in 
the western Pacific and South China Sea, with a reported mortality of 
approximately 12,300 turtles per year. Using commercial tuna longline 
logbooks, research vessel data, and questionnaires, Nishemura and 
Nakahigashi (1990) estimated that for every 10,000 hooks in the western 
Pacific and South China Sea, one turtle is captured, with a mortality 
rate of 42 percent. Although species-specific information on the 
bycatch is not available, vessels reported that 36 percent of the 
sightings of turtles in locations that overlap with these commercial 
fishing grounds were loggerheads.
    Caution should be used in interpreting the results of Nishemura and 
Nakahigashi (1990), including estimates of sea turtle take rate (per 
number of hooks) and resultant mortality rate, and estimates of annual 
take by the fishery, for the following reasons: (1) The data collected 
were based on observations by training and research vessels, logbooks, 
and a questionnaire (i.e., hypothetical), and do not represent actual, 
substantiated logged or observed catch of sea turtles by the fishery; 
(2) the authors assumed that turtles were distributed homogeneously; 
and (3) the authors used only one year (1978) to estimate total effort 
and distribution of the Japanese tuna longline fleet. Although the data 
and analyses provided by Nishemura and Nakahigashi (1990) are 
conjectural, longliners fishing in the Pacific have significantly 
impacted and, with the current level of effort, probably will continue 
to have significant impacts on sea turtle populations.
    Foreign high-seas driftnet fishing in the North Pacific Ocean for 
squid, tuna, and billfish ended with a United Nations moratorium in 
December 1992. Except for observer data collected in 1990-1991, there 
is virtually no information on the incidental take of sea turtle 
species by the driftnet fisheries prior to the moratorium. The high-
seas squid driftnet fishery in the North Pacific was observed in Japan, 
Korea, and Taiwan, while the large-mesh fisheries targeting tuna and 
billfish were observed in the Japanese fleet (1990-1991) and the 
Taiwanese fleet (1990). A combination of observer data and fleet effort 
statistics indicate that 2,986 loggerhead turtles were entangled by the 
combined fleets of Japan, Korea, and Taiwan from June 1990 through May 
1991, when all fleets were monitored. Of these incidental 
entanglements, an estimated 805 loggerheads were killed (27 percent 
mortality rate) (Wetherall, 1997). Data on size composition of the 
turtles caught in the high-seas driftnet fisheries also were collected 
by observers. The majority of loggerheads measured by observers were 
juvenile (Wetherall, 1997). The cessation of high-seas driftnet fishing 
in 1992 should have reduced the incidental take of marine turtles. 
However, nations involved in driftnet fishing may have shifted to other 
gear types (e.g., pelagic or demersal longlines, coastal gillnets); 
this shift in gear types could have resulted

[[Page 12618]]

in either similar or increased turtle bycatch and associated mortality.
    These rough mortality estimates for a single fishing season provide 
only a narrow glimpse of the impacts of the driftnet fishery on sea 
turtles, and a full assessment of impacts would consider the turtle 
mortality generated by the driftnet fleets over their entire range. 
Unfortunately, comprehensive data are lacking, but the observer data do 
indicate the possible magnitude of turtle mortality given the best 
information available. Wetherall et al. (1993) speculate that the 
actual mortality of sea turtles may have been between 2,500 and 9,000 
per year, with most of the mortalities being loggerheads taken in the 
Japanese and Taiwanese large-mesh fisheries.
    While a comprehensive, quantitative assessment of the impacts of 
the North Pacific driftnet fishery on turtles is impossible without a 
better understanding of turtle population abundance, genetic 
identities, exploitation history, and population dynamics, it is likely 
that the mortality inflicted by the driftnet fisheries in 1990 and in 
prior years was significant (Wetherall et al., 1993), and the effects 
may still be evident in sea turtle populations today. The high 
mortality of juvenile turtles and reproductive adults in the high-seas 
driftnet fishery has probably altered the current age structure 
(especially if certain age groups were more vulnerable to driftnet 
fisheries) and therefore diminished or limited the reproductive 
potential of affected sea turtle populations.
    Extensive ongoing studies regarding loggerhead mortality and 
bycatch have been administered off the coast of Baja California Sur, 
Mexico. The location and timing of loggerhead strandings documented in 
2003-2005 along a 43-kilometer beach (Playa San Lazaro) indicated 
bycatch in local small-scale fisheries. In order to corroborate this, 
in 2005, researchers observed two small-scale fleets operating closest 
to an area identified as a high-use area for loggerheads. One fleet, 
based out of Puerto Lopez-Mateos, fished primarily for halibut using 
bottom set gillnets, soaking from 20 to 48 hours. This fleet consisted 
of up to 75 boats in 2005, and, on a given day, 9 to 40 vessels fished 
the deep area (32-45 meter depths). During a 2-month period, 11 
loggerheads were observed taken in 73 gillnet day-trips, with eight of 
those loggerheads landed dead (observed mortality rate of 73 percent). 
The other fleet, based in Santa Rosa, fished primarily for demersal 
sharks using bottom-set longlines baited with tuna or mackerel and left 
to soak for 20 to 48 hours. In 2005, the fleet numbered only five to 
six vessels. During the seven daylong bottom-set longline trips 
observed, 26 loggerheads were taken, with 24 of them landed dead 
(observed mortality rate of 92 percent). Based on these observations, 
researchers estimated that in 2005 at least 299 loggerheads died in the 
bottom-set gillnet fishery and at least 680 loggerheads died in the 
bottom-set longline fishery. This annual bycatch estimate of 
approximately 1,000 loggerheads is considered a minimum and is also 
supported by shoreline mortality surveys and informal interviews 
(Peckham et al., 2007).
    These results suggest that incidental capture at Baja California 
Sur is one of the most significant sources of mortality identified for 
the North Pacific loggerhead population and underscores the importance 
of reducing bycatch in small-scale fisheries.
    In the U.S. Pacific, longline fisheries targeting swordfish and 
tuna and drift gillnet fisheries targeting swordfish have been 
identified as the primary fisheries of concern for loggerheads. Bycatch 
of loggerhead turtles in these fisheries has been significantly reduced 
as a result of time-area closures, required gear modifications, and 
hard caps imposed on turtle bycatch, with 100 percent observer coverage 
in certain areas.
    The California/Oregon (CA/OR) drift gillnet fishery targets 
swordfish and thresher shark off the west coast of the United States. 
The fishery has been observed by NMFS since July 1990 and currently 
averages 20 percent. From July 1990 to January 2000, the CA/OR drift 
gillnet fishery was observed to incidentally capture 17 loggerheads (12 
released alive, 1 injured, and 4 killed). Based on a worst-case 
scenario, NMFS estimated that a maximum of 33 loggerheads in a given 
year could be incidentally taken by the CA/OR drift gillnet fleet. Sea 
turtle mortality rates for hard-shelled species were estimated to be 32 
percent (NMFS, 2000).
    In 2000, analyses conducted under the mandates of the ESA showed 
that the CA/OR drift gillnet fishery was taking excessive numbers of 
sea turtles, such that the fishery ``jeopardized the continued 
existence of'' loggerheads and leatherbacks. In this case, the 
consulting agency (NMFS) was required to provide a reasonable and 
prudent alternative to the action (i.e., the fishery). In order to 
reduce the likelihood of interactions with loggerhead sea turtles, NMFS 
has regulations in place to close areas to drift gillnet fishing off 
southern California during forecasted or occurring El Ni[ntilde]o 
events from June 1 through August 31, when loggerheads are likely to 
move into the area from the Pacific coast of Baja California following 
a preferred prey species, pelagic red crabs.
    Prior to 2000, the Hawaii-based longline fishery targeted highly 
migratory species north of Hawaii using gear largely used by fleets 
around the world. From 1994-1999, the fishery was estimated to take 
between 369 and 501 loggerheads per year, with between 64 and 88 
mortalities per year (NMFS, 2000). Currently, the Hawaii-based shallow 
longline fishery targeting swordfish is strictly regulated such that an 
annual take of 17 loggerheads is authorized for the fishery, beginning 
in 2004, when the fishery was re-opened after being closed for several 
years. In 2004 and 2005, the fishing year was completed without 
reaching the turtle take levels (1 and 10 loggerheads were captured, 
respectively, with fleets operating with 100 percent observer 
coverage). However, in 2006, 17 loggerheads were taken, forcing the 
fishery to be shut down early. In 2007, 15 loggerheads were taken by 
the fishery. Most loggerheads were released alive (NMFS-Pacific Islands 
Regional Office, Observer Database Public Web site, 2008).
    Recent investigations off the coast of Japan, particularly focused 
off the main islands of Honshu, Shikoku, and Kyushu, have revealed a 
major threat to the more mature stage classes of loggerheads 
(approximately 70-80 cm SCL) due to pound net fisheries set offshore of 
the nesting beaches and in the coastal foraging areas. While pound nets 
constitute the third largest fishery in terms of metric tons of fish 
caught in Japan, they account for the majority of loggerhead bycatch by 
Japanese fisheries. Open-type pound nets studied in an area off Shikoku 
were shown to take loggerheads as the most prevalent sea turtle species 
caught but had lower mortality rates (less than 15 percent), primarily 
because turtles could reach the surface to breathe. Middle layer and 
bottom-type pound nets in particular have high rates of mortality 
(nearly 100 percent), because the nets are submerged and sea turtles 
are unable to reach the surface. Estimates of loggerhead mortality in 
one area studied between April 2006 and September 2007 were on the 
order of 100 individuals. While the fishing industry has an interest in 
changing its gear to open-type, it is very expensive, and the support 
from the Japanese government is limited (T. Ishihara, Sea Turtle 
Association of Japan, personal communication, 2007). Nonetheless, the 
BRT recognizes that coastal pound net fisheries off Japan may pose a

[[Page 12619]]

significant threat to the North Pacific population of loggerheads.
    Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries in the North 
Pacific Ocean on loggerhead sea turtles is very difficult given the low 
level of observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by 
countries that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to 
quantify the effect of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads, and 
annual estimates of bycatch were on the order of over 10,000 sea 
turtles, with as many as 2,600 individual loggerheads killed annually 
through immediate or delayed mortality as a result of interacting with 
the gear (Lewison et al., 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level 
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the North Pacific 
Ocean. For example, Matsuzawa et al. (2002) found heat-related 
mortality of pre-emergent hatchlings in Minabe Senri Beach and 
concluded that this population is vulnerable to even small temperature 
increases resulting from global warming because sand temperatures 
already exceed the optimal thermal range for incubation. Recently, 
Chaloupka et al. (2008) used generalized additive regression modeling 
and autoregressive-prewhitened cross-correlation analysis to consider 
whether changes in regional ocean temperatures affect long-term nesting 
population dynamics for Pacific loggerheads from primary nesting 
assemblages in Japan and Australia. Researchers chose four nesting 
sites with a generally long time series to model, two in Japan (Kamouda 
rookery, declining population, and Yakushima rookery, generally 
increasing in the last 20 years), and two in Australia (Woongarra 
rookery, generally declining through early 1990s and beginning to 
recover, and Wreck Island rookery, which is generally declining). 
Analysis of 51 years of mean annual sea surface temperatures around two 
core foraging areas off Japan and eastern Australia, showed a general 
warming of the oceans in these regions. In general, nesting abundance 
for all four rookeries was inversely related to sea surface 
temperatures; that is, higher sea surface temperatures during the 
previous year in the core foraging area resulted in lower summer season 
nesting at all rookeries. Given that cooler ocean temperatures are 
generally associated with increased productivity and that female sea 
turtles generally require at least 1 year to acquire sufficient fat 
stores for vitellogenesis to occur in the foraging grounds, as well as 
the necessary energy required for migration, any lag in productivity 
due to warmer temperatures has physiological basis. Over the long term, 
warming ocean temperatures could therefore lead to lower productivity 
and prey abundance, and thus reduced nesting and recruitment by Pacific 
loggerheads (Chaloupka et al., 2008).
    Other anthropogenic impacts include boat strikes, ingestion of and 
entanglement in marine debris, and entrainment in coastal power plants.
    Natural environmental events, such as cyclones and hurricanes, may 
affect loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean. Typhoons also have been 
shown to cause severe beach erosion and negatively affect hatching 
success at many loggerhead nesting beaches in Japan, especially in 
areas already prone to erosion. For example, during the 2004 season, 
the Japanese archipelago suffered a record number of typhoons and many 
nests were drowned or washed out. Extreme sand temperatures at nesting 
beaches also create highly skewed female sex ratios of hatchlings or 
threaten the health of hatchlings. Without human intervention to 
protect clutches against some of these natural threats, many of these 
nests would be lost (Matsuzawa, 2006).
    In summary, we find that the North Pacific Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Pacific 
Ocean, including the coastal pound net fisheries off Japan, coastal 
fisheries impacting juvenile foraging populations off Baja California, 
Mexico, and undescribed fisheries likely affecting loggerheads in the 
South China Sea and the North Pacific Ocean, is a significant threat to 
the persistence of this DPS.

South Pacific Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
South Pacific result from coastal development and construction, 
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting, 
beachfront lighting, vehicular traffic, beach erosion, beach pollution, 
removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation 
(NMFS and USFWS, 1998; Limpus, 2009).
    Removal or destruction of native dune vegetation, which enhances 
beach stability and acts as an integral buffer zone between land and 
sea, results in erosion of nesting habitat. Preliminary studies on 
nesting beaches in New Caledonia include local oral histories that 
attribute the decrease in loggerhead nesting to the removal of 
vegetation for construction purposes and subsequent beach erosion 
(Limpus et al., 2006).
    Beach armoring presents a barrier to nesting in the South Pacific. 
On the primary nesting beach in New Caledonia, a rock wall was 
constructed to prevent coastal erosion, and sea turtle nesting attempts 
have been unsuccessful. Local residents are seeking authorization to 
extend the wall further down the beach (Limpus et al., 2006).
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the South Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging, 
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Climate change, 
for instance, may result in future trophic changes, thus impacting 
loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the South Pacific Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that coastal armoring and removal of native dune vegetation on nesting 
beaches are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Legislation in Australia outlaws the harvesting of loggerheads by 
indigenous peoples (Limpus et al., 2006). Despite national laws, in 
many areas the poaching of eggs and hunting of adult and juvenile 
turtles is still a problem, and Limpus (2009) suggests that the harvest 
rate of loggerheads by indigenous hunters, both within Australia and in 
neighboring countries, is on the order of 40 turtles per year. 
Preliminary studies suggest that local harvesting in New Caledonia 
constitutes about 5 percent of the nesting population (Limpus et al., 
2006). Loggerheads also are consumed after being captured incidentally 
in high-seas fisheries of the southeastern Pacific (Alfaro-Shigueto et 
al., 2006), and occasionally may be the product of illegal trade 
throughout the region.
    In summary, current illegal harvest of loggerheads in Australia and 
New Caledonia for human consumption, as well as the consumption of 
loggerheads incidentally taken in high-seas fisheries,

[[Page 12620]]

continues as a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the South Pacific. While the prevalence of 
fibropapillomatosis in most loggerhead populations is thought to be 
small, an exception is in Moreton Bay, Australia, where 4.4 percent of 
the 320 loggerheads captured exhibited the disease during 1990-1992 
(Limpus et al., 1994). A subsequent study also found a high prevalence 
of fibropapillomatosis in the area (Quackenbush et al., 2000).
    Predation on nests and hatchlings by terrestrial vertebrates is a 
major problem at loggerhead rookeries in the South Pacific. At mainland 
rookeries in eastern Australia, for example, the introduced fox (Vulpes 
vulpes) has been the most significant predator on loggerhead eggs 
(Limpus, 1985, 2009). Although this has been minimized in recent years 
(to less than 5 percent; Limpus, 2009), researchers believe the earlier 
egg loss will greatly impact recruitment to this nesting population in 
the early 21st century (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). Predation on 
hatchlings by crabs and diurnal birds is also a threat (Limpus, 2009). 
In New Caledonia, feral dogs pose a predation threat to nesting 
loggerheads, and thus far no management has been implemented (Limpus et 
al., 2006).
    In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that 
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Although current fox 
predation levels in eastern Australia are greatly reduced from historic 
levels, predation by other species still occurs, and predation by feral 
dogs in New Caledonia has not been addressed. In addition, a high 
prevalence of the fibropapillomatosis disease exists in Moreton Bay, 
Australia. Therefore, predation and disease are believed to be a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the South Pacific Ocean. The 
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.2.4. of the Status Review 
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and 
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle 
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority 
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and 
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation 
(Hykle, 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Pacific Ocean is 
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South 
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due 
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported 
fisheries, the continued expansion of artisanal fleets in the 
southeastern Pacific, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing 
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated 
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations 
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive 
bycatch reduction technologies.
    In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal armoring and erosion 
resulting from the removal of native dune vegetation on nesting beaches 
continues as a substantial threat (see Factor A). Coastal armoring, if 
left unaddressed, will become an even more substantial threat as sea 
level rises.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of South Pacific Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal armoring and 
removal of native dune vegetation (Factor A) is significant relative to 
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Incidental capture in artisanal and commercial fisheries is a 
significant threat to the survival of loggerheads throughout the South 
Pacific. The primary gear types involved in these interactions include 
longlines, driftnets, set nets, and trawl fisheries. These are employed 
by both artisanal and industrial fleets, and target a wide variety of 
species including tunas, sharks, sardines, swordfish, and mahi mahi.
    In the southwestern Pacific, bottom trawling gear has been a 
contributing factor to the decline in the eastern Australian loggerhead 
population (Limpus and Reimer, 1994). The northern Australian prawn 
fishery (NPF) is made up of both a banana prawn fishery and a tiger 
prawn fishery, and extends from Cape York, Queensland (142[deg] E) to 
Cape Londonberry, Western Australia (127[deg] E). The fishery is one of 
the most valuable in all of Australia and in 2000 comprised 121 vessels 
fishing approximately 16,000 fishing days (Robins et al., 2002a). In 
2000, the use of turtle excluder devices (TEDs) in the NPF was made 
mandatory, due in part to several factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft 
Australian Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles, (2) requirement of the 
Australian Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for 
Commonwealth fisheries to become ecologically sustainable, and (3) the 
1996 U.S. import embargo on wild-caught prawns taken in a fishery 
without adequate turtle bycatch management practices (Robins et al., 
2002a). Data primarily were collected by volunteer fishers who were 
trained extensively in the collection of scientific data on sea turtles 
caught as bycatch in their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in this 
fishery, the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as 
bycatch, with a mortality rate of an estimated 40 percent due to 
drowning, injuries, or being returned to the water comatose (Poiner and 
Harris, 1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in effect, the 
annual bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to less than 200 
sea turtles per year, with a mortality rate of approximately 22 percent 
(based on recent years). This lower mortality rate also may be based on 
better sea turtle handling techniques adopted by the fleet. In general, 
loggerheads were the third most common sea turtle taken in this 
fishery.
    Loggerheads also are taken by longline fisheries operating out of

[[Page 12621]]

Australia (Limpus, 2009). For example, Robins et al. (2002b) estimate 
that approximately 400 turtles are killed annually in Australian 
pelagic longline fishery operations. Of this annual estimate, 
leatherbacks accounted for over 60 percent of this total, while 
unidentified hardshelled turtles accounted for the remaining species. 
Therefore, the effect of this longline fishery on loggerheads is 
unknown.
    Loggerheads also have been the most common turtle species captured 
in shark control programs in Australia (Kidston et al., 1992; Limpus, 
2009). From 1998-2002, a total of 232 loggerheads was captured with 195 
taken on drum lines and 37 taken in nets, both with a low level of 
direct mortality (Limpus, 2009).
    In the southeastern Pacific, significant bycatch has been reported 
in artisanal gillnet and longline shark and mahi mahi fisheries 
operating out of Peru (Kelez et al., 2003; Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 
2006) and, to a lesser extent, Chile (Donoso and Dutton, 2006). The 
fishing industry in Peru is the second largest economic activity in the 
country, and, over the past few years, the longline fishery has rapidly 
increased. Currently, nearly 600 longline vessels fish in the winter 
and over 1,300 vessels fish in the summer. During an observer program 
in 2003/2004, 588 sets were observed during 60 trips, and 154 sea 
turtles were taken as bycatch. Loggerheads were the species most often 
caught (73.4 percent). Of the loggerheads taken, 68 percent were 
entangled and 32 percent were hooked. Of the two fisheries, sea turtle 
bycatch was highest during the mahi mahi season, with 0.597 turtles/
1,000 hooks, while the shark fishery caught 0.356 turtles/1,000 hooks 
(Alfaro-Shigueto et al., 2008b). A separate study by Kelez et al. 
(2003) reported that approximately 30 percent of all turtles bycaught 
in Peru were loggerheads. In many cases, loggerheads are kept on board 
for human consumption; therefore, the mortality rate in this artisanal 
longline fishery is likely high because sea turtles are retained for 
future consumption or sale.
    Data on loggerhead bycatch in Chile are limited to the industrial 
swordfish fleet. Since 1990, fleet size has ranged from 7 to 23 vessels 
with a mean of approximately 14 vessels per year. These vessels fish up 
to and over 1,000 nautical miles along the Chilean coast with 
mechanized sets numbering approximately 1,200 hooks (M. Donoso, ONG 
Pacifico Laud--Chile, personal communication, 2007). Loggerhead bycatch 
is present in Chilean fleets; however, the catch rate is substantially 
lower than that reported for Peru (P. Dutton, NMFS, and M. Donoso, ONG 
Pacifico Laud--Chile, unpublished data).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other threats such as debris ingestion, boat strikes, and port 
dredging also impact loggerheads in the South Pacific, although these 
threats have been minimized in recent years due to a variety of 
legislative actions (Limpus, 2009). Loggerhead mortality resulting from 
dredging of channels in Queensland is a persistent, albeit minor 
problem. From 1999-2002, the average annual reported mortality was 1.7 
turtles per year (range = 1-3) from port dredging operations (Limpus, 
2009). Climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact 
loggerheads in the South Pacific Ocean, yet the impact of these threats 
has not been quantified.
    Natural environmental events, such as cyclones or hurricanes, may 
affect loggerheads in the South Pacific Ocean. These types of events 
may disrupt loggerhead nesting activity, albeit on a temporary scale. 
Chaloupka et al. (2008) demonstrated that nesting abundance of 
loggerheads in Australia was inversely related to sea surface 
temperatures, and suggested that a long-term warming trend in the South 
Pacific may be adversely impacting the recovery potential of this 
population.
    In summary, we find that the South Pacific Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Pacific 
Ocean is a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.

North Indian Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
North Indian Ocean result from coastal development and construction, 
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, beach pollution, 
removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (E. 
Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008).
    The primary loggerhead nesting beaches of this DPS are at Masirah 
Island, Oman, and are still relatively undeveloped but now facing 
increasing development pressures. Newly paved roads closely paralleling 
most of the Masirah Island coast are bringing newly constructed highway 
lights (E. Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008) and greater 
access to nesting beaches by the public. Light pollution from the 
military installation at Masirah Island also is evident at the most 
densely nested northern end of the island and is a likely cause of 
hatchling misorientation and nesting female disturbance (E. Possardt, 
USFWS, personal observation, 2008). Beach driving occurs on most of the 
major beaches outside the military installation. This vehicular traffic 
creates ruts that obstruct hatchling movements (Mann, 1977; Hosier et 
al., 1981; Cox et al., 1994; Baldwin, 1992), tramples nests, and 
destroys vegetation and dune formation processes, which exacerbates 
light pollution effects. Free ranging camels, sheep, and goats 
overgraze beach vegetation, which impedes natural dune formation (E. 
Possardt, USFWS, personal observation, 2008). Development of a new 
hotel on a major loggerhead nesting beach at Masirah Island is near 
completion and, although not yet approved, there are plans for a major 
resort at an important loggerhead nesting beach on one of the Halaniyat 
Islands. Armoring structures common to many developed beaches 
throughout the world are not yet evident on the major loggerhead 
nesting beaches of this DPS.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the North Indian Ocean include fishing practices, channel dredging, 
sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods 
not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also deplete 
invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. In 
many cases loggerhead foraging areas coincide with fishing zones. There 
has been an apparent growth in artisanal and commercial fisheries in 
waters surrounding Masirah Island (Baldwin, 1992). Climate change also 
may result in future trophic changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey 
abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the North Indian Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that coastal development, beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach 
driving on nesting beaches in Oman are significant threats to the 
persistence of this DPS.

[[Page 12622]]

B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    The use of loggerhead meat for food in Oman is not legal or 
popular. However, routine egg collection on Masirah Island does occur 
(Baldwin, 1992). The extent of egg collection as estimated by Masirah 
rangers and local residents is approximately 2,000 clutches per year 
(less than 10 percent).
    In summary, although the collection of eggs for human consumption 
is known to occur, it does not appear to be a significant threat to the 
persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the North Indian Ocean. Natural egg predation on 
Oman loggerhead nesting beaches undoubtedly occurs, but is not well 
documented or believed to be significant. Predation on hatchlings by 
Arabian red fox (Vulpes vulpes arabica), ghost crabs (Ocypode saratan), 
night herons (Nycticorax nycticorax), and gulls (Larus spp.) likely 
occurs. While quantitative data do not exist to evaluate these impacts 
on the North Indian Ocean loggerhead population, they are not likely to 
be significant.
    In summary, although nest predation is known to occur and hatchling 
predation is likely, quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the 
degree of impact of nest predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the North Indian Ocean. The 
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.3.4. of the Status Review 
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and 
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle 
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority 
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and 
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle 
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Impacts to loggerheads and loggerhead nesting habitat from coastal 
development, beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach driving on 
nesting beaches in Oman is substantial (see Factor A). In addition, 
fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Indian Ocean, although 
not quantified, is a likely substantial (see Factor E). Threats to 
nesting beaches are likely to increase, which would require additional 
and widespread nesting beach protection efforts (Factor A). Little is 
currently being done to monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and 
oceanic fisheries in the range of the North Indian Ocean DPS; this 
mortality is likely to continue and increase with expected additional 
fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E). 
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of 
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of North Indian Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development, 
beachfront lighting, and vehicular beach driving (Factor A) is 
significant relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    The magnitude of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles in 
artisanal and commercial fisheries in the North Indian Ocean is 
difficult to assess. A bycatch survey administered off the coast of Sri 
Lanka between September 1999 and November 2000 reported 5,241 total 
turtle entanglements, of which 1,310 were loggerheads, between 
Kalpitiya and Kirinda (Kapurusinghe and Saman, 2001; Kapurusinghe and 
Cooray, 2002). Sea turtle bycatch has been reported in driftnet and set 
gillnets, longlines, trawls, and hook and line gear (Kapurusinghe and 
Saman, 2001; Kapurusinghe and Cooray, 2002; Lewison et al., 2004).
    Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads 
in the North Indian Ocean is difficult given the low level of observer 
coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by countries that 
have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to quantify the 
effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads globally (Lewison et 
al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch data available from the 
North Indian Ocean to use in their assessment, extrapolations that 
considered bycatch data for the Pacific and Atlantic basins gave a 
conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured in the Indian Ocean 
in the year 2000. Interviews with rangers at Masirah Island reveal that 
shark gillnets capture many loggerheads off nesting beaches during the 
nesting season. As many as 60 boats are involved in this fishery with 
up to 6 km of gillnets being fished daily from June through October 
along the Masirah Island coast. Rangers reported one example of 17 
loggerheads in one net (E. Possardt, USFWS, personal communication, 
2008).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or 
entanglement in marine debris, as well as entrainment in coastal power 
plants, likely apply to loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. Similar 
to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level rise have the 
potential to impact loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. This 
includes beach erosion and loss from rising sea levels, skewed 
hatchling sex ratios from rising beach incubation temperatures, and 
abrupt disruption of ocean currents used for natural dispersal during 
the complex life cycle. Climate change impacts could have profound 
long-term impacts on nesting populations in the North Indian Ocean, but 
it is not possible to quantify the potential impacts at this point in 
time.
    Natural environmental events, such as cyclones, tsunamis, and 
hurricanes, affect loggerheads in the North Indian Ocean. For example, 
during the 2007 season, Oman suffered a rare typhoon. In general, 
however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they may affect 
loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally localized 
and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting 
seasons.
    In summary, we find that the North Indian Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea

[[Page 12623]]

turtle is negatively affected by both natural and manmade impacts as 
described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we find that fishery 
bycatch that occurs throughout the North Indian Ocean, although not 
quantified, is a likely a significant threat to the persistence of this 
DPS.

Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    The primary loggerhead nesting beaches for this DPS occur in 
Australia on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al., 
2003), which are undeveloped. Dirk Hartog Island is soon to become part 
of the National Park System.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the Southeast-Indo Pacific Ocean include fishing practices, channel 
dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. 
Fishing methods not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also 
deplete invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem 
dynamics. In many cases, loggerhead foraging areas coincide with 
fishing zones. Climate change also may result in future trophic 
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of 
the loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in 
its marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as 
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not 
available to assess the significance of these threats to the 
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Legislation in Australia outlaws the harvesting of loggerheads by 
indigenous peoples (Limpus et al., 2006). Dirk Hartog Island and Murion 
Islands are largely uninhabited, and poaching of eggs and turtles is 
likely negligible.
    In summary, harvest of eggs and turtles is believed to be 
negligible and does not appear to be a threat to the persistence of 
this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. On the North 
West Cape and the beaches of the Ningaloo coast of mainland Australia, 
a long established feral European red fox (Vulpes vulpes) population 
preyed heavily on eggs and is thought to be responsible for the lower 
numbers of nesting turtles on the mainland beaches (Baldwin et al., 
2003). The fox populations have been eradicated on Dirk Hartog Island 
and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    In summary, nest predation likely was a factor that contributed to 
the historic decline of this DPS. However, foxes have been eradicated 
on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands, and current fox predation 
levels on mainland beaches in western Australia are greatly reduced 
from historic levels. Therefore, predation no longer appears to be a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Southeast Indo-Pacific 
Ocean. The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.4.4. of the 
Status Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle 
(2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of 
these international instruments. The problems with existing 
international treaties are often that they have not realized their full 
potential, do not include some key countries, do not specifically 
address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a 
sovereign authority to enforce environmental regulations. The 
ineffectiveness of international treaties and national legislation is 
oftentimes due to the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to 
implement and enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is 
available in a special 2002 issue of the Journal of International 
Wildlife Law and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle 
Conservation (Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southeast Indo-Pacific 
Ocean, although not quantified, is a likely substantial (see Factor E). 
With the exception of efforts to reduce loggerhead bycatch in the 
northern Australian prawn fishery, little is currently being done to 
monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and oceanic fisheries in the 
range of the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS. This mortality is likely 
to continue and increase with expected additional fishing effort from 
commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E). Although national and 
international governmental and non-governmental entities are currently 
working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions 
have been implemented, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can 
be sufficiently reduced in the near future due to the challenges of 
mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported fisheries, the 
continued expansion of artisanal fleets, the lack of comprehensive 
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on 
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of Southeast Indo-Pacific 
Ocean loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are 
not being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. 
We find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to 
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    The extent of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles in 
artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
is unknown. Sea turtles are caught in pelagic and demersal longlines, 
gillnets, trawls, seines, and pots and traps (Environment Australia, 
2003). There is evidence of significant historic bycatch from prawn 
fisheries, which may have depleted nesting populations long before 
nesting surveys were initiated in the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads 
in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean is very difficult given the low 
level of observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by 
countries that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to 
quantify the effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads 
globally (Lewison et al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch 
data available from the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean to use in their 
assessment, extrapolations that considered bycatch data for the Pacific 
and Atlantic basins gave a conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads 
captured

[[Page 12624]]

in the Indian Ocean in the year 2000. Loggerheads are known to be taken 
by Japanese longline fisheries operating off of Western Australia 
(Limpus, 2009). The effect of the longline fishery on loggerheads in 
the Indian Ocean is largely unknown (Lewison et al., 2004).
    The northern Australian prawn fishery (NPF) is made up of both a 
banana prawn fishery and a tiger prawn fishery, and extends from Cape 
York, Queensland (142[deg] E) to Cape Londonberry, Western Australia 
(127[deg] E). The fishery is one of the most valuable in all of 
Australia and in 2000 comprised 121 vessels fishing approximately 
16,000 fishing days (Robins et al., 2002a). In 2000, the use of turtle 
excluder devices in the NPF was made mandatory, due in part to several 
factors: (1) Objectives of the Draft Australian Recovery Plan for 
Marine Turtles, (2) requirement of the Australian Environment 
Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for Commonwealth fisheries 
to become ecologically sustainable, and (3) the 1996 U.S. import 
embargo on wild-caught prawns taken in a fishery without adequate 
turtle bycatch management practices (Robins et al., 2002a). Data 
primarily were collected by volunteer fishers who were trained 
extensively in the collection of scientific data on sea turtles caught 
as bycatch in their fishery. Prior to the use of TEDs in this fishery, 
the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea turtles as bycatch, 
with a mortality rate of an estimated 40 percent, due to drowning, 
injuries, or being returned to the water comatose (Poiner and Harris, 
1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in effect, the annual 
bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to less than 200 sea 
turtles per year, with a mortality rate of approximately 22 percent 
(based on recent years). This lower mortality rate also may be based on 
better sea turtle handling techniques adopted by the fleet. In general, 
loggerheads were the third most common sea turtle taken in this 
fishery.
    Loggerheads also have been the most common turtle species captured 
in shark control programs in Pacific Australia (Kidston et al., 1992; 
Limpus, 2009); however, the Western Australian demersal longline 
fishery for sharks has no recorded interaction with loggerheads. From 
1998-2002, a total of 232 loggerheads were captured, with 195 taken on 
drum lines and 37 taken in nets, both with a low level of direct 
mortality (Limpus, 2009).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or 
entanglement in marine debris, likely apply to loggerheads in the 
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. Similar to other areas of the world, 
climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact 
loggerheads in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. This includes beach 
erosion and loss from rising sea levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios 
from rising beach incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of 
ocean currents used for natural dispersal during the complex life 
cycle. Climate change impacts could have profound long-term impacts on 
nesting populations in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, but it is not 
possible to quantify the potential impacts at this point in time.
    Natural environmental events, such as cyclones and hurricanes, may 
affect loggerheads in the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean. In general, 
however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they may affect 
loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally localized 
and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting 
seasons.
    In summary, we find that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS of 
the loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch, particularly from the northern Australian 
prawn fishery, was a factor that contributed to the historic decline of 
this DPS. Although loggerhead bycatch has been greatly reduced in the 
northern Australian prawn fishery, bycatch that occurs elsewhere in the 
Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, although not quantified, is likely a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.

Southwest Indian Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    All nesting beaches within South Africa are within protected areas 
(Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, nesting beaches in the Maputo 
Special Reserve (approximately 60 km of nesting beach) and in the 
Paradise Islands are within protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003; 
Costa et al., 2007). There are no protected areas for loggerheads in 
Madagascar (Baldwin et al., 2003).
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS include fishing practices, channel 
dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. 
Fishing methods not only incidentally capture loggerheads, but also 
deplete invertebrate and fish populations and thus alter ecosystem 
dynamics. In many cases, loggerhead foraging areas coincide with 
fishing zones. Climate change also may result in future trophic 
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in its 
marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as 
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not 
available to assess the significance of these threats to the 
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    In the Southwest Indian Ocean, on the east coast of Africa, 
subsistence hunting by local people is a continued threat to 
loggerheads (Baldwin et al., 2003). Illegal hunting of marine turtles 
and egg harvesting remains a threat in Mozambique as well (Louro et 
al., 2006).
    In summary, harvest of loggerheads and eggs for human consumption 
on the east coast of Africa, although not quantified, is likely a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
 C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the Southwest Indian Ocean. Side striped jackals 
(Canis adustus) and honey badgers (Melivora capensis) are known to 
depredate nests (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    In summary, although nest predation is known to occur, quantitative 
data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of nest 
predation on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Southwest Indian Ocean. 
The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.5.4. of the Status 
Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) 
and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address

[[Page 12625]]

sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign 
authority to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and 
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation 
(Hykle, 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian Ocean, 
although not quantified, is likely substantial (see Factor E). This 
mortality is likely to continue and may increase with expected 
additional fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries. 
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of 
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of Southwest Indian Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to 
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    The full extent of the threat of incidental capture of sea turtles 
in artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southwest Indian Ocean is 
unknown. Sea turtles are caught in demersal and pelagic longlines, 
trawls, gillnets, and seines (Petersen, 2005; Louro et al., 2006; 
Petersen et al., 2007, 2009; Costa et al., 2007; Fennessy and Isaksen, 
2007). There is evidence of significant historic bycatch from prawn 
fisheries, which may have depleted nesting populations long before 
nesting surveys were initiated in the 1990s (Baldwin et al., 2003).
    Quantifying the magnitude of the threat of fisheries on loggerheads 
in the Southwest Indian Ocean is very difficult given the low level of 
observer coverage or investigations into bycatch conducted by countries 
that have large fishing fleets. Efforts have been made to quantify the 
effects of pelagic longline fishing on loggerheads globally (Lewison et 
al., 2004). While there were no turtle bycatch data available from the 
Southwest Indian Ocean to use in their assessment, extrapolations that 
considered bycatch data for the Pacific and Atlantic basins gave a 
conservative estimate of 6,000 loggerheads captured in the Indian Ocean 
in the year 2000. The effect of the longline fishery on loggerheads in 
the Indian Ocean is largely unknown (Lewison et al., 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or 
entanglement in marine debris, likely apply to loggerheads in the 
Southwest Indian Ocean. Similar to other areas of the world, climate 
change and sea level rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in 
the Southwest Indian Ocean. This includes beach erosion and loss from 
rising sea levels, skewed hatchling sex ratios from rising beach 
incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of ocean currents used 
for natural dispersal during the complex life cycle. Climate change 
impacts could have profound long-term impacts on nesting populations in 
the Southwest Indian Ocean, but it is not possible to quantify the 
potential impacts at this point in time.
    Natural environmental events, such as cyclones, tsunamis and 
hurricanes, may affect loggerheads in the Southwest Indian Ocean. In 
general, however, severe storm events are episodic and, although they 
may affect loggerhead hatchling production, the results are generally 
localized and they rarely result in whole-scale losses over multiple 
nesting seasons.
    In summary, we find that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian 
Ocean, although not quantified, is likely a significant threat to the 
persistence of this DPS.

Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
Northwest Atlantic results from coastal development and construction, 
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting, 
placement of nearshore shoreline stabilization structures, beachfront 
lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, beach erosion, beach sand 
placement, removal of native vegetation, and planting of non-native 
vegetation (NMFS and USFWS, 2008).
    Numerous beaches in the southeastern United States are eroding due 
to both natural (e.g., storms, sea level changes, waves, shoreline 
geology) and anthropogenic (e.g., construction of armoring structures, 
groins, and jetties; coastal development; inlet dredging) factors. Such 
shoreline erosion leads to a loss of nesting habitat for sea turtles.
    In the southeastern United States, numerous erosion control 
structures (e.g., bulkheads, seawalls, soil retaining walls, rock 
revetments, sandbags, geotextile tubes) that create barriers to nesting 
have been constructed. The proportion of coastline that is armored is 
approximately 18 percent (239 km) in Florida (Clark, 1992; Schroeder 
and Mosier, 2000; Witherington et al., 2006), 9 percent (14 km) in 
Georgia (M. Dodd, GDNR, personal communication, 2009), 12 percent (29 
km) in South Carolina (D. Griffin, SCDNR, personal communication, 
2009), and 3 percent (9 km) in North Carolina (M. Godfrey, North 
Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, 2009). These estimates of 
armoring extent do not include structures that are also barriers to sea 
turtle nesting but do not fit the definition of armoring, such as dune 
crossovers, cabanas, sand fences, and recreational equipment. Jetties 
have been placed at many ocean inlets along the U.S. Atlantic coast to 
keep transported sand from closing the inlet channel. Witherington et 
al. (2005) found a significant negative relationship between loggerhead 
nesting density and distance from the nearest of 17 ocean inlets on the 
Atlantic coast of Florida. The effect of inlets in lowering nesting 
density was observed both updrift and downdrift of the inlets, leading 
researchers to propose that beach instability from both erosion and 
accretion may discourage loggerhead nesting.
    Stormwater and other water source runoff from coastal development, 
including beachfront parking lots, building rooftops, roads, decks, and 
draining swimming pools adjacent to the beach, is frequently discharged 
directly onto Northwest Atlantic beaches and dunes either by sheet 
flow, through stormwater collection system outfalls, or through small 
diameter

[[Page 12626]]

pipes. These outfalls create localized erosion channels, prevent 
natural dune establishment, and wash out sea turtle nests (Florida Fish 
and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data). Contaminants 
contained in stormwater, such as oils, grease, antifreeze, gasoline, 
metals, pesticides, chlorine, and nutrients, are also discharged onto 
the beach and have the potential to affect sea turtle nests and 
emergent hatchlings. The effects of these contaminants on loggerheads 
are not yet understood. As a result of natural and anthropogenic 
factors, beach nourishment is a frequent activity, and many beaches are 
on a periodic nourishment schedule. On severely eroded sections of 
beach, where little or no suitable nesting habitat previously existed, 
beach nourishment has been found to result in increased nesting (Ernest 
and Martin, 1999). However, on most beaches in the southeastern United 
States, nesting success typically declines for the first year or two 
following construction, even though more nesting habitat is available 
for turtles (Trindell et al., 1998; Ernest and Martin, 1999; Herren, 
1999).
    Coastal development also contributes to habitat degradation by 
increasing light pollution. Both nesting and hatchling sea turtles are 
adversely affected by the presence of artificial lighting on or near 
the beach (Witherington and Martin, 1996). Experimental studies have 
shown that artificial lighting deters adult female turtles from 
emerging from the ocean to nest (Witherington, 1992). Witherington 
(1986) also noted that loggerheads aborted nesting attempts at a 
greater frequency in lighted areas. Because adult females rely on 
visual brightness cues to find their way back to the ocean after 
nesting, those turtles that nest on lighted beaches may become 
disoriented (unable to maintain constant directional movement) or 
misoriented (able to maintain constant directional movement but in the 
wrong direction) by artificial lighting and have difficulty finding 
their way back to the ocean. In some cases, misdirected nesting females 
have crawled onto coastal highways and have been struck and killed by 
vehicles (FFWCC, unpublished data).
    Hatchlings exhibit a robust sea-finding behavior guided by visual 
cues (Witherington and Bjorndal 1991; Salmon et al., 1992; Lohmann et 
al., 1997; Witherington and Martin, 1996; Lohmann and Lohmann, 2003); 
direct and timely migration from the nest to sea is critical to their 
survival. Hatchlings have a tendency to orient toward the brightest 
direction as integrated over a broad horizontal area. On natural 
undeveloped beaches, the brightest direction is commonly away from 
elevated shapes (e.g., dune, vegetation, etc.) and their silhouettes 
and toward the broad open horizon of the sea. On developed beaches, the 
brightest direction is often away from the ocean and toward lighted 
structures. Hatchlings unable to find the ocean, or delayed in reaching 
it, are likely to incur high mortality from dehydration, exhaustion, or 
predation (Carr and Ogren, 1960; Ehrhart and Witherington, 1987; 
Witherington and Martin, 1996). Hatchlings lured into lighted parking 
lots or toward streetlights are often crushed by passing vehicles 
(McFarlane, 1963; Philibosian, 1976; Peters and Verhoeven, 1994; 
Witherington and Martin, 1996). Uncommonly intense artificial lighting 
can even draw hatchlings back out of the surf (Daniel and Smith, 1947; 
Carr and Ogren, 1960; Ehrhart and Witherington, 1987).
    Reports of hatchling disorientation events in Florida alone 
describe several hundred nests each year and are likely to involve tens 
of thousands of hatchlings (Nelson et al., 2002); however, this number 
calculated is likely a vast underestimate. Independent of these 
reports, Witherington et al. (1996) surveyed hatchling orientation at 
nests located at 23 representative beaches in six counties around 
Florida in 1993 and 1994 and found that, by county, approximately 10 to 
30 percent of nests showed evidence of hatchlings disoriented by 
lighting. From this survey and from measures of hatchling production 
(Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data), 
the number of hatchlings disoriented by lighting in Florida is 
calculated in the range of hundreds of thousands per year.
    In the United States, vehicular driving is allowed on certain 
beaches in northeast Florida (Nassau, Duval, St. Johns, and Volusia 
Counties), northwest Florida (Walton and Gulf Counties), Georgia 
(Cumberland, Little Cumberland, and Sapelo Islands), North Carolina 
(Fort Fisher State Recreation Area, Carolina Beach, Freeman Park, 
Onslow Beach, Emerald Isle, Indian Beach/Salter Path, Pine Knoll 
Shores, Atlantic Beach, Cape Lookout National Seashore, Cape Hatteras 
National Seashore, Nag's Head, Kill Devil Hills, Town of Duck, and 
Currituck Banks), Virginia (Chincoteague NWR and Wallops Island), and 
Texas (the majority of beaches except for a highly developed section of 
South Padre Island and Padre Island National Seashore, San Jose Island, 
Matagorda Island, and Matagorda Peninsula where driving is not allowed 
or is limited to agency personnel, land owners, and/or researchers). 
Beach driving has been found to reduce the quality of loggerhead 
nesting habitat in several ways. In the southeastern U.S., vehicle ruts 
on the beach have been found to prevent or impede hatchlings from 
reaching the ocean following emergence from the nest (Mann, 1977; 
Hosier et al., 1981; Cox et al., 1994; Hughes and Caine, 1994). Sand 
compaction by vehicles has been found to hinder nest construction and 
hatchling emergence from nests (Mann, 1977). Vehicle lights and vehicle 
movement on the beach after dark results in reduced habitat 
suitability, which can deter females from nesting and disorient 
hatchlings. Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting beaches 
contributes to erosion, especially during high tides or on narrow 
beaches where driving is concentrated on the high beach and foredune.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean include fishing practices, channel 
dredging, sand extraction, oil exploration and development, marine 
pollution, and climate change. Fishing methods not only incidentally 
capture loggerheads, but also deplete invertebrate and fish populations 
and thus alter ecosystem dynamics. Although anthropogenic disruptions 
of natural ecological interactions have been difficult to discern, a 
few studies have been focused on the effects of these disruptions on 
loggerheads. For instance, Youngkin (2001) analyzed gut contents from 
hundreds of loggerheads stranded in Georgia over a 20-year period. His 
findings point to the probability of major effects on loggerhead diet 
from activities such as shrimp trawling and dredging. Lutcavage and 
Musick (1985) found that horseshoe crabs strongly dominated the diet of 
loggerheads in Chesapeake Bay in 1980-1981. Subsequently, fishermen 
began to harvest horseshoe crabs, primarily for use as bait in the eel 
and whelk pot fisheries, using several gear types. Atlantic coast 
horseshoe crab landings increased by an order of magnitude (0.5 to 6.0 
million pounds) between 1980 and 1997, and in 1998 the Atlantic States 
Marine Fisheries Commission implemented a horseshoe crab fishery 
management plan to curtail catches (Atlantic States Marine Fisheries 
Commission, 1998). The decline in horseshoe crab availability has 
apparently caused a diet shift in juvenile loggerheads, from

[[Page 12627]]

predominantly horseshoe crabs in the early to mid-1980s to blue crabs 
in the late 1980s and early 1990s, to mostly finfish in the late 1990s 
and early 2000s (Seney, 2003; Seney and Musick, 2007). These data 
suggest that turtles are foraging in greater numbers in or around 
fishing gears and on discarded bycatch (Seney, 2003).
    Periodic dredging of sediments from navigational channels is 
carried out at large ports to provide for the passage of large 
commercial and military vessels. In addition, sand mining (dredging) 
for beach renourishment and construction projects occurs in the 
Northwest Atlantic along the U.S., Mexico, Central American, Colombia, 
and Venezuela coasts. Although directed studies have not been 
conducted, dredging activities, which occur regularly in the Northwest 
Atlantic, have the potential to destroy or degrade benthic habitats 
used by loggerheads. Channelization of inshore and nearshore habitat 
and the subsequent disposal of dredged material in the marine 
environment can destroy or disrupt resting or foraging grounds 
(including grass beds and coral reefs) and may affect nesting 
distribution by altering physical features in the marine environment 
(Hopkins and Murphy, 1980). Oil exploration and development on live 
bottom areas may disrupt foraging grounds by smothering benthic 
organisms with sediments and drilling muds (Coston-Clements and Hoss, 
1983). The effects of benthic habitat alteration on loggerhead prey 
abundance and distribution, and the effects of these potential changes 
on loggerhead populations, have not been determined but are of concern. 
Climate change also may result in trophic changes, thus impacting 
loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that coastal development, beachfront lighting, and coastal armoring and 
other erosion control structures on nesting beaches in the United 
States are significant threats to the persistence of this DPS. We also 
find that anthropogenic disruptions of natural ecological interactions 
as a result of fishing practices, channel dredging, and oil exploration 
and development are likely a significant threat to the persistence of 
this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs 
is reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. In the 
Caribbean, 12 of 29 (41 percent) countries/territories allow the 
harvest of loggerheads (NMFS and USFWS, 2008; see Appendix 3; A. 
Bolten, University of Florida, personal communication, 2009); this 
takes into account the September 2009 ban on the harvest of sea turtles 
in The Bahamas. Loggerhead harvest in the Caribbean is generally 
restricted to the non-nesting season with the exception of St. Kitts 
and Nevis, where turtle harvest is allowed annually from March 1 
through September 30, and the Turks and Caicos Islands, where turtle 
harvest is allowed year-round. Most countries/territories that allow 
harvest have regulations that favor the harvest of large juvenile and 
adult turtles, the most reproductively valuable members of the 
population. Exceptions include the Cayman Islands, which mandates 
maximum size limits, and Haiti and Trinidad and Tobago, which have no 
size restrictions. All North, Central, and South American countries in 
the Northwest Atlantic have enacted laws that mandate complete 
protection of loggerheads from harvest in their territorial waters with 
the exception of Guyana. Despite national laws, in many countries the 
poaching of eggs and hunting of adult and juvenile turtles still occurs 
at varying levels (NMFS and USFWS, 2008; see Appendix 3).
    In summary, harvest of loggerheads in the Caribbean for human 
consumption has been and continues to be a significant threat to the 
persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the Northwest Atlantic. Viral diseases have not 
been documented in free-ranging loggerheads, with the possible 
exception of sea turtle fibropapillomatosis, which may have a viral 
etiology (Herbst and Jacobson, 1995; George, 1997). Although 
fibropapillomatosis reaches epidemic proportions in some wild green 
turtle populations, the prevalence of this disease in most loggerhead 
populations is thought to be small. An exception is Florida Bay where 
approximately 9.5 percent of the loggerheads captured exhibit 
fibropapilloma-like external lesions (B. Schroeder, NMFS, personal 
communication, 2006). Mortality levels and population-level effects 
associated with the disease are still unknown. Heavy infestations of 
endoparasites may cause or contribute to debilitation or mortality in 
loggerhead turtles. Trematode eggs and adult trematodes were recorded 
in a variety of tissues including the spinal cord and brain of 
debilitated loggerheads during an epizootic in South Florida, USA, 
during late 2000 and early 2001. These endoparasites were implicated as 
a possible cause of the epizootic (Jacobson et al., 2006). Although 
many health problems have been described in wild populations through 
the necropsy of stranded turtles, the significance of diseases on the 
ecology of wild loggerhead populations is not known (Herbst and 
Jacobson, 1995).
    Predation of eggs and hatchlings by native and introduced species 
occurs on almost all nesting beaches throughout the Northwest Atlantic. 
The most common predators at the primary nesting beaches in the 
southeastern United States are ghost crabs (Ocypode quadrata), raccoons 
(Procyon lotor), feral hogs (Sus scrofa), foxes (Urocyon 
cinereoargenteus and Vulpes vulpes), coyotes (Canis latrans), 
armadillos (Dasypus novemcinctus), and red fire ants (Solenopsis 
invicta) (Stancyk, 1982; Dodd, 1988). In the absence of well managed 
nest protection programs, predators may take significant numbers of 
eggs; however, nest protection programs are in place at most of the 
major nesting beaches in the Northwest Atlantic.
    Non-native vegetation has invaded many coastal areas and often 
outcompetes native plant species. Exotic vegetation may form 
impenetrable root mats that can invade and desiccate eggs, as well as 
trap hatchlings. The Australian pine (Casuarina equisetifolia) is 
particularly harmful to sea turtles. Dense stands have taken over many 
coastal areas throughout central and south Florida. Australian pines 
cause excessive shading of the beach that would not otherwise occur. 
Studies in Florida suggest that nests laid in shaded areas are 
subjected to lower incubation temperatures, which may alter the natural 
hatchling sex ratio (Marcus and Maley, 1987; Schmelz and Mezich, 1988; 
Hanson et al., 1998). Fallen Australian pines limit access to suitable 
nest sites and can entrap nesting females (Austin, 1978; Reardon and 
Mansfield, 1997). The shallow root network of these pines can interfere 
with nest construction (Schmelz and Mezich, 1988). Davis and Whiting 
(1977) reported that nesting activity declined in Everglades National 
Park where dense stands of Australian pine took over native dune 
vegetation on a

[[Page 12628]]

remote nesting beach. Beach vitex (Vitex rotundifolia) is native to 
countries in the western Pacific and was introduced to the horticulture 
trade in the southeastern United States in the mid-1980s and is often 
sold as a ``dune stabilizer.'' Its presence on North Carolina and South 
Carolina beaches has a negative effect on sea turtle nesting as its 
dense mats interfere with sea turtle nesting and hatchling emergence 
from nests (Brabson, 2006). This exotic plant is crowding out the 
native species, such as sea oats and bitter panicum, and can colonize 
large areas in just a few years. Sisal, or century plant (Agave 
americana), is native to arid regions of Mexico. The plant was widely 
grown in sandy soils around Florida in order to provide fiber for 
cordage. It has escaped cultivation in Florida and has been purposely 
planted on dunes. Although the effects of sisal on sea turtle nesting 
are uncertain, thickets with impenetrable sharp spines are occasionally 
found on developed beaches.
    Harmful algal blooms, such as a red tide, also affect loggerheads 
in the Northwest Atlantic. In Florida, the species that causes most red 
tides is Karenia brevis, a dinoflagellate that produces a toxin 
(Florida Marine Research Institute, 2003) and can cause mortality in 
birds, marine mammals, and sea turtles. During four red tide events 
along the west coast of Florida, sea turtle stranding trends indicated 
that these events were acting as a mortality factor (Redlow et al., 
2003). Furthermore, brevetoxin concentrations supportive of 
intoxication were detected in biological samples from dead and moribund 
sea turtles during a mortality event in 2005 and in subsequent events 
(Fauquier et al., 2007). The population level effects of these events 
are not yet known.
    In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that 
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Although current 
predation levels in the United States are greatly reduced from historic 
levels, predation still occurs in the United States, as well as in 
Mexico, and can be significant in the absence of well managed 
protection efforts. Although diseases and parasites are known to impact 
loggerheads in this DPS, the significance of these threats is not 
known. Overall, however, predation and disease are believed to be a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean 
(Conant et al., 2009). Hykle (2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the 
effectiveness of some of these international instruments. The problems 
with existing international treaties are often that they have not 
realized their full potential, do not include some key countries, do 
not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped 
by the lack of a sovereign authority to enforce environmental 
regulations.
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Atlantic Ocean is 
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North 
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced across the range of the 
DPS in the near future because of the diversity and magnitude of the 
fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive 
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on 
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of Northwest Atlantic Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and coastal development, 
beachfront lighting, and coastal armoring and other erosion control 
structures on nesting beaches in the United States (Factor A) is 
significant relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Bycatch of loggerheads in commercial and recreational fisheries in 
the Northwest Atlantic is a significant threat facing the species in 
this region. A variety of fishing gears that incidentally capture 
loggerhead turtles are employed including gillnets, trawls, hook and 
line, longlines, seines, dredges, pound nets, and various types of 
pots/traps. Among these, gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear contribute 
to the vast majority of bycatch mortality of loggerheads annually 
throughout their range in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico 
(Epperly et al., 1995; NMFS, 2002, 2004, 2007, 2008; Lewison et al., 
2003, 2004; Richards, 2007; NMFS, unpublished data). Considerable 
effort has been expended since the 1980s to document and address 
fishery bycatch, especially in the United States and Mexico. Observer 
programs have been implemented in some fisheries to collect turtle 
bycatch data, and efforts to reduce bycatch and mortality of 
loggerheads in certain fishing operations have been undertaken and 
implemented or partially implemented. These efforts include developing 
gear solutions to prevent or reduce captures or to allow turtles to 
escape without harm (e.g., TEDs, circle hooks and bait combinations), 
implementing time and area closures to prevent interactions from 
occurring (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing along the mid-Atlantic 
coast during the critical time of northward migration of loggerheads), 
implementation of careful release protocols (e.g., requirements for 
careful release of turtles captured in longline fisheries), 
prohibitions of gillnetting in some U.S. State waters), and/or 
modifying gear (e.g., requirements to reduce mesh size in the leaders 
of pound nets in certain U.S. coastal waters to prevent entanglement).
    The primary bycatch reduction focus in the Northwest Atlantic, 
since the 1978 ESA listing of the loggerhead, has been on bycatch 
reduction in shrimp trawls. The United States has required the use of 
turtle excluder devices (TEDs) throughout the year since the mid-1990s, 
with modifications required and implemented as necessary (52 FR 24244; 
June 29, 1987; 57 FR 57348; December 4, 1992). Most notably, in 2003, 
NMFS implemented new requirements for TEDs in the shrimp trawl fishery 
to ensure that large loggerheads could escape through TED openings (68 
FR 8456; February 21, 2003). Significant effort has been expended to 
transfer this technology to other shrimping fleets in the Northwest 
Atlantic; however, not all nations where loggerheads occur require the 
device be used. Enforcement of TED regulations is difficult and 
compliance is not believed to be complete. Because

[[Page 12629]]

TEDs are not 100 percent effective, a significant number of loggerheads 
are estimated to still be killed annually in shrimp trawls throughout 
the Northwest Atlantic. In the U.S. Southeast food shrimp trawl 
fishery, NMFS estimated the annual mortality of loggerheads in the Gulf 
of Mexico and southeastern U.S. Atlantic Ocean as 3,948 individuals (95 
percent confidence intervals, 1,221-8,498) (NMFS, 2002). Shrimping 
effort in the southeastern United States has reportedly declined; a 
revised estimate of annual loggerhead mortality for the Gulf of Mexico 
segment of the Southeast food shrimp trawl fishery is 647 individuals 
(NMFS, unpublished data).
    Other trawl fisheries operating in Northwest Atlantic waters that 
are known to capture sea turtles include, but are not limited to, 
summer flounder, calico scallop, sea scallop, blue crab, whelk, 
cannonball jellyfish, horseshoe crab, and mid-Atlantic directed finfish 
trawl fisheries and the Sargassum fishery. In the United States, the 
summer flounder fishery is the only trawl fishery (other than the 
shrimp fishery) with Federally mandated TED use (in certain areas). 
Loggerhead annual bycatch estimates in 2004 and 2005 in U.S. mid-
Atlantic scallop trawl gear ranged from 81 to 191 turtles, depending on 
the estimation methodology used (Murray, 2007). Estimated average 
annual bycatch of loggerheads in other mid-Atlantic Federally managed 
bottom otter trawl fisheries during 1996-2004 was 616 turtles (Murray, 
2006). The harvest of Sargassum by trawlers can result in incidental 
capture of post-hatchlings and habitat destruction (Schwartz, 1988; 
Witherington, 2002); however, this fishery is not currently active.
    Dredge fishing gear is the predominant gear used to harvest sea 
scallops off the mid- and northeastern United States Atlantic coast. 
Turtles can be struck and injured or killed by the dredge frame and/or 
captured in the bag where they may drown or be further injured or 
killed when the catch and heavy gear are dumped on the vessel deck. 
Total estimated bycatch of loggerhead turtles in the U.S. sea scallop 
dredge fishery operating in the mid-Atlantic region (New York to North 
Carolina) from June through November is on the order of several hundred 
turtles per year (Murray, 2004, 2005, 2007). The impact of the sea 
scallop dredge fishery on loggerheads in U.S. waters of the Northwest 
Atlantic remains a serious concern.
    Incidental take of oceanic-stage loggerheads in pelagic longline 
fisheries has recently received significant attention (Balazs and 
Pooley, 1994; Bolten et al., 1994, 2000; Aguilar et al., 1995; Laurent 
et al., 1998; Long and Schroeder, 2004; Watson et al., 2005). Large-
scale commercial longline fisheries operate throughout the pelagic 
range of the Northwest Atlantic loggerhead, including the western 
Mediterranean. The largest size classes in the oceanic stage are the 
size classes impacted by the swordfish longline fishery in the Azores 
(Bolten, 2003) and on the Grand Banks off Newfoundland (Watson et al., 
2005), and this is likely the case for other nation's fleets operating 
in the region, including but not limited to, the European Union, United 
States, Japan, and Taiwan. The demographic consequences relative to 
population recovery of the increased mortality of these size classes 
have been discussed (Crouse et al., 1987; see also Heppell et al., 2003 
and Chaloupka, 2003). Estimates derived from data recorded by the 
international observer program (IOP) suggest that thousands of mostly 
juvenile loggerheads have been captured in the Canadian pelagic 
longline fishery in the western North Atlantic since 1999 (Brazner and 
McMillan, 2008). NMFS (2004) estimates that 635 loggerheads (143 
lethal) will be taken annually in the U.S. pelagic longline fishery.
    Incidental capture of neritic-stage loggerheads in demersal 
longline fishing gear has also been documented. Richards (2007) 
estimated total annual bycatch of loggerheads in the Southeast U.S. 
Atlantic and U.S. Gulf of Mexico commercial directed shark bottom 
longline fishery from 2003-2005 as follows: 2003: 302-1,620 (CV 0.45); 
2004: 95-591 (CV 0.49); and 2005: 139-778 (CV 0.46). NMFS (2009) 
estimated the total number of captures of hardshell turtles in the U.S. 
Gulf of Mexico reef fish fishery (demersal longline fishery) from July 
2006-December 2008 as 861 turtles (95 percent confidence intervals, 
383-1934). These estimates are not comprehensive across this gear type 
(i.e., pelagic and demersal longline) throughout the Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean. Cumulatively, the bycatch and mortality of Northwest Atlantic 
loggerheads in longline fisheries is significant.
    Gillnet fisheries may be the most ubiquitous of fisheries operating 
in the neritic range of the Northwest Atlantic loggerhead. 
Comprehensive estimates of bycatch in gillnet fisheries do not yet 
exist and, while this precludes a quantitative analysis of their 
impacts on loggerhead populations, the cumulative mortality of 
loggerheads in gillnet fisheries is likely high. In the U.S. mid-
Atlantic, the average annual estimated bycatch of loggerheads from 
1995-2006 was 350 turtles (CV= 0.20., 95 percent confidence intervals 
over the 12-year period: 234 to 504) (Murray, 2009). In the United 
States, some States (e.g., South Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, 
and Texas) have prohibited gillnets in their waters, but there remain 
active gillnet fisheries in other U.S. States, in U.S. Federal waters, 
Mexico waters, Central and South America waters, and the Northeast 
Atlantic.
    Pound nets are fixed gear composed of a series of poles driven into 
the bottom upon which netting is suspended. Pound nets basically 
operate like a trap with the pound constructed of a series of funnels 
leading to a bag that is open at the top, and a long leader of netting 
that extends from shallow to deeper water where the pound is located. 
In some configurations, the leader is suspended from the surface by a 
series of stringers or vertical lines. Sea turtles incidentally 
captured in the open top pound, which is composed of small mesh 
webbing, are usually safe from injury and may be released easily when 
the fishermen pull the nets (Mansfield et al., 2002). However, sea 
turtle mortalities have been documented in the leader of certain pound 
nets. Large mesh leaders (greater than 12-inch stretched mesh) may act 
as a gillnet, entangling sea turtles by the head or foreflippers 
(Bellmund et al., 1987) or may act as a barrier against which turtles 
may be impinged (NMFS, unpublished data). Nets with small mesh leaders 
(less than 8 inches stretched mesh) usually do not present a mortality 
threat to loggerheads, but some mortalities have been reported 
(Morreale and Standora, 1998; Epperly et al., 2000, 2007; Mansfield et 
al., 2002). In 2002, the United States prohibited, in certain areas 
within the Chesapeake Bay and at certain times, pound net leaders 
having mesh greater than or equal to 12 inches and leaders with 
stringers (67 FR 41196; June 17, 2002). Subsequent regulations have 
further restricted the use of certain pound net leaders in certain 
geographic areas and established pound net leader gear modifications 
(69 FR 24997; May 5, 2004; 71 FR 36024; June 23, 2006).
    Pots/traps are commonly used to target crabs, lobsters, whelk, and 
reef fishes. These traps vary in size and configuration, but all are 
attached to a surface float by means of a vertical line leading to the 
trap. Entanglement and mortality of loggerheads has been documented in 
various pot/trap fisheries in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. 
Data from the U.S. Sea Turtle Stranding and Salvage Network indicate 
that 82 loggerheads (dead and rescued alive) were documented by the

[[Page 12630]]

stranding network in various pot/trap gear from 1996-2005, of these 
approximately 30-40 percent were adults and the remainder juvenile 
turtles (NMFS, unpublished data). Without intervention it is likely 
that the majority of the live, entangled turtles would die. 
Additionally, documented strandings represent only a portion of total 
interactions and mortality. Recently, a small number of loggerhead 
entanglements also have been recorded in whelk pot bridles in the U.S. 
Mid-Atlantic (M. Fagan, Virginia Institute of Marine Science, personal 
communication, 2008). However, no dedicated observer programs exist to 
provide estimates of take and mortality from pot/trap fisheries; 
therefore, comprehensive estimates of loggerhead interactions with pot/
trap gear are not available, but the gear is widely used throughout the 
range of the DPS, and poses a continuing threat.
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Propeller and collision injuries from boats and ships are becoming 
more common in sea turtles. In the U.S. Atlantic, from 1997 to 2005, 
14.9 percent of all stranded loggerheads were documented as having 
sustained some type of propeller or collision injuries (NMFS, 
unpublished data). The incidence of propeller wounds observed in sea 
turtles stranded in the United States has risen from approximately 10 
percent in the late 1980s to a record high of 20.5 percent in 2004 
(NMFS, unpublished data). In the United States, propeller wounds are 
greatest in Southeast Florida; during some years, as many as 60 percent 
of the loggerhead strandings found in these areas had propeller wounds 
(Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data). 
As the number of vessels increases, in concert with increased coastal 
development, especially in nearshore waters, propeller and vessel 
collision injuries are also expected to rise.
    Several activities associated with offshore oil and gas production, 
including oil spills, water quality (operational discharge), seismic 
surveys, explosive platform removal, platform lighting, and noise from 
drillships and production activities, are known to impact loggerheads 
(National Research Council, 1996; Minerals Management Service, 2000; 
Gregg Gitschlag, NMFS, personal communication, 2007; Viada et al., 
2008). Currently, there are 3,443 Federally regulated offshore 
platforms in the Gulf of Mexico dedicated to natural gas and oil 
production. Additional State-regulated platforms are located in State 
waters (Texas and Louisiana). There are currently no active leases off 
the Atlantic coast.
    Oil spills also threaten loggerheads in the Northwest Atlantic. Two 
oil spills that occurred near loggerhead nesting beaches in Florida 
were observed to affect eggs, hatchlings, and nesting females. 
Approximately 350,000 gallons of fuel oil spilled in Tampa Bay in 
August 1993 and was carried onto nesting beaches in Pinellas County. 
Observed mortalities included 31 hatchlings and 176 oil-covered nests; 
an additional 2,177 eggs and hatchlings were either exposed to oil or 
disturbed by response activities (Florida Department of Environmental 
Protection et al., 1997). Another spill near the beaches of Broward 
County in August 2000 involved approximately 15,000 gallons of oil and 
tar (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and Florida 
Department of Environmental Protection, 2002). Models estimated that 
approximately 1,500 to 2,000 hatchlings and 0 to 1 adults were injured 
or killed. Annually about 1 percent of all sea turtle strandings along 
the U.S. east coast have been associated with oil, but higher rates of 
3 to 6 percent have been observed in South Florida and Texas (Teas, 
1994; Rabalais and Rabalais, 1980; Plotkin and Amos, 1990).
    In addition to the destruction or degradation of habitat, periodic 
dredging of sediments from navigational channels can also result in 
incidental mortality of sea turtles. Direct injury or mortality of 
loggerheads by dredges has been well documented in the southeastern and 
mid-Atlantic United States (National Research Council, 1990). 
Solutions, including modification of dredges and time/area closures, 
have been successfully implemented to reduce mortalities and injuries 
in the United States (NMFS, 1991, 1995, 1997; Nelson and Shafer, 1996).
    The entrainment and entrapment of loggerheads in saltwater cooling 
intake systems of coastal power plants has been documented in New 
Jersey, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas (Eggers, 1989; National 
Research Council, 1990; Carolina Power and Light Company, 2003; FPL and 
Quantum Resources, Inc., 2005; Progress Energy Florida, Inc., 2003). 
Average annual incidental capture rates for most coastal plants from 
which captures have been reported amount to several turtles per plant 
per year. One notable exception is the St. Lucie Nuclear Power Plant 
located on Hutchinson Island, Florida. During the first 15 years of 
operation (1977-1991), an average of 128 loggerheads per year was 
captured in the intake canal with a mortality rate of 6.4 percent. 
During 1991-2005, loggerhead captures more than doubled (average of 308 
per year), while mortality rates decreased to 0.3 percent per year (FPL 
and Quantum Resources, Inc., 2005).
    Although not a major source of mortality, cold stunning of 
loggerheads has been reported at several locations in the United 
States, including Cape Cod Bay, Massachusetts (Still et al., 2002); 
Long Island Sound, New York (Meylan and Sadove, 1986; Morreale et al., 
1992); the Indian River system, Florida (Mendonca and Ehrhart, 1982; 
Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989); and Texas inshore waters (Hildebrand, 
1982; Shaver, 1990). Cold stunning is a phenomenon during which turtles 
become incapacitated as a result of rapidly dropping water temperatures 
(Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989; Morreale et al., 1992). As 
temperatures fall below 8-10[deg] C, turtles may lose their ability to 
swim and dive, often floating to the surface. The rate of cooling that 
precipitates cold stunning appears to be the primary threat, rather 
than the water temperature itself (Milton and Lutz, 2003). Sea turtles 
that overwinter in inshore waters are most susceptible to cold 
stunning, because temperature changes are most rapid in shallow water 
(Witherington and Ehrhart, 1989).
    Another natural factor that has the potential to affect recovery of 
loggerhead turtles is aperiodic hurricanes. In general, these events 
are episodic and, although they may affect loggerhead hatchling 
production, the results are generally localized and they rarely result 
in whole-scale losses over multiple nesting seasons. The negative 
effects of hurricanes on low-lying and/or developed shorelines may be 
longer-lasting and a greater threat overall.
    Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level 
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the Northwest 
Atlantic. This includes beach erosion and loss from rising sea levels, 
repeated inundation of nests, skewed hatchling sex ratios from rising 
beach incubation temperatures, and abrupt disruption of ocean currents 
used for natural dispersal during the complex life cycle.
    In summary, we find that the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North Atlantic 
Ocean, particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from gillnet, 
longline, and trawl fisheries throughout their range in the Atlantic 
Ocean and Gulf of Mexico, is a significant threat to the persistence of 
this DPS. In addition, boat strikes are

[[Page 12631]]

becoming more common and are likely also a significant threat to the 
persistence of this DPS.

Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
Northeast Atlantic result from coastal development and construction, 
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting, 
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, 
beach erosion, and beach pollution (Formia et al., 2003; Loureiro, 
2008).
    In the Northeast Atlantic, the only loggerhead nesting of note 
occurs in the Cape Verde Islands. The Cape Verde government's plans to 
develop Boa Vista Island, the location of the main nesting beaches, 
could increase the terrestrial threats to loggerheads (van Bogaert, 
2006). Sand extraction on Santiago Island, Cape Verde, may be 
responsible for the apparent decrease in nesting there (Loureiro, 
2008). Both sand extraction and beachfront lighting have been 
identified as serious threats to the continued existence of a nesting 
population on Santiago Island (Loureiro, 2008). Scattered and 
infrequent nesting occurs in western Africa, where much 
industrialization is located on the coast and population growth rates 
fluctuate between 0.8 percent (Cape Verde) and 3.8 percent (C[ocirc]te 
D'Ivoire) (Abe et al., 2004; Tayaa et al., 2005). Land mines on some of 
the beaches of mainland Africa, within the reported historical range of 
nesting by loggerheads (e.g., the Western Sahara region), would be 
detrimental to nesters and are an impediment to scientific surveys of 
the region (Tiwari et al., 2001). Tiwari et al. (2001) noted a high 
level of human use of many of the beaches in Morocco--enough that any 
evidence of nesting activity would be quickly erased. Garbage litters 
many developed beaches (Formia et al., 2003). Erosion is a problem 
along the long stretches of high energy ocean shoreline of Africa and 
is further exacerbated by sand mining and harbor building (Formia et 
al., 2003); crumbling buildings claimed by the sea may present 
obstructions to nesting females.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the Northeast Atlantic Ocean include fishing practices, marine 
pollution and climate change. Ecosystem alterations have occurred due 
to the tremendous human pressure on the environment in the region. 
Turtles, including loggerheads, usually are included in ecosystem 
models of the region (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). In the Canary 
Current Large Marine Ecosystem (LME), the area is characterized by the 
Global International Waters Assessment as severely impacted in the area 
of modification or loss of ecosystems or ecotones and health impacts, 
but these impacts are decreasing (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). The Celtic-
Biscay Shelf LME is affected by alterations to the seabed, agriculture, 
and sewage (Vald[eacute]s and Lavin, 2002). The Gulf of Guinea has been 
characterized as severely impacted in the area of solid wastes by the 
Global International Waters Assessment; this and other pollution 
indicators are increasing (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). Marine pollution, 
such as oil and debris, has been shown to negatively impact loggerheads 
and represent a degradation of the habitat (Or[oacute]s et al., 2005, 
2009; Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). Climate change also may 
result in future trophic changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey 
abundance and/or distribution.
    Additionally, fishing is a major source of ecosystem alteration of 
the neritic and oceanic habitats of loggerhead turtles in the region. 
Fishing effort off the western African coast is increasing and record 
low biomass has been recorded for exploited resources, representing a 
13X decline in biomass since 1960 (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). 
Throughout the North Atlantic, fishery landings fell by 90 percent 
during the 20th century, foreboding a trophic cascade and a change in 
food-web competition (Pauly et al., 1998; Christensen et al., 2003). 
For a description of the exploited marine resources in the region, see 
Lamboeuf (1997). The Celtic-Biscay Shelf LME, the Iberian Coastal 
Ecosystem LME, the Canary Current LME, and the Guinea Current LME all 
are severely overfished, and effort now is turning to a focus on 
pelagic fisheries, whereas historically there were demersal fisheries. 
The impacts continue to increase in the Guinea Current LME despite 
efforts throughout the region to reduce fishing pressure (http://www.lme.noaa.gov).
    The threats to bottom habitat for loggerheads include modification 
of the habitat through bottom trawling. Trawling occurs off the 
European coast and the area off Northwest Africa is one of the most 
intensively trawled areas in the world (Zeeberg et al., 2006). Trawling 
has been banned in the Azores, Madeira, and Canary Islands to protect 
cold-water corals (Lutter, 2005). Although illegal, trawling also 
occurs in the Cape Verde Islands (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). The use 
of destructive fishing practices, such as explosives and toxic 
chemicals, has been reported in the Canary Current area, causing 
serious damage to both the resources and the habitat (Tayaa et al., 
2005).
    In summary, we find that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that sand extraction and beachfront lighting on nesting beaches are 
significant threats to the persistence of this DPS. We also find that 
anthropogenic disruptions of natural ecological interactions as a 
result of fishing practices and marine pollution are likely a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs 
still exists and remains the most serious threat facing nesting turtles 
in the Northeast Atlantic. Historical records indicate turtles were 
harvested throughout Macaronesia (see Lopez-Jurado, 2007). Intensive 
exploitation has been cited for the extirpation of the loggerhead 
nesting colony in the Canary Islands (Lopez-Jurado, 2007), and heavy 
human predation on nesting and foraging animals occurred on Santiago 
Island, Cape Verde, the first in the Archipelago to be settled 
(Loureiro, 2008), as well as on Sal and Sao Vicente islands (Lopez-
Jurado, 2007). Nesting loggerheads and eggs are still harvested at Boa 
Vista, Cape Verde (Cabrera et al., 2000; Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). In 
2007, over 1,100 (36 percent) of the nesting turtles were hunted, which 
is about 15 percent of the estimated adult female population (Marco et 
al., in press). In 2008, the military protected one of the major 
nesting beaches on Boa Vista where in 2007 55 percent of the mortality 
had occurred; with the additional protection, only 17 percent of the 
turtles on that beach were slaughtered (Roder et al., in press). On Sal 
Island, 11.5 percent of the emergences on unprotected beaches ended 
with mortality, whereas mortality was 3 percent of the emergences on 
protected beaches (Cozens et al., in press). The slaughter of nesting 
turtles is a problem wherever turtles nest in the Cape Verde Islands 
and may approach 100 percent in some places (C. Roder, Turtle 
Foundation, M[uuml]nsing, Germany,

[[Page 12632]]

personal communication, 2009; Cozens, in press). The meat and eggs are 
consumed locally as well as traded among the archipelago (C. Roder, 
Turtle Foundation, M[uuml]nsing, Germany, personal communication, 
2009). Hatchlings are collected on Sal Island, but this activity 
appears to be rare on other islands of the archipelago (J. Cozens, SOS 
Tartarugas, Santa Maria, Sal Island, Cape Verde, personal 
communication, 2009). Additionally, free divers target turtles for 
consumption of meat, often selectively taking large males (Lopez-Jurado 
et al., 2003). Turtles are harvested along the African coast and, in 
some areas, are considered a significant source of food and income due 
to the poverty of many residents along the African coast (Formia et 
al., 2003). Loggerhead carapaces are sold in markets in Morocco and 
Western Sahara (Fretey, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Benhardouze et al., 
2004).
    In summary, overutilization for human consumption likely was a 
factor that contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Current 
harvest of loggerhead turtles and eggs for human consumption in both 
Cape Verde and along the African coast, as well as the sale of 
loggerhead carapaces in markets in Africa, are a significant threat to 
the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean. Spontaneous diseases 
documented in the Northeast Atlantic include pneumonia, hepatitis, 
meningitis, septicemic processes, and neoplasia (Or[oacute]s et al., 
2005). Pneumonia could result from the aspiration of water from forced 
submergence in fishing gear. The authors also reported nephritis, 
esophagitis, nematode infestation, and eye lesions. Fibropapillomatosis 
does not appear to be an issue in the Northeast Atlantic.
    Nest depredation by ghost crabs (Ocypode cursor) occurs in Cape 
Verde (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2000). The ghost crabs feed on both eggs 
and hatchlings. Arvy et al. (2000) reported predation of loggerhead 
eggs in two nests in Mauritania by golden jackals (Canis aureus); a 
loggerhead turtle creating a third nest also had been killed, with meat 
and eggs eaten, but the predator was not identified.
    Loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic also may be impacted by 
harmful algal blooms, which have been reported infrequently in the 
Canary Islands and the Iberian Coastal LME (Ramos et al., 2005; Akin-
Oriola et al., 2006; Amorim and Dale, 2006; Moita et al., 2006; http://www.lme.noaa.gov).
    In summary, although disease and predation are known to occur, 
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of 
these threats on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northeast Atlantic 
Ocean. The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.7.4. of the 
Status Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle 
(2002) and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of 
these international instruments. The problems with existing 
international treaties are often that they have not realized their full 
potential, do not include some key countries, do not specifically 
address sea turtle conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a 
sovereign authority to enforce environmental regulations. The 
ineffectiveness of international treaties and national legislation is 
oftentimes due to the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to 
implement and enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is 
available in a special 2002 issue of the Journal of International 
Wildlife Law and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle 
Conservation (Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Ongoing directed lethal take of nesting females and eggs (Factor 
B), low hatching and emergence success (Factors A, B, and C), and 
mortality of juvenile and adult turtles from fishery bycatch (Factor E) 
that occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic Ocean is substantial. 
Currently, conservation efforts to protect nesting females are growing, 
and a reduction in this source of mortality is likely to continue in 
the near future. Although national and international governmental and 
non-governmental entities in the Northeast Atlantic are currently 
working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions 
have been implemented, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can 
be sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future 
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries 
operating within the range of this DPS, lack of bycatch reduction in 
coastal fisheries in Africa, the lack of comprehensive information on 
fishing distribution and effort, limitations on implementing 
demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of Northeast Atlantic Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for harvest of turtles and eggs for human consumption 
(Factor B), fishery bycatch (Factor E), and sand extraction and 
beachfront lighting on nesting beaches (Factor A) is significant 
relative to the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Loggerhead turtles strand throughout the Northeast Atlantic 
(Fretey, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001; Duguy et al., 2004, 2005; Witt et 
al., 2007), and there are indications that the turtles become entangled 
in nets and monofilament and swallow hooks in the region (Or[oacute]s 
et al., 2005; Calabuig Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). On the European 
coasts, most stranded loggerheads are small (mean of less than 30 cm 
SCL), but a few are greater than 60 cm SCL (Witt et al., 2007). 
Similarly, Tiwari et al. (2001) and Benhardouze et al. (2004) indicated 
that the animals they viewed in Morocco and Western Sahara were small 
juveniles and preliminary genetic analyses of stranded turtles indicate 
that they are of western Atlantic origin (M. Tiwari, NMFS, and A. 
Bolten, University of Florida, unpublished data), whereas Fretey (2001) 
reported that loggerheads captured and stranded in Mauritania were both 
juvenile and adult-sized animals.
    Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial 
fisheries is a threat to the survival of loggerheads in the Northeast 
Atlantic. Sea turtles may be caught in a multitude of gears deployed in 
the region: Pelagic and demersal longlines, drift and set gillnets, 
bottom and mid-water trawling, weirs, haul and purse seines, pots and 
traps, cast nets, and hook and line gear (see Pascoe and 
Gr[eacute]boval, 2003; Bayliff et al., 2005; Tayaa et al., 2005; Dossa 
et al., 2007). Fishing effort off the western African coast has been 
increasing (see Palomares and Pauly, 2004). Impacts

[[Page 12633]]

continue to increase in the Guinea Current LME, but, in contrast, the 
impacts are reported to be decreasing in the Canary Current LME (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). Throughout the region, fish stocks are depleted and 
management authorities are striving to reduce the fishing pressure.
    In the Northeast Atlantic, loggerheads, particularly the largest 
size classes in the oceanic environment (most of which are small 
juveniles), are captured in surface longline fisheries targeting 
swordfish (Ziphias gladius) and tuna (Thunnus spp.) (Ferreira et al., 
2001; Bolten, 2003). Bottom longlines in Madeira Island targeting 
black-scabbard (Aphanopus carbo) capture and kill small juvenile 
loggerhead turtles as the fishing depth does not allow hooked turtles 
to surface (Dellinger and Encarna[ccedil][acirc]o, 2000; Delgado et 
al., in press).
    In United Kingdom and Irish waters, loggerhead bycatch is uncommon 
but has been noted in pelagic driftnet fisheries (Pierpoint, 2000; 
Rogan and Mackey, 2007). Loggerheads have not been captured in pelagic 
trawls, demersal trawls, or gillnets in United Kingdom and Irish waters 
(Pierpoint, 2000), but have been captured in nets off France (Duguy et 
al., 2004, 2005).
    International fleets of trawl fisheries operate in Mauritania and 
have been documented to capture sea turtles, including loggerheads 
(Zeeberg et al., 2006). Despite being illegal, trawling occurs in the 
Cape Verde Islands and has the potential to capture and kill loggerhead 
turtles; one piece of abandoned trawl net washed ashore with eight live 
and two dead loggerheads (Lopez-Jurado et al., 2003). Longlines, 
seines, and hook and line have been documented to capture loggerheads 
35-73 cm SCL off the northwestern Moroccan coast (Benhardouze, 2004).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or 
entanglement in marine debris, also apply to loggerheads in the 
Northeast Atlantic. Propeller and boat strike injuries have been 
documented in the Northeast Atlantic (Oros et al., 2005; Calabuig 
Miranda and Liria Loza, 2007). Exposure to crude oil is also of 
concern. Loggerhead strandings in the Canary Islands have shown 
evidence of hydrocarbon exposure as well as ingestion of marine debris, 
such as plastic and monofilament (Oros et al., 2005; Calabuig Miranda 
and Liria Loza, 2007), and in the Azores and elsewhere plastic debris 
is found both on the beaches and floating in the waters (Barrerios and 
Barcelos, 2001; Tiwari et al., 2001). Pollution from heavy metals is a 
concern for the seas around the Iberian Peninsula (European 
Environmental Agency, 1998) and in the Guinea Current LME (Abe et al., 
2004). Bioaccumulation of metals in loggerheads has been measured in 
the Canary Islands and along the French Atlantic Coast (Caurant et al., 
1999; Torrent et al., 2004). However, the consequences of long-term 
exposure to heavy metals are unknown (Torrent et al., 2004).
    Natural environmental events, such as climate change, could affect 
loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic. Similar to other areas of the 
world, climate change and sea level rise have the potential to impact 
loggerheads in the Northeast Atlantic, and the changes may be further 
exacerbated by the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation. These 
effects include flooding of nesting beaches, shifts in ocean currents, 
ecosystem shifts in prey distribution and abundance, and a shift in the 
sex ratio of the population if rookeries do not migrate concurrently 
(e.g., northward in the case of global warming) or if nesting phenology 
does not change (see Doody et al., 2006). Tropical and sub-tropical 
storms occasionally strike the area and could have a negative impact on 
nesting, although such an impact would be of limited duration.
    In summary, we find that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic 
Ocean, particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from longline and 
trawl fisheries, is a significant threat to the persistence of this 
DPS.

Mediterranean Sea DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    In the Mediterranean, some areas known to host nesting activity in 
the past have been lost to turtles (e.g., Malta) or severely degraded 
(e.g., Israel) (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Destruction and 
modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the Mediterranean result 
from coastal development and construction, placement of erosion control 
structures and other barriers to nesting, beachfront lighting, 
vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, beach erosion, beach 
sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native vegetation, and 
planting of non-native vegetation (Baldwin, 1992; Margaritoulis et al., 
2003). These activities may directly impact the nesting success of 
loggerheads and survivability of eggs and hatchlings. Nesting in the 
Mediterranean almost exclusively occurs in the Eastern basin, with the 
main concentrations found in Cyprus, Greece, Turkey, and Libya 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003; Laurent et al., 1999); therefore, the 
following threats to the nesting habitat are concentrated in these 
areas.
    The Mediterranean experiences a large influx of tourists during the 
summer months, coinciding with the nesting season. Margaritoulis et al. 
(2003) stated that extensive urbanization of the coastline, largely a 
result of tourism and recreation, is likely the most serious threat to 
loggerhead nesting areas. The large numbers of tourists that use 
Mediterranean beaches result in an increase in umbrellas, chairs, 
garbage, and towels, as well as related hotels, restaurants, and 
stationary (e.g., street lights, hotels) and moving (e.g., cars) 
lighting, all which can impact sea turtle nesting success 
(Demetropoulos, 2000). Further, the eastern Mediterranean is exposed to 
high levels of pollution and marine debris, in particular the nesting 
beaches of Cyprus, Turkey, and Egypt (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004).
    Construction and infrastructure development also have the potential 
to alter nesting beaches and subsequently impact nesting success. The 
construction of new buildings on or near nesting beaches has been a 
problem in Greece and Turkey (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). The construction 
of a jetty and waterworks around Mersin, Turkey, has contributed 
significantly to the continuous loss of adjacent beach (Cami[ntilde]as, 
2004).
    Beach erosion and sand extraction also pose a problem for sea 
turtle nesting sites. The noted decline of the nesting population at 
Rethymno, Island of Crete, Greece, is partly attributed to beach 
erosion caused by construction on the high beach and at sea (e.g., 
groins) (Margaritoulis et al., 2009). A 2001 survey of Lebanese nesting 
beaches found severe erosion on beaches where previous nesting had been 
reported, and in some cases the beaches had disappeared completely 
(Venizelos et al., 2005). Definitive causes of this erosion were found 
to be sand extraction, offshore sand dredging, and sediment removal 
from river beds for construction and military purposes. Beach erosion 
also may occur from natural changes, with the same deleterious effects 
to loggerhead nesting.

[[Page 12634]]

On Patara, Turkey, beach erosion and subsequent inundation by waves and 
shifting sand dunes are responsible for about half of all loggerhead 
nest losses (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Erosion can further be exacerbated 
when native dune vegetation, which enhances beach stability and acts as 
an integral buffer zone between land and sea, is degraded or destroyed. 
This in turn often leaves insufficient nesting opportunities above the 
high tide line, and nests may be washed out. In contrast, the planting 
or invasion of less stabilizing, non-native plants can lead to 
increased erosion and degradation of suitable nesting habitat. Finally, 
sand extraction has been a serious problem on Mediterranean nesting 
beaches, especially in Turkey (T[uuml]rkozan and Baran, 1996), Cyprus 
(Godley et al., 1996; Demetropoulos and Hadjichristophorou, 1989), and 
Israel (Levy, 2003).
    While the most obvious effect of nesting beach destruction and 
modification may be to the existence of the actual nests, hatchlings 
are also threatened by habitat alteration. In the Mediterranean, 
disorientation of hatchlings due to artificial lighting has been 
recorded mainly in Greece (Rees, 2005; Margaritoulis et al., 2007, 
2009), Turkey (T[uuml]rkozan and Baran, 1996), and Lebanon (Newbury et 
al., 2002). Additionally, vehicle traffic on nesting beaches may 
disrupt the natural beach environment and contribute to erosion, 
especially during high tides or on narrow beaches where driving is 
concentrated on the high beach and foredune. On Zakynthos Island in 
Greece, Venizelos et al. (2006) reported that vehicles drove along the 
beach and sand dunes throughout the tourist season on East Laganas and 
Kalamaki beaches, leaving deep ruts in the sand, disturbing sea turtles 
trying to nest, and impacting hatchlings trying to reach the sea.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Threats to habitat in the loggerhead neritic and oceanic zones in 
the Mediterranean Sea include fishing practices, channel dredging, sand 
extraction, marine pollution, and climate change. Trawling occurs 
throughout the Mediterranean, most notably in areas off Albania, 
Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Libya, Morocco, 
Slovenia, Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and Casale, 1999; 
Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Casale, 2008). This fishing practice has the 
potential to destroy bottom habitat in these areas. Fishing methods 
affect neritic zones by not only impacting bottom habitat and 
incidentally capturing loggerheads but also depleting fish populations, 
and thus altering ecosystem dynamics. For example, depleted fish stocks 
in Zakynthos, Greece, likely contributed to predation of adult 
loggerheads by monk seals (Monachus monachus) (Margaritoulis et al., 
1996). Further, by depleting fish populations, the trophic dynamics 
will be altered, which may then in turn affect the ability of 
loggerheads to find prey resources. If loggerheads are not able to 
forage on the necessary prey resources, their long-term survivability 
may be impacted. Climate change also may result in future trophic 
changes, thus impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    Marine pollution, including direct contamination and structural 
habitat degradation, can affect loggerhead neritic and oceanic habitat. 
As the Mediterranean is an enclosed sea, organic and inorganic wastes, 
toxic effluents, and other pollutants rapidly affect the ecosystem 
(Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). The Mediterranean has been declared a ``special 
area'' by the MARPOL Convention, in which deliberate petroleum 
discharges from vessels are banned, but numerous repeated offenses are 
still thought to occur (Pavlakis et al., 1996). Some estimates of the 
amount of oil released into the region are as high as 1,200,000 metric 
tons (Alpers, 1993). Direct oil spill events also occur as happened in 
Lebanon in 2006 when 10,000 to 15,000 tons of heavy fuel oil spilled 
into the eastern Mediterranean (United Nations Environment Programme, 
2007).
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead habitat also may occur 
as a result of other activities. For example, underwater explosives 
have been identified as a key threat to loggerhead habitat in 
internesting areas in the Mediterranean (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
Further, the Mediterranean is a site of intense tourist activity, and 
corresponding boat anchoring also may impact loggerhead habitat in the 
neritic environment.
    In summary, we find that the Mediterranean Sea DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in both 
its terrestrial and marine habitats as a result of land and water use 
practices as considered above in Factor A. Within Factor A, we find 
that coastal development, placement of barriers to nesting, beachfront 
lighting, and erosion resulting from sand extraction, offshore sand 
dredging, and sediment removal from river beds are significant threats 
to the persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Mediterranean turtle populations were subject to severe 
exploitation until the mid-1960s (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs is 
reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. For 
example, Nada and Casale (2008) found that egg collection (for 
individual consumption) still occurs in Egypt. In some areas of the 
Mediterranean, like on the Greek Island of Zakynthos, nesting beaches 
are protected (Panagopoulou et al., 2008), so egg harvest by humans in 
those areas is likely negligible.
    Exploitation of juveniles and adults still occurs in some 
Mediterranean areas. In Tunisia, clandestine trade for local 
consumption is still recorded, despite prohibition of the sale of 
turtles in fish markets in 1989 (Laurent et al., 1996). In Egypt, 
turtles are sold in fish markets despite prohibitive laws; of 71 
turtles observed at fish markets in 1995 and 1996, 68 percent were 
loggerheads (Laurent et al., 1996). Nada (2001) reported 135 turtles 
(of which 85 percent were loggerheads) slaughtered at the fish market 
of Alexandria in 6 months (December 1998-May 1999). Based on observed 
sea turtle slaughters in 1995 and 1996, Laurent et al. (1996) estimated 
that several thousand sea turtles were probably killed each year in 
Egypt. More recently, a study found that the open selling of sea 
turtles in Egypt generally has been curtailed due to enforcement 
efforts, but a high level of intentional killing for the black market 
or for direct personal consumption still exists (Nada and Casale, 
2008). Given the high numbers of turtles caught in this area, several 
hundred turtles are currently estimated to be slaughtered each year in 
Egypt (Nada and Casale, 2008). This estimate likely includes both 
juvenile and adult loggerheads, as Egyptian fish markets have been 
documented selling different sized sea turtles. While the mean sea 
turtle size was 65.7 cm CCL (range 38-86.3 cm CCL; n=48), 37.5 percent 
of observed loggerhead samples were greater than 70 cm CCL (Laurent et 
al., 1996).
    In summary, overutilization for commercial purposes likely was a 
factor that contributed to the historic declines of this DPS. Current 
illegal harvest of loggerheads in Egypt for human consumption continues 
as a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads

[[Page 12635]]

found in the Mediterranean. Endoparasites in loggerheads have been 
studied in the western Mediterranean. While the composition of the 
gastrointestinal community of sea turtles is expected to include 
digeneans, nematodes, and aspidogastreans, loggerheads in the 
Mediterranean were found to harbor only four digenean species typical 
of marine turtles (Aznar et al., 1998). There have been no records of 
fibropapillomatosis in the Mediterranean. While there is the potential 
for disease in this area, information on the prevalence of such disease 
is lacking.
    In the Mediterranean Sea, loggerhead hatchlings and eggs are 
subject to depredation by wild canids (i.e., foxes (Vulpes vulpes), 
golden jackals (Canis aureus)), feral/domestic dogs, and ghost crabs 
(Ocypode cursor) (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Predators have caused 
the loss of 48.4 percent of loggerhead clutches at Kyparissia Bay, 
Greece (Margaritoulis, 1988), 70-80 percent at Dalyan Beach, Turkey 
(Erk'akan, 1993), 36 percent (includes green turtle clutches) in Cyprus 
(Broderick and Godley, 1996), and 44.8 percent in Libya (Laurent et 
al., 1995). A survey of the Syrian coast in 1999 found 100 percent nest 
predation, mostly due to stray dogs and humans (Venizelos et al., 
2005). Loggerhead eggs are also depredated by insect larvae in Cyprus 
(McGowan et al., 2001), Turkey ([Ouml]zdemir et al., 2004), and Greece 
(Lazou and Rees, 2006). Ghost crabs have been reported preying on 
loggerhead hatchlings in northern Cyprus and Egypt, suggesting 66 
percent of emerging hatchlings succumb to this mortality source (Simms 
et al., 2002). Predation also has been influenced by anthropogenic 
sources. On Zakynthos, Greece, a landfill site next to loggerhead 
nesting beaches has resulted in an artificially high level of seagulls 
(Larus spp.), which results in increased predation pressure on 
hatchlings (Panagopoulou et al., 2008). Planting of non-native plants 
also can have a detrimental effect on nests in the form of roots 
invading eggs (e.g., tamarisk tree (Tamarix spp.) roots invading eggs 
in Zakynthos, Greece) (Margaritoulis et al., 2007).
    Predation on adult and juvenile loggerheads has also been 
documented in the Mediterranean. Predation of nesting loggerheads by 
golden jackals has been recorded in Turkey (Peters et al., 1994). 
During a 1995 survey of loggerhead nesting in Libya, two nesting 
females were found killed by carnivores, probably jackals (Laurent et 
al., 1997). Off the sea turtle nesting beach of Zakynthos, Greece, 
adult loggerheads were found being predated upon by Mediterranean monk 
seals (Monachus monachus). Of the eight predated turtles observed or 
reported, 62.5 percent were adult males (Margaritoulis et al., 1996). 
Further, stomach contents were examined from 24 Mediterranean white 
sharks (Carcharodon carcharias), and 17 percent contained remains of 
marine turtles, including two loggerheads, one green, and one 
unidentifiable turtle (Fergusson et al., 2000). One of the loggerhead 
turtles ingested was a juvenile with a carapace length of approximately 
60 cm (length not reported as either SCL or CCL). Fergusson et al. 
(2000) report that white shark interactions with sea turtles are likely 
rare east of the Ionian Sea, and while the impact of shark predation on 
turtle populations is unknown, it is probably small compared to other 
sources of mortality.
    The Mediterranean is a low-productivity body of water, with high 
water clarity as a result. However, harmful algal blooms do occur in 
this area (e.g., off Algeria in 2002), and the problem is particularly 
acute in enclosed ocean basins such as the Mediterranean. In the 
northern Adriatic Sea, fish kills have occurred as a result of noxious 
phytoplankton blooms and anoxic conditions (Mediterranean Sea LME). 
While fish may be more susceptible to these harmful algal blooms, 
loggerheads in the Mediterranean also may be impacted by such noxious 
or toxic phytoplankton to some extent.
    In summary, nest and hatchling predation likely was a factor that 
contributed to the historic decline of this DPS. Current nest and 
hatchling predation on several Mediterranean nesting beaches is 
believed to be a significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Mediterranean Sea. The 
reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.8.4. of the Status Review 
for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) and 
Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle 
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority 
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law and 
Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation (Hykle 
2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Mediterranean Sea (see 
Factor E), as well as anthropogenic threats to nesting beaches (Factor 
A) and eggs/hatchlings (Factors A, B, C, and E), is substantial. 
Although conservation efforts to protect some nesting beaches are 
underway, more widespread and consistent protection is needed. Although 
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities 
in the Mediterranean Sea are currently working toward reducing 
loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be 
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future 
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in commercial and artisanal 
fisheries operating within the range of this DPS, the lack of 
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of Mediterranean Sea 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) and impacts to nesting beach 
habitat (Factor A) is significant relative to the persistence of this 
DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
    Other anthropogenic and natural factors affecting loggerhead 
survival include incidental bycatch in fisheries, vessel collisions, 
marine pollution, climate change, and cyclonic storm events. Fishing 
practices alone have been estimated to result in over 150,000 sea 
turtle captures per year, with

[[Page 12636]]

approximately 50,000 mortalities (Casale, 2008).
    The only estimation of loggerhead survival probabilities in the 
Mediterranean was calculated by using capture-mark-recapture techniques 
from 1981-2003 (Casale et al., 2007c). Of the 3,254 loggerheads tagged, 
134 were recaptured at different sites throughout the Mediterranean. 
Most recaptured animals were juveniles (mean 54.4 cm CCL; range 25-88 
cm CCL), but the study did not delineate between juvenile life stages. 
This research estimated a loggerhead annual survival probability of 
0.73(95 percent confidence interval; 0.67-0.78), recognizing that there 
are methodological limitations of the technique used. Nonetheless, 
Casale et al. (2007a) stated that assuming a natural survivorship no 
higher than 0.95 and a tag loss rate of 0.1, a range of 0.1-0.2 appears 
reasonable for the additional human induced mortality (from all 
sources).
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial 
fisheries is a significant threat to the survivability of loggerheads 
in the Mediterranean. Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and demersal 
longlines, drift gillnets, set gillnets and trammel nets, bottom and 
mid-water trawls, seines, dredges, traps/pots, and hook and line gear. 
In a 2004 FAO Fisheries Report, Cami[ntilde]as (2004) stated that the 
main fisheries affecting sea turtles in the Mediterranean Sea (at that 
time) were Spanish and Italian longline, North Adriatic Italian, 
Tunisian, and Turkish trawl, and Moroccan and Italian driftnet. 
Available information on sea turtle bycatch by gear type is discussed 
below. There is growing evidence that artisanal/small vessel fisheries 
(set gillnet, bottom longline, and part of the pelagic longline 
fishery) may be responsible for a comparable or higher number of 
captures with higher mortality rates than the commercial/large vessel 
fisheries (Casale, 2008) as previously suggested by indirect clues 
(Casale et al., 2005a).
    Mediterranean fish landings have increased steadily since the 
1950s, but the FAO 10-year capture trend from 1990-1999 shows stable 
landings (Mediterranean LME, http://www.lme.noaa.gov). However, stable 
fish landings may result from stable fishing effort at the same catch 
rates, or higher fishing effort at lower catch rates. As fish stocks in 
the Mediterranean are being depleted (P. Casale, MTSG-IUCN Italy, 
personal communication, 2009), fishing effort in some areas may be 
increasing to catch the available fish. This trend has not yet been 
verified throughout the Mediterranean, but fishing pressures may be 
increasing even though landings appear stable.

Longline Fisheries

    In the Mediterranean, pelagic longline fisheries targeting 
swordfish (Ziphias gladius) and albacore (Thunnus alalunga) may be the 
primary source of loggerhead bycatch. It appears that most of the 
incidental captures occur in the western and central portions of the 
area (Demetropoulos and Hadjichristophorou, 1995). The most severe 
bycatch in the Mediterranean occurs around the Balearic Islands where 
1,950-35,000 juveniles are caught annually in the surface longline 
fishery (Mayol and Castell[oacute] Mas, 1983; Cami[ntilde]as, 1988, 
1997; Aguilar et al., 1995). Specifically, the following regions have 
reported annual estimates of total turtle bycatch from pelagic 
longlines: Spain--17,000 to 35,000 turtles (Aguilar et al., 1995; 
Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003); Italy (Ionian Sea)--1,084 to 4,447 
turtles (Deflorio et al., 2005); Morocco--3,000 turtles (Laurent, 
1990); Greece--280 to 3,310 turtles (Panou et al., 1999; Kapantagakis 
and Lioudakis, 2006); Italy (Lampedusa)--2,100 turtles (Casale et al., 
2007a); Malta--1,500 to 2,500 turtles (Gramentz, 1989); South Tunisia 
(Gulf of Gab[egrave]s)--486 turtles (Jribi et al., 2008); and Algeria--
300 turtles (Laurent, 1990).
    For the entire Mediterranean pelagic longline fishery, an 
extrapolation resulted in a bycatch estimate of 60,000 to 80,000 
loggerheads in 2000 (Lewison et al., 2004). Further, a more recent 
paper used the best available information to estimate that Spain, 
Morocco, and Italy have the highest level of sea turtle bycatch, with 
over 10,000 turtle captures per year for each country, and Greece, 
Malta, Libya, and Tunisia each catch 1,000 to 3,000 turtles per year 
(Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of loggerhead 
sea turtle captures by all Mediterranean pelagic longline fisheries may 
be greater than 50,000 (Casale, 2008). Note that these are not 
necessarily individual turtles, as the same sea turtle can be captured 
more than once.
    Mortality estimates in the pelagic longline fishery at gear 
retrieval appear to be lower than in some other types of gear (e.g., 
set gillnet). Although limited to observations of direct mortality at 
gear retrieval, Carreras et al. (2004) found mortality to be low (0-7.7 
percent) in the longline fishery off the Balearic Islands, and Jribi et 
al. (2008) reported 0 percent direct mortality in the southern Tunisia 
surface longline fishery. These estimates are consistent with those 
found in other areas; direct mortality was estimated at 4.3 percent in 
Greece (n=23), 0 percent in Italy (n=214), and 2.6 percent in Spain 
(n=676) (Laurent et al., 2001). However, considering injured turtles 
and those released with hooks, the potential for mortality is likely 
much higher. Based upon observations of hooked loggerhead turtles in 
captivity, Aguilar et al. (1995) estimated 20-30 percent of animals 
caught in longline gear may eventually die. More recently, Casale et 
al. (2008b) found, given variations in hook position affecting 
survivability, the mortality rate of turtles caught by pelagic 
longlines may be higher than 30 percent, which is greater than 
previously thought (17-42 percent; Lewison et al., 2004). Considering 
direct and post-release mortality, Casale (2008) used a conservative 
approach to arrive at 40 percent for the average mortality from 
Mediterranean pelagic longlines. The result is an estimated 20,000 
turtles killed per year by pelagic longlines (Casale, 2008).
    In general, most of the turtles captured in the Mediterranean 
surface longline fisheries are juvenile animals (Aguilar et al., 1995; 
Panou et al., 1999; Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003; Casale et al., 2007a; 
Jribi et al., 2008), but some adult loggerhead bycatch is also 
reported. Considering data from many Mediterranean areas and research 
studies, the average size of turtles caught by pelagic longlines was 
48.9 cm CCL (range 20.5-79.2 cm CCL; n=1868) (Casale, 2008). 
Specifically, in the Spanish surface longline fishery, 13 percent of 
estimated carapace sizes (n=455) ranged from 75.36 to 107 cm CCL, 
considered to be adult animals (Cami[ntilde]as et al., 2003), and in 
the Ionian Sea, 15 percent of a total 157 loggerhead turtles captured 
in swordfish longlines were adult animals (estimated size at greater 
than or equal to 75 cm) (Panou et al., 1999).
    Bottom longlines are also fished in the Mediterranean, but specific 
capture rates for loggerheads are largely unknown for many areas. The 
countries with the highest number of documented captures (in the 
thousands per year) are Tunisia, Libya, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, Morocco, 
and Italy (Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of 
loggerhead sea turtle captures (not necessarily individual turtles) by 
all Mediterranean demersal longliners may be greater than 35,000 
(Casale, 2008). Given available information and using a conservative 
approach, mortality from bottom longlines may be at least equal to 
pelagic longline mortality (40

[[Page 12637]]

percent; Casale, 2008). The result is an estimated 14,000 turtles 
killed per year in Mediterranean bottom longlines (Casale, 2008). It is 
likely that these animals represent mostly juvenile loggerheads, Casale 
(2008) reported an average turtle size of 51.8 cm CCL (n=35) in bottom 
longlines based on available data throughout the Mediterranean.
    Artisanal longline fisheries also have the potential to take sea 
turtles. A survey of 54 small boat (4-10 meter length) artisanal 
fishermen in Cyprus and Turkey resulted in an estimated minimum bycatch 
of over 2,000 turtles per year, with an estimated 10 percent mortality 
rate (Godley et al., 1998a). These small boats fished with a 
combination of longlines and trammel/gillnets. However, note that it is 
likely that a proportion (perhaps a large proportion) of the turtle 
bycatch estimated in this study are green turtles.

Set Net (Gillnet) Fisheries

    As in other areas, sea turtles have the potential to interact with 
set nets (gillnets or trammel nets) in the Mediterranean. Mediterranean 
set nets refer to gillnets (a single layer of net) and trammel nets, 
which consist of three layers of net with different mesh size. Casale 
(2008) estimated that the countries with the highest number of 
loggerhead captures (in the thousands per year) are Tunisia, Libya, 
Greece, Turkey, Cyprus, and Croatia. Italy, Morocco, Egypt, and France 
likely have high capture rates as well. Available information suggests 
the annual number of loggerhead captures by Mediterranean set nets may 
be greater than 30,000 (Casale, 2008).
    Due to the nature of the gear and fishing practices (e.g., 
relatively long soak times), incidental capture in gillnets is among 
the highest source of direct sea turtle mortality. An evaluation of 
turtles tagged then recaptured in gillnets along the Italian coast 
found 14 of 19 loggerheads (73.7 percent) to be dead (Argano et al., 
1992). Gillnets off France were observed to capture six loggerheads 
with a 50 percent mortality rate (Laurent, 1991). Six loggerheads were 
recovered in gillnets off Croatia between 1993 and 1996; 83 percent 
were found dead (Lazar et al., 2000). Off the Balearic Islands, 196 sea 
turtles were estimated to be captured in lobster trammel nets in 2001, 
with a CPUE of 0.17 turtles per vessel (Carreras et al., 2004). 
Mortality estimates for this artisanal lobster trammel net fishery 
ranged from 78 to 100 percent. Given this mortality rate and the number 
of turtles reported in lobster trammel nets, Carreras et al. (2004) 
estimate that a few thousand loggerhead turtles are killed annually by 
lobster trammel nets in the whole western Mediterranean. Considering 
data throughout the entire Mediterranean, as well as a conservative 
approach, Casale (2008) considered mortality by set nets to be 60 
percent, with a resulting estimate of 16,000 turtles killed per year. 
Most of these animals are likely juveniles; Casale (2008) evaluated 
available set net catch data throughout the Mediterranean and found an 
average size of 45.4 cm CCL (n=74).
    As noted above, artisanal set net fisheries also may capture 
numerous sea turtles, as observed off Cyprus and Turkey (Godley et al., 
1998a).

Driftnet Fisheries

    Historically, driftnet fishing in the Mediterranean caught large 
numbers of sea turtles. An estimated 16,000 turtles were captured 
annually in the Ionian Sea driftnet fishery in the 1980s (De Metrio and 
Megalofonou, 1988). The United Nations established a worldwide 
moratorium on driftnet fishing effective in 1992, but unregulated 
driftnetting continued to occur in the Mediterranean. For instance, a 
bycatch estimate of 236 loggerhead turtles was developed for the 
Spanish swordfish driftnet fishery in 1994 (Silvani et al., 1999). 
While the Spanish fleet curtailed activity in 1994, the Moroccan, 
Turkish, French, and Italian driftnet fleets continued to operate. 
Tudela et al. (2005) presented bycatch rates for driftnet fisheries in 
the Alboran Sea and off Italy. The Moroccan Alboran Sea driftnet fleet 
bycatch rate ranged from 0.21 to 0.78 loggerheads per haul, whereas the 
Italian driftnet fleet had a lower bycatch rate of 0.046 to 0.057 
loggerheads per haul (Di Natale, 1995; Caminas, 1997; Silvani et al., 
1999). The use of driftnets in the Mediterranean continues to be 
illegal: the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean 
prohibited driftnet fishing in 1997; a total ban on driftnet fishing by 
the European Union fleet in the Mediterranean went into effect in 2002; 
and the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas 
(ICCAT) banned driftnets in 2003. Nevertheless, there are an estimated 
600 illegal driftnet vessels operating in the Mediterranean, including 
fleets based in Algeria, France, Italy, Morocco, and Turkey 
(Environmental Justice Foundation, 2007). In particular, the Moroccan 
fleet, operating in the Alboran Sea and Straits of Gibraltar, comprises 
the bulk of Mediterranean driftnetting, and has been found responsible 
for high bycatch, including loggerhead turtles (Environmental Justice 
Foundation, 2007; Aksissou et al., in press). Driftnet fishing in the 
Mediterranean, and accompanying threats to loggerhead turtles, 
continues to occur.

Trawl Fisheries

    Sea turtles are known to be incidentally captured in trawls in 
Albania, Algeria, Croatia, Egypt, France, Greece, Italy, Libya, 
Morocco, Slovenia, Spain, Tunisia, and Turkey (Gerosa and Casale, 1999; 
Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Casale, 2008). Laurent et al. (1996) estimated 
that approximately 10,000 to 15,000 sea turtles (most of which are 
loggerheads) are captured by bottom trawling in the entire 
Mediterranean. More recently, Casale (2008) compiled available trawl 
bycatch data throughout the Mediterranean and reported that Italy and 
Tunisia have the highest level of sea turtle bycatch, potentially over 
20,000 captures per year combined, and Croatia, Greece, Turkey, Egypt, 
and Libya each catch more than 2,000 turtles per year. Further, Spain 
and Albania may each capture a few hundred sea turtles per year 
(Casale, 2008). Available data suggest the annual number of sea turtle 
captures by all Mediterranean trawlers may be greater than 40,000 
(Casale, 2008). Note that these are capture events and not necessarily 
individual turtles.
    Although juveniles are incidentally captured in trawl gear in many 
areas of the Mediterranean (Casale et al., 2004, 2007a; Jribi et al., 
2007), adult turtles are also found. In Egypt, 25 percent of 
loggerheads captured in bottom trawl gear (n=16) were greater than or 
equal to 70 cm CCL, and in Tunisia, 26.2 percent (n=62) were of this 
larger size class (Laurent et al., 1996). Off Lampedusa Island, Italy, 
the average size of turtles caught by bottom trawlers was 51.8 cm CCL 
(range 22-87 cm CCL; n=368), and approximately 10 percent of the 
animals measured greater than 75 cm CCL (Casale et al., 2007a). For all 
areas of the Mediterranean, Casale (2008) reported that medium to large 
turtles are generally caught by bottom trawl gear (mean 53.9 cm CCL; 
range 22-87 cm CCL; n=648).
    While there is a notable interaction rate in the Mediterranean, it 
appears that the mortality associated with trawling is relatively low. 
Incidents of mortality have ranged from 3.3 percent (n=60) in Tunisia 
(Jribi et al., 2007) and 3.3 percent (n=92) in France (Laurent, 1991) 
to 9.4 percent (n=32) in Italy (Casale et al., 2004). Casale et al. 
(2004) found that mortality would be higher if all comatose turtles 
were assumed to die. It also should be noted that the mortality rate in 
trawls depends on the

[[Page 12638]]

duration of the haul, with longer haul durations resulting in higher 
mortality rates (Henwood and Stuntz, 1987; Sasso and Epperly, 2006). 
Jribi et al. (2007) stated that the low recorded mortality in the Gulf 
of Gab[egrave]s is likely due to the short haul durations in this area. 
Based on available information from multiple areas of the 
Mediterranean, and assuming that comatose animals die if released in 
that condition, the overall average mortality rate for bottom trawlers 
was estimated to be 20 percent (Casale, 2008). This results in at least 
7,400 turtles killed per year by bottom trawlers in all of the 
Mediterranean, but the number is likely more than 10,000 (Casale, 
2008).
    Mid-water trawling may have less total impact on sea turtles found 
in the Mediterranean than some other gear types, but interactions still 
occur. Casale et al. (2004) found that while no turtles were caught on 
observed mid-water trawl trips in the North Adriatic Sea, vessel 
captains reported 13 sea turtles captured from April to September. 
Considering total fishing effort, these reports resulted in a minimum 
total catch estimate of 161 turtles/year in the Italian mid-water trawl 
fishery. Off Turkey, 71 loggerheads were captured in mid-water trawls 
from 1995-1996, while 43 loggerheads were incidentally taken in bottom 
trawls (Oru[ccedil], 2001). In this same study, of a total 320 turtles 
captured in mid-water trawls (loggerheads and greens combined), 95 
percent were captured alive and apparently healthy. While the total 
catch numbers throughout the Mediterranean have not been estimated, 
mid-water trawl fisheries do present a threat to loggerhead sea 
turtles.

Other Gear Types

    Seine, dredge, trap/pot, and hook and line fisheries operate in 
Mediterranean waters and may affect loggerhead turtles, although 
incidental captures in these gear types are largely unknown 
(Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Artisanal fisheries using a variety of gear 
types also have the potential for sea turtle takes, but the effects of 
most artisanal gear types on sea turtles have not been estimated.

Other Manmade and Natural Impacts

    Other anthropogenic threats, such as interactions with recreational 
and commercial vessels, marine pollution, and intentional killing, also 
impact loggerheads found in the Mediterranean. Propeller and collision 
injuries from boats and ships are becoming more common in sea turtles, 
although it is unclear as to whether the events are increasing or just 
the reporting of the injuries. Speedboat impacts are of particular 
concern in areas of intense tourist activity, such as Greece and 
Turkey. Losses of nesting females from vessel collisions have been 
documented in Zakynthos and Crete in Greece (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). In 
the Gulf of Naples, 28.1 percent of loggerheads recovered from 1993-
1996 had injuries attributed to boat strikes (Bentivegna and 
Paglialonga, 1998). Along the Greece coastline from 1997-1999, boat 
strikes were reported as a seasonal phenomenon in stranded turtles 
(Kopsida et al., 2002), but numbers were not presented.
    Direct or indirect disposal of anthropogenic debris introduces 
potentially lethal materials into loggerhead foraging habitats. 
Unattended or discarded nets, floating plastics and bags, and tar balls 
are of particular concern (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004; Margaritoulis, 2007). 
Monofilament netting appears to be the most dangerous waste produced by 
the fishing industry (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). In the Mediterranean, 20 
of 99 loggerhead turtles examined from Maltese fisheries were found 
contaminated with plastic or metal litter and hydrocarbons, with crude 
oil being the most common pollutant (Gramentz, 1988). Of 54 juvenile 
loggerhead turtles incidentally caught by fisheries in Spanish 
Mediterranean waters, 79.6 percent had debris in their digestive tracts 
(Tomas et al., 2002). In this study, plastics were the most frequent 
type of marine debris observed (75.9 percent), followed by tar (25.9 
percent). However, an examination of stranded sea turtles in Northern 
Cyprus and Turkey found that only 3 of 98 animals were affected by 
marine debris (Godley et al., 1998b).
    Pollutant waste in the marine environment may impact loggerheads, 
likely more than other sea turtle species. Omnivorous loggerheads 
stranded in Cyprus, Greece, and Scotland had the highest organochlorine 
contaminant concentrations, as compared to green and leatherback 
turtles (Mckenzie et al., 1999). In northern Cyprus, Godley et al. 
(1999) found heavy metal concentrations (mercury, cadmium, and lead) to 
be higher in loggerheads than green turtles. Even so, concentrations of 
contaminants from sea turtles in Mediterranean waters were found to be 
comparable to other areas, generally with levels lower than 
concentrations shown to cause deleterious effects in other species 
(Godley et al., 1999; Mckenzie et al., 1999). However, lead 
concentrations in some Mediterranean loggerhead hatchlings were at 
levels known to cause toxic effects in other vertebrate groups (Godley 
et al., 1999).
    As in other areas of the world, intentional killing or injuring of 
sea turtles has been reported to occur in the Mediterranean. Of 524 
strandings in Greece, it appeared that 23 percent had been 
intentionally killed or injured (Kopsida et al., 2002). While some 
turtles incidentally captured are used for consumption, it has been 
reported that some fishermen kill the sea turtles they catch for a 
variety of other reasons, including non-commercial use, hostility, 
prejudice, recovery of hooks, and ignorance (Laurent et al., 1996; 
Godley et al., 1998a; Gerosa and Casale, 1999; Casale, 2008).
    Natural environmental events also may affect loggerheads in the 
Mediterranean. Cyclonic storms that closely resemble tropical cyclones 
in satellite images occasionally form over the Mediterranean Sea 
(Emanuel, 2005). While hurricanes typically do not occur in the 
Mediterranean, researchers have suggested that climate change could 
trigger hurricane development in this area in the future (Gaertner et 
al., 2007). Any significant storm event that may develop could disrupt 
loggerhead nesting activity and hatchling production, but the results 
are generally localized and rarely result in whole-scale losses over 
multiple nesting seasons.
    Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level 
rise have the potential to impact loggerheads in the Mediterranean. 
Over the long term, Mediterranean turtle populations could be 
threatened by the alteration of thermal sand characteristics (from 
global warming), resulting in the reduction or cessation of female 
hatchling production (Cami[ntilde]as, 2004). Further, a significant 
rise in sea level would restrict loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
eastern Mediterranean.
    In summary, we find that the Mediterranean Sea DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the Mediterranean Sea, 
particularly bycatch mortality of loggerheads from pelagic and bottom 
longline, set net, driftnet, and trawl fisheries, is a significant 
threat to the persistence of this DPS. In addition, boat strikes are 
becoming more common and are likely also a significant threat to the 
persistence of this DPS.

[[Page 12639]]

South Atlantic Ocean DPS

A. The Present or Threatened Destruction, Modification, or Curtailment 
of Its Habitat or Range
Terrestrial Zone
    Destruction and modification of loggerhead nesting habitat in the 
South Atlantic result from coastal development and construction, 
placement of erosion control structures and other barriers to nesting, 
beachfront lighting, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, sand extraction, 
beach erosion, beach sand placement, beach pollution, removal of native 
vegetation, and planting of non-native vegetation (D'Amato and 
Marczwski, 1993; Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Naro-Maciel et al., 
1999; Marcovaldi et al., 2002b, 2005; Marcovaldi, 2007).
    The primary nesting areas for loggerheads in the South Atlantic are 
in the states of Sergipe, Bahia, Esp[iacute]rito Santo, and Rio de 
Janeiro in Brazil (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). These primary 
nesting areas are monitored by Projeto TAMAR, the national sea turtle 
conservation program in Brazil. Since 1980, Projeto TAMAR has worked to 
establish legal protection for nesting beaches (Marcovaldi and 
Marcovaldi, 1999). As such, human activities, including sand 
extraction, beach nourishment, seawall construction, beach driving, and 
artificial lighting, that can negatively impact sea turtle nesting 
habitat, as well as directly impact nesting turtles and their eggs and 
hatchlings during the reproductive season, are restricted by various 
State and Federal laws (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Marcovaldi et 
al., 2002b, 2005). Nevertheless, tourism development in coastal areas 
in Brazil is high, and Projeto TAMAR works toward raising awareness of 
turtles and their conservation needs through educational and 
informational activities at their Visitor Centers that are dispersed 
throughout the nesting areas (Marcovaldi et al., 2005).
    In terms of non-native vegetation, the majority of nesting beaches 
in northern Bahia, where loggerhead nesting density is highest in 
Brazil (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007), have coconut plantations 
dating back to the 17th century backing them (Naro-Maciel et al., 
1999). It is impossible to assess whether this structured habitat has 
resulted in long-term changes to the loggerhead nesting rookery in 
northern Bahia.
Neritic/Oceanic Zones
    Human activities that impact bottom habitat in the loggerhead 
neritic and oceanic zones in the South Atlantic Ocean include fishing 
practices, channel dredging, sand extraction, marine pollution, and 
climate change (e.g., Ibe, 1996; Silva et al., 1997). General human 
activities have altered ocean ecosystems, as identified by ecosystem 
models (http://www.lme.noaa.gov). On the western side of the South 
Atlantic, the Brazil Current LME region is characterized by the Global 
International Waters Assessment as suffering severe impacts in the 
areas of pollution, coastal habitat modification, and overexploitation 
of fish stocks (Marques et al., 2004). The Patagonian Shelf LME is 
moderately affected by pollution, habitat modification, and overfishing 
(Mugetti et al., 2004). On the eastern side of the South Atlantic, the 
Benguela Current LME has been characterized as moderately impacted in 
the area of overfishing, with future conditions expected to worsen by 
the Global International Waters Assessment (Prochazka et al., 2005). 
Climate change also may result in future trophic changes, thus 
impacting loggerhead prey abundance and/or distribution.
    In summary, we find that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by ongoing changes in its 
marine habitats as a result of land and water use practices as 
considered above in Factor A. However, sufficient data are not 
available to assess the significance of these threats to the 
persistence of this DPS.
B. Overutilization for Commercial, Recreational, Scientific, or 
Educational Purposes
    Deliberate hunting of loggerheads for their meat, shells, and eggs 
is reduced from previous exploitation levels, but still exists. Limited 
numbers of eggs are taken for human consumption in Brazil, but the 
relative amount is considered minor when compared to historical rates 
of egg collection (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999; Marcovaldi et al., 
2005; Almeida and Mendes, 2007). Use of sea turtles including 
loggerheads for medicinal purposes occasionally occurs in northeastern 
Brazil (Alves and Rosa, 2006). Use of bycaught loggerheads for 
subsistence and medicinal purposes is likely to occur in southern 
Atlantic Africa, based on information from central West Africa (Fretey, 
2001; Fretey et al., 2007).
    In summary, the harvest of loggerheads in Brazil for their meat, 
shells, and eggs likely was a factor that contributed to the historic 
decline of this DPS. However, current harvest levels are greatly 
reduced from historic levels. Although harvest is known to still occur 
in Brazil and southern Atlantic Africa, it no longer appears to be a 
significant threat to the persistence of this DPS.
C. Disease or Predation
    The potential exists for diseases and endoparasites to impact 
loggerheads found in the South Atlantic Ocean. There have been five 
confirmed cases of fibropapillomatosis in loggerheads in Brazil 
(Baptistotte, 2007). There is no indication that this disease poses a 
major threat for this species in the eastern South Atlantic (Formia et 
al., 2007).
    Eggs and nests in Brazil experience depredation, primarily by foxes 
(Marcovaldi and Laurent, 1996). Nests laid by loggerheads in the 
southern Atlantic African coastline, if any, likely experience similar 
predation pressures to those on nests of other species laid in the same 
area (e.g., jackals depredate green turtle nests in Angola; Weir et 
al., 2007).
    Loggerheads in the South Atlantic also may be impacted by harmful 
algal blooms (Gilbert et al., 2005).
    In summary, although disease and predation are known to occur, 
quantitative data are not sufficient to assess the degree of impact of 
these threats on the persistence of this DPS.
D. Inadequacy of Existing Regulatory Mechanisms
International Instruments
    The BRT identified several regulatory mechanisms that apply to 
loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the South Atlantic Ocean. 
The reader is directed to sections 5.1.4. and 5.2.9.4. of the Status 
Review for a discussion of these regulatory mechanisms. Hykle (2002) 
and Tiwari (2002) have reviewed the effectiveness of some of these 
international instruments. The problems with existing international 
treaties are often that they have not realized their full potential, do 
not include some key countries, do not specifically address sea turtle 
conservation, and are handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority 
to enforce environmental regulations. The ineffectiveness of 
international treaties and national legislation is oftentimes due to 
the lack of motivation or obligation by countries to implement and 
enforce them. A thorough discussion of this topic is available in a 
special 2002 issue of the Journal of International Wildlife Law

[[Page 12640]]

and Policy: International Instruments and Marine Turtle Conservation 
(Hykle 2002).
National Legislation and Protection
    Fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South Atlantic Ocean is 
substantial (see Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South 
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch in 
the South Atlantic, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be 
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future 
because of the diversity and magnitude of the commercial and artisanal 
fisheries operating in the South Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive 
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on 
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies.
    In summary, our review of regulatory mechanisms under Factor D 
demonstrates that although regulatory mechanisms are in place that 
should address direct and incidental take of South Atlantic Ocean 
loggerheads, these regulatory mechanisms are insufficient or are not 
being implemented effectively to address the needs of loggerheads. We 
find that the threat from the inadequacy of existing regulatory 
mechanisms for fishery bycatch (Factor E) is significant relative to 
the persistence of this DPS.
E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Affecting Its Continued Existence
Incidental Bycatch in Fishing Gear
    Incidental capture of sea turtles in artisanal and commercial 
fisheries is a significant threat to the survivability of loggerheads 
in the South Atlantic. Sea turtles may be caught in pelagic and 
demersal longlines, drift and set gillnets, bottom and mid-water 
trawling, fishing dredges, pound nets and weirs, haul and purse seines, 
pots and traps, and hook and line gear. In the western South Atlantic, 
there are various efforts aimed at mitigating bycatch of sea turtles in 
various fisheries. In Brazil, there is the National Action Plan to 
Reduce Incidental Capture of Sea Turtles in Fisheries, coordinated by 
Projeto TAMAR (Marcovaldi et al., 2006). This action plan focuses on 
both artisanal and commercial fisheries, and collects data directly 
from fishers as well as on-board observers. Although loggerheads have 
been observed as bycatch in all fishing gear and methods identified 
above, Marcovaldi et al. (2006) have identified longlining as the major 
source of incidental capture of loggerhead turtles. Reports of 
loggerhead bycatch by pelagic longlines come mostly from the southern 
portion of the Brazilian Exclusive Economic Zone, between 20[deg] S and 
35[deg] S latitude. Bugoni et al. (2008) reported a loggerhead bycatch 
rate of 0.52 juvenile turtles/1000 hooks by surface longlines targeting 
dolphinfish. Pinedo et al. (2004) reported seasonal variation in 
bycatch of juvenile loggerheads (and other sea turtle species) by 
pelagic longlines in the same region of Brazil, with the highest rates 
(1.85 turtles/1000 hooks) in the austral spring. Kotas et al. (2004) 
reported the highest rates of loggerhead bycatch (greater than 10 
turtles/1000 hooks) by pelagic longlines in the austral summer/fall 
months. A study based on several years found that the highest rate of 
loggerhead bycatch in pelagic longlines off Uruguay and Brazil was in 
the late austral summer month of February: 2.72 turtles/1000 hooks 
(Lopez-Medilaharsu et al., 2007). Sales et al. (2008) reported a 
loggerhead bycatch rate of 0.87/1000 hooks near the Rio Grande Elevacao 
do Rio Grande, about 600 nautical miles off the coast of southern 
Brazil. In Uruguayan waters, the primary fisheries with loggerhead 
bycatch are bottom trawlers and longlines (Domingo et al., 2006). 
Domingo et al. (2008) reported bycatch rates of loggerheads of 0.9-1.3/
1000 hooks by longline deployed south of 30[deg] S latitude. In waters 
off Argentina, bottom trawlers also catch some loggerheads (Domingo et 
al., 2006).
    In the eastern South Atlantic, sea turtle bycatch in fisheries has 
been documented from Gabon to South Africa (Fretey, 2001). Limited data 
are available on bycatch of loggerheads in coastal fisheries, although 
loggerheads are known (or strongly suspected) to occur in coastal 
waters from Gabon to South Africa (Fretey, 2001; Bal et al., 2007; Weir 
et al., 2007). Coastal fisheries implicated in bycatch of loggerheads 
and other turtles include gillnets, beach seines, and trawlers (Bal et 
al., 2007).
    In the high seas, longlines are used by fishing boats targeting 
tuna and swordfish in the eastern South Atlantic. A recent study by 
Honig et al. (2008) estimates 7,600-120,000 sea turtles are 
incidentally captured by commercial longlines fishing in the Benguela 
Current LME; 60 percent of these are loggerheads. Petersen et al. 
(2007, 2009) reported that the rate of loggerhead bycatch in South 
African longliners was around 0.02 turtles/1000 hooks, largely in the 
Benguela Current LME. In the middle of the South Atlantic, loggerhead 
bycatch by longlines was reported to be low, relative to other regions 
in the Atlantic (Mejuto et al., 2008).
Other Manmade and Natural Impacts
    Other anthropogenic impacts, such as boat strikes and ingestion or 
entanglement in marine debris, also apply to loggerheads in the South 
Atlantic. Bugoni et al. (2001) have suggested the ingestion of plastic 
and oil may contribute to loggerhead mortality on the southern coast of 
Brazil. Plastic marine debris in the eastern South Atlantic also may 
pose a problem for loggerheads and other sea turtles (Ryan, 1996). 
Similar to other areas of the world, climate change and sea level rise 
have the potential to impact loggerheads in the South Atlantic.
    Oil reserve exploration and extraction activities also may pose a 
threat for sea turtles in the South Atlantic. Seismic surveys in Brazil 
and Angola have recorded sea turtle occurrences near the seismic work 
(Gurjao et al., 2005; Weir et al., 2007). While no sea turtle takes 
were directly observed on these surveys, increased equipment and 
presence in the water that is associated with these activities also 
increases the likelihood of sea turtle interactions (Weir et al., 
2007).
    Natural environmental events may affect loggerheads in the South 
Atlantic. However, while a rare hurricane hit Brazil in March 2004, 
typically hurricanes do not occur in the South Atlantic (McTaggart-
Cowan et al., 2006). This is generally due to higher windspeeds aloft, 
preventing the storms from gaining height and therefore strength.
    In summary, we find that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS of the 
loggerhead sea turtle is negatively affected by both natural and 
manmade impacts as described above in Factor E. Within Factor E, we 
find that fishery bycatch, particularly bycatch mortality of 
loggerheads from pelagic longline fisheries, is a significant threat to 
the persistence of this DPS.

Extinction Risk Assessments

    In addition to the status evaluation and listing factor analysis 
provided above, the BRT conducted two independent analyses to assess 
extinction risks of the nine identified DPSs. These analyses provided 
additional insights into the status of the nine DPSs. The first 
analysis used the diffusion approximation approach based on time series 
of counts of nesting females (Lande and Orzack, 1988; Dennis et al., 
1991; Holmes, 2001; Snover and Heppell, 2009). This

[[Page 12641]]

analysis provided a metric (susceptibility to quasi-extinction or SQE) 
to determine if the probability of a population's risk of quasi-
extinction is high enough to warrant a particular listing status 
(Snover and Heppell, 2009). The term ``quasi-extinction'' is defined by 
Ginzburg et al. (1982) as the minimum number of individuals (often 
females) below which the population is likely to be critically and 
immediately imperiled. The diffusion approximation approach is based on 
stochastic projections of observed trends and variability in the 
numbers of mature females at various nesting beaches. The second 
approach used a deterministic stage-based population model that focused 
on determining the effects of known anthropogenic mortalities on each 
DPS with respect to the vital rates of the species. Anthropogenic 
mortalities were added to natural mortalities and possible ranges of 
population growth rates were computed as another metric of population 
health. Because this approach is based on matrix models, the BRT 
referred to it as a threat matrix analysis. This approach focused on 
how additional mortalities may affect the future growth and recovery of 
a loggerhead turtle DPS. The first approach (SQE) was solely based on 
the available time-series data on the numbers of nests at nesting 
beaches, whereas the second approach (threat matrix analysis) was based 
on the known biology of the species, natural mortality rates, and 
anthropogenic mortalities, independent of observed nesting beach data.
    The BRT found that for three of five DPSs with sufficient data to 
conduct the SQE analysis (North Pacific Ocean, South Pacific Ocean, and 
Northwest Atlantic Ocean), these DPSs were at risk of declining to 
levels that are less than 30 percent of the current numbers of nesting 
females (quasi-extinction thresholds < 0.30). The BRT found that for 
the other two DPSs with sufficient data to conduct the SQE analysis 
(Southwest Indian Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean), the risk of 
declining to any level of quasi-extinction is negligible using the SQE 
analysis because of the observed increases in the nesting females in 
both DPSs. There were not enough data to conduct the SQE analysis for 
the North Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, Northeast 
Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea DPSs.
    According to the threat matrix analysis using experts' opinions in 
the matrix model framework, the BRT determined that all loggerhead 
turtle DPSs have the potential to decline in the future. Although some 
DPSs are indicating increasing trends at nesting beaches (Southwest 
Indian Ocean and South Atlantic Ocean), available information about 
anthropogenic threats to juvenile and adult loggerheads in neritic and 
oceanic environments indicate possible unsustainable additional 
mortalities. According to the threat matrix analysis, the potential for 
future decline is greatest for the North Indian Ocean, Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and South 
Atlantic Ocean DPSs.
    The BRT's approach to the risk analysis presented several important 
points. First, the lack of precise estimates of age at first 
reproduction hindered precise assessment of the status of any DPS. 
Within the range of possible ages at first reproduction of the species, 
however, some DPSs could decline rapidly regardless of the exact age at 
first reproduction because of high anthropogenic mortality.
    Second, the lack of precise estimates of anthropogenic mortalities 
resulted in a wide range of possible status using the threat matrix 
analysis. For the best case scenario, a DPS may be considered healthy, 
whereas for the worst case scenario the same DPS may be considered as 
declining rapidly. The precise prognosis of each DPS relies on 
obtaining precise estimates of anthropogenic mortality and vital rates.
    Third, the assessment of a population without the information on 
natural and anthropogenic mortalities is difficult. Because of the 
longevity of the species, loggerhead turtles require high survival 
rates throughout their life to maintain a population. Anthropogenic 
mortality on the species occurs at every stage of their life, where the 
exact magnitude of the mortality is often unknown. As described in the 
Status Review, the upper end of natural mortality can be computed from 
available information.
    Nesting beach count data for the North Pacific Ocean DPS indicated 
a decline of loggerhead turtle nesting in the last 20 years. The SQE 
approach reflected the observed decline. However, in the threat matrix 
analysis, the asymptotic population growth rates ([lambda]) with 
anthropogenic mortalities ranged from less than one to greater than 
one, indicating a large uncertainty about the future of the DPS. 
Fishery bycatch along the coast of the Baja Peninsula and the nearshore 
waters of Japan are the main known sources of mortalities. Mortalities 
in the high-seas, where a large number of juvenile loggerhead turtles 
reside (Kobayashi et al., 2008), from fishery bycatch are still 
unknown.
    The SQE approach indicated that, based on nest count data for the 
past 3 decades, the South Pacific Ocean DPS is at risk and thus likely 
to decline in the future. These results were based on recently 
published nesting census data for loggerhead turtles at index beaches 
in eastern Australia (Limpus, 2009). The threat matrix analysis 
provided uncertain results: in the case of the lowest anthropogenic 
threats, the South Pacific Ocean DPS may recover, but in the worst-case 
scenario, the DPS may substantially decline in the future. These 
results are largely driven by the ongoing threats to juvenile and adult 
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occur throughout the South 
Pacific Ocean and the uncertainty in estimated mortalities.
    For the North Indian Ocean DPS, there were no nesting beach data 
available to conduct the SQE analysis. The threat matrix analysis 
indicated a decline of the DPS in the future, primarily as a result of 
fishery bycatch in neritic habitats. Cumulatively, substantial threats 
may exist for eggs/hatchlings. Because of the lack of precise estimates 
of bycatch, however, the range of possible [lambda] values was large.
    Similar to the North Indian Ocean DPS, no nesting beach data were 
available for the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS. The level of 
anthropogenic mortalities is low for the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
DPS, based on the best available information, resulting in relatively 
large P[lambda] (the proportion of [lambda] values greater 
than 1) and a narrow range. The greatest threats for the Southeast 
Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS exist for the first year of the life stages 
(eggs and hatchlings).
    For the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS, the SQE approach, based on a 
37-year time series of nesting female counts at Tongaland, South Africa 
(1963-1999), indicated this segment of the population, while small, has 
increased, and the likelihood of quasi-extinction is negligible. The 
threat matrix analysis, on the other hand, provided a wide range of 
results: in the best case scenario, the DPS would grow slowly, whereas 
in the worst case scenario, the DPS would decline in the future. The 
results of the threat matrix analysis were driven by uncertainty in 
anthropogenic mortalities in the neritic environment and the eggs/
hatchlings stage.
    Within the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, four of the five 
identified recovery units have adequate time series data for applying 
the SQE analysis; these were the Northern, Peninsular Florida, Northern 
Gulf of Mexico, and Greater Caribbean Recovery Units. The SQE analysis 
indicated differences in SQEs

[[Page 12642]]

among these four recovery units. Although the Northern Gulf of Mexico 
Recovery Unit indicated the worst result among the four recovery units 
assessed the length of the time series was shortest (12 data points). 
The other three recovery units, however, appeared to show similar 
declining trends, which were also indicated through the SQE approach. 
The threat matrix analysis indicated a likely decline of the DPS in the 
future. The greatest threats to the DPS result from cumulative fishery 
bycatch in neritic and oceanic habitats.
    Sufficient nesting beach data for the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS 
were not available to conduct the SQE analysis. The high likelihood of 
the predicted decline of the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS from the 
threat matrix analysis is largely driven by the ongoing harvest of 
nesting females, low hatchling and emergence success, and mortality of 
juvenile and adult turtles from fishery bycatch throughout the 
Northeast Atlantic Ocean. The threat matrix analysis indicated a 
consistently pessimistic future for the DPS.
    Representative nesting beach data for the Mediterranean Sea DPS 
were not available to conduct the SQE analysis. The threat matrix 
analysis indicated the DPS is likely to decline in the future. The 
primary threats are fishery bycatch in neritic and oceanic habitats.
    The two approaches for determining risks to the South Atlantic 
Ocean DPS provided different, although not incompatible, results. The 
SQE approach indicated that, based on nest count data for the past 2 
decades, the population was unlikely to decline in the future. These 
results were based on recently published nesting beach trend analyses 
by Marcovaldi and Chaloupka (2007) and this QET analysis was consistent 
with their conclusions. However, the SQE approach was based on past 
performance of the DPS, specifically only nesting beach data, and did 
not address ongoing or future threats to segments of the DPS that might 
not have been or might not yet be reflected by nest count data. The 
threat matrix approach indicated that the South Atlantic Ocean DPS is 
likely to decline in the future. These results were largely driven by 
the ongoing mortality threats to juvenile turtles from fishery bycatch 
that occurs throughout the South Atlantic Ocean. Although conservation 
efforts by national and international groups in the South Atlantic are 
currently working toward mitigating bycatch in the South Atlantic, it 
is unlikely that this source of mortality can be greatly reduced in the 
near future, largely due to inadequate funding and knowledge gaps that 
together inhibit implementation of large-scale management actions 
(Domingo et al., 2006).

Conservation Efforts

    When considering the listing of a species, section 4(b)(1)(A) of 
the ESA requires us to consider efforts by any State, foreign nation, 
or political subdivision of a State or foreign nation to protect the 
species. Such efforts would include measures by Native American Tribes 
and organizations. Also, Federal, Tribal, State, and foreign recovery 
actions (16 U.S.C. 1533(f)), and Federal consultation requirements (16 
U.S.C. 1536) constitute conservation measures. In addition to 
identifying these efforts, under the ESA and our policy implementing 
this provision (68 FR 15100; March 28, 2003) we must evaluate the 
certainty of an effort's effectiveness on the basis of whether the 
effort or plan establishes specific conservation objectives; identifies 
the necessary steps to reduce threats or factors for decline; includes 
quantifiable performance measures for the monitoring of compliance and 
effectiveness; incorporates the principles of adaptive management; is 
likely to be implemented; and is likely to improve the species' 
viability at the time of the listing determination.

North Pacific Ocean DPS

    NMFS has formalized two conservation actions to protect foraging 
loggerheads in the North Pacific Ocean, both of which were implemented 
to reduce loggerhead bycatch in U.S. fisheries. Prior to 2001, the 
Hawaii-based longline fishery had annual interaction levels of 300 to 
500 loggerhead turtles. The temporary closure of the shallow-set 
swordfish fishery in 2001 in large part over concerns of turtle 
interactions brought about the immediate need to develop effective 
solutions to reduce turtle interactions while maintaining the viability 
of the industry. Since the reopening of the swordfish sector in 2004, 
the fishery has operated under strict management measures, including 
the use of large circle hooks and fish bait, restricted annual effort, 
annual caps on loggerhead interactions (17 annually), and 100 percent 
onboard observer coverage (50 CFR 665.3). As a result of these 
measures, loggerhead interactions in the swordfish fishery have been 
reduced by over 90 percent (Gilman et al., 2007). Furthermore, in 2003, 
NMFS implemented a time/area closure in southern California during 
forecasted or existing El Ni[ntilde]o-like conditions to reduce the 
take of loggerheads in the California/Oregon drift gillnet fishery (68 
FR 69963, December 16, 2003). While this closure has not been 
implemented since the passage of these regulations due to the lack of 
conditions occurring in the area, such a closure is expected to reduce 
interactions between the large-mesh gillnet fishery and loggerheads by 
over 70 percent.
    Loggerhead interactions and mortalities with coastal fisheries in 
Mexico and Japan are of concern and are considered a major threat to 
North Pacific loggerhead recovery. NMFS and U.S. non-governmental 
organizations have worked with international entities to: (1) Assess 
bycatch mortality through systematic stranding surveys in Baja 
California Sur, Mexico; (2) reduce interactions and mortalities in two 
bottom-set fisheries in Mexico; (3) conduct gear mitigation trials to 
reduce bycatch in Japanese pound nets; and (4) convey information to 
fishers and other stakeholders through participatory activities, events 
and outreach.
    In 2003, the Grupo Tortuguero's ProCaguama (Operation Loggerhead) 
was initiated to partner directly with fishermen to assess and mitigate 
their bycatch while maintaining fisheries sustainability in Baja 
California, Mexico. ProCaguama's fisher-scientist team discovered the 
highest turtle bycatch rates documented worldwide and has made 
considerable progress in mitigating anthropogenic mortality in Mexican 
waters (Peckham et al., 2007, 2008). As a result of the 2006 and 2007 
tri-national fishermen's exchanges run by ProCaguama, Sea Turtle 
Association of Japan, and the Western Pacific Fisheries Management 
Council, in 2007 a prominent Baja California Sur fleet retired its 
bottom-set longlines. Prior to this closure, the longline fleet 
interacted with an estimated 2,000 loggerheads annually, with nearly 
all (approximately 90 percent) of the takes resulting in mortalities 
(Peckham et al., 2008). Because this fishery no longer exists, 
conservation efforts have resulted in the continued protection of 
nearly 2,000 juvenile loggerheads annually.
    Led by the Mexican wildlife service (Vida Silvestre), a Federal 
loggerhead bycatch reduction task force was organized in 2008 to ensure 
loggerheads the protection they are afforded by Mexican law. The task 
force is comprised of Federal and State agencies, in addition to non-
governmental organizations, to solve the bycatch problem, meeting 
ProCaguama's bottom-up initiatives with complementary top-down 
management and enforcement resources. In 2009, while testing a variety 
of potential solutions, ProCaguama's fisher-scientist

[[Page 12643]]

team demonstrated the commercial viability of substituting bycatch-free 
hook fishing for gillnet fishing. Local fishers are interested in 
adoption of this gear because the technique results in higher quality 
catch offering access to higher-value markets and potentially higher 
sustainability with zero bycatch. From 2010 forward ProCaguama, in 
coordination with the task force, will engineer a market-based bycatch 
solution consisting of hook substitution, training to augment ex-vessel 
fish value, development of fisheries infrastructure, linkage of local 
fleets with regional and international markets, and concurrent 
strengthening of local fisheries management.
    The U.S. has also funded non-governmental organizations to convey 
bycatch solutions to local fishers as well as to educate communities on 
the protection of all sea turtles (i.e., reduce directed harvest). Over 
3,500 coastal citizens are reached through festivals and local outreach 
activities, over 45 local leaders and dozens of fishermen are empowered 
to reduce bycatch and promote sustainable fishing, and 15 university 
and high school students are trained in conservation science. The 
effectiveness of these efforts is difficult to quantify without several 
post-outreach years of documenting reductions in sea turtle strandings, 
directed takes, or bycatch in local fisheries.
    Due to concerns of high adult loggerhead mortality in mid-water 
pound nets, as documented in 2006, Sea Turtle Association of Japan 
researchers began to engage the pound net operators in an effort to 
study the impact and reduce sea turtle bycatch. This work was expanded 
in 2008 with U.S. support and, similar to outreach efforts in Mexico, 
is intended to engage local fishermen in conservation throughout 
several Japanese prefectures. Research opportunities will be developed 
with and for local fishermen in order to assess and mitigate bycatch.
    Since 2003, with the assistance of the U.S., the Sea Turtle 
Association of Japan and, in recent years with the Grupo Tortuguero, 
has conducted nesting beach monitoring and management at several major 
loggerhead nesting beaches, with the intent of increasing the number of 
beaches surveyed and protected. Due to logistical problems and costs, 
the Sea Turtle Association of Japan's program had been limited to five 
primary rookeries. At these areas, hatchling production has been 
augmented through: (1) Relocation of doomed nests; and (2) protection 
of nests in situ from trampling, desiccation, and predation. Between 
2004 and 2008, management activities have been successful with over 
160,000 hatchlings released from relocated nests that would have 
otherwise been lost to inundation or erosion, with many more hatchlings 
produced from in situ nests.
    The U.S. plans to continue supporting this project in the 
foreseeable future, increasing relocation activities at other high-
density nesting beaches, implementing predator control activities to 
reduce predation by raccoon dogs and raccoons, and assessing the 
effects of light pollution at a major nesting beach (Maehama Beach). 
Determination of hatching success will also be initiated at several key 
nesting beaches (Inakahama, Maehama, Yotsuse, and Kurio, all in 
Yakushima) to provide information to support the removal of armoring 
structures and to evaluate the success of relocation and other nest 
protection activities. Outreach and education activities in coastal 
cities will increase public awareness of problems with foot traffic, 
light pollution, and armoring.
    Egg harvest was common in Japan until the 1970s, when several of 
the major nesting areas (notably Yakushima and Miyazaki) led locally 
based efforts to ban or eliminate egg harvest. As a result, egg harvest 
at Japanese nesting beaches was eliminated by the early 1980s.
    The establishment of the Sea Turtle Association of Japan in 1990 
created a network of individuals and organizations conducting sea 
turtle monitoring and conservation activities in Japan for the first 
time. The Sea Turtle Association of Japan also served to standardize 
data collection methods (for tagging and measuring). The Association 
greatly depends on its members around Japan to gather nesting data as 
well as to conduct various conservation measures.
    Shoreline erosion and bycatch are some of the major concerns dealt 
by the Sea Turtle Association of Japan today. Much of Japan's coastline 
is ``armored'' using concrete structures to prevent and minimize 
impacts to coastal communities from natural disasters. These structures 
have resulted in a number of nesting beaches losing sand suitable for 
sea turtle nesting, and nests are often relocated to safe areas or 
hatcheries to protect them from further erosion and inundation. In 
recent years, a portion of the concrete structures at a beach in 
Toyohashi City, Aichi Prefecture, was experimentally removed to create 
better nesting habitat. The Sea Turtle Association of Japan, along with 
various other organizations in Japan, are carrying out discussions with 
local and Federal government agencies to develop further solutions to 
the beach erosion issue and to maintain viable nesting sites. Beach 
erosion and armament still remain one of the most significant threats 
to nesting beaches in Japan.
    While conservation efforts for the North Pacific Ocean DPS are 
substantive and improving and may be reflected in the recent increases 
in the number of nesting females, they still remain inadequate to 
ensure the long-term viability of the population. For example, while 
most of the major nesting beaches are monitored, some of the management 
measures in place are inadequate and may be inappropriate. On some 
beaches, hatchling releases are coordinated with the tourist industry 
or nests are being trampled on or are unprotected. The largest threat 
on the nesting beach, reduced availability of habitat due to heavy 
armament and subsequent erosion, is just beginning to be addressed but 
without immediate attention may ultimately result in the demise of the 
highest density beaches. Efforts to reduce loggerhead bycatch in known 
coastal fisheries off Baja California, Mexico, and Japan is 
encouraging, but concerns remain regarding the mortalities of adult and 
juvenile turtles in mid-water pound nets and the high costs that may be 
involved in replacing and/or mitigating this gear. With these coastal 
fishery threats still emerging, there has not yet been sufficient 
time--or a nationwide understanding of the threat--to develop 
appropriate conservation strategies or work to fully engage with the 
government of Japan. Greater international cooperation and 
implementation of the use of circle hooks in longline fisheries 
operating in the North Pacific Ocean is necessary, as well as 
understanding fishery related impacts in the South China Sea. Further, 
it is suspected that there are substantial impacts from illegal, 
unreported, and unregulated fishing, which we are unable to mitigate 
without additional fisheries management efforts and international 
collaborations. While conservation projects for this population have 
been in place since 2004 for some important areas, efforts in other 
areas are still being developed to address major threats, including 
fisheries bycatch and long-term nesting habitat protection.

South Pacific Ocean DPS

    The New Caledonia Aquarium and NMFS have collaborated since 2007 to 
address and influence management measures of the regional fishery 
management organization. Their intent is to reduce pelagic fishery 
interactions with sea turtles through increased understanding of 
pelagic habitat use by

[[Page 12644]]

South Pacific loggerheads using satellite telemetry, oceanographic 
analysis, and juvenile loggerheads reared at the Aquarium. NMFS 
augments this effort by supporting animal husbandry, education and 
outreach activities coordinated through the New Caledonia Aquarium to 
build capacity, and public awareness regarding turtle conservation in 
general.
    The U.S. has collaborated on at-sea conservation of sea turtles 
with Chile under the U.S.-Chile Fisheries Cooperation Agreement, and 
with Peru under a collaboration with El Instituto del Mar del Peru and 
local non-governmental organizations. Research from this collaboration 
showed that loggerheads of southwestern Pacific stock origin interact 
with commercial and artisanal longline fisheries off the South American 
coast. NMFS has supported efforts by Chile to reduce bycatch and 
mortality by placing observers on vessels who have been trained and 
equipped to dehook, resuscitate, and release loggerheads. Chile also 
has closed the northernmost sector since 2002, where the loggerheads 
interactions occur, to longline fishing (Miguel Donoso, Pacifico Laud, 
personal communication, 2009). Local non-governmental organizations, 
such as Pacifico Laud (Chile), Associacion Pro Delphinus (Peru), and 
Areas Costeras y Recursos Marinos (Peru), have been engaged in outreach 
and conservation activities promoting loggerhead bycatch reduction, 
with support from NMFS.
    Coastal trawl fisheries also threaten juvenile and adult 
loggerheads foraging off eastern Australia, particularly the northern 
Australian prawn fishery (estimated to take between 5,000 and 6,000 
turtles annually in the late 1980s/early 1990s). However, since the 
introduction and requirement for these fisheries to use turtle excluder 
devices in 2000, that threat has been drastically reduced, to an 
estimated 200 turtles/year (Robins et al., 2002a). Turtle excluder 
devices were also made mandatory in the Queensland East Coast trawl 
fisheries (2000), the Torres Strait prawn fishery (2002), and the 
Western Australian prawn and scallop fisheries (2002) (Limpus, 2009).
    Predation of loggerhead eggs by foxes was a major threat to nests 
laid in eastern Australia through the late 1970s, particularly on Mon 
Repos and Wreck Rock. Harassment by local residents and researchers, as 
well as baiting and shooting, discouraged foxes from encroaching on the 
nesting beach at Mon Repos so that by the mid-1970s, predation levels 
had declined to trivial levels. At Wreck Rock, fox predation was 
intense through the mid-1980s, with a 90-95 percent predation rate 
documented. Fox baiting was introduced at Wreck Rock and some adjacent 
beaches in 1987, and has been successful at reducing the predation rate 
to low levels by the late 1990s (Limpus, 2009). To reduce the risk of 
hatchling disorientation due to artificial lighting inland of the 
nesting beaches adjacent to Mon Repos and Heron Island, low pressure 
sodium vapor lights have been installed or, where lighting has not been 
controlled, eggs are relocated to artificial nests on nearby dark 
beaches. Limpus (2009) reported that hatchling mortality due to altered 
light horizons on the Woongara coast has been reduced to a handful of 
clutches annually.
    While most of the conservation efforts for the South Pacific Ocean 
DPS are long-term, substantive, and improving, given the low number of 
nesting females, the declining trends, and major threats that are just 
beginning to be addressed, they still remain inadequate to ensure the 
long-term viability of the population. The use of TEDs in most of the 
major trawl fisheries in Australia has certainly reduced the bycatch of 
juvenile and adult turtles, as has the reduction in fox predation on 
important nesting beaches. However, the intense effort by longline 
fisheries in the South Pacific, particularly from artisanal fleets 
operating out of Peru, and its estimated impact on this loggerhead 
population, particularly oceanic juveniles, remains a significant 
threat that is just beginning to be addressed by most participating 
countries, including the regional fishery management council(s) that 
manage many of these fleets. Modeling by Chaloupka (2003) showed the 
impact of this fleet poses a greater risk than either fox predation at 
major nesting beaches (90 percent egg loss per year during unmanaged 
periods) or past high mortalities in coastal trawl fisheries. The 
recent sea turtle conservation resolution by the Western and Central 
Pacific Fisheries Commission, requiring longline fleets to use specific 
gear and collect information on bycatch, is encouraging but took effect 
in January 2010, so improvement in the status of this population may 
not be realized for many years. Potentially important pelagic foraging 
habitat in areas of high fishing intensity remains poorly studied but 
is improving through U.S. and international collaborations. While a 
comprehensive conservation program for this population has been in 
place for important nesting beaches, efforts in other areas are still 
being developed to address major threats, including fisheries bycatch.

North Indian Ocean DPS

    The main threats to North Indian Ocean loggerheads are fishery 
bycatch and nesting beach habitat loss and degradation. Royal Decree 
53/81 prohibits the hunting of turtles and eggs in Oman. The Ministry 
of Environment and Climate Affairs (MECA) and Environmental Society of 
Oman (ESO) are collaborating to carry out a number of conservation 
measures at Masirah Island for the nesting loggerhead population. First 
and foremost are standardized annual nesting surveys to monitor 
population trends. Standardized surveys were first implemented in 2008. 
Less complete nesting surveys have been conducted in some previous 
years beginning in 1977, but the data have yet to be adequately 
analyzed to determine their usefulness in determining population size 
and trends. Nine kilometers of nesting habitat within the Masirah Air 
Force Base is largely protected from tourist development but remains 
subject to light pollution from military operations. The remaining 50 
kilometers of loggerhead nesting beaches are not protected from egg 
harvest, lighting, or beach driving. Currently, MECA is in the process 
of developing a protected area proposal for Masirah Island that will 
address needed protection of nesting beaches, including protection from 
egg collection and beach driving. In the meantime, development is 
continuing and it is uncertain how much, when, and if nesting habitat 
will receive adequate protection. MECA is beginning to regulate 
artificial lighting in new development. In 2010, a major outreach 
effort in the form of a Turtle Celebration Day is planned at Masirah 
Island to raise greater awareness of the local communities about the 
global importance of the Masirah Island loggerhead nesting population 
and to increase community involvement in conservation efforts. Nesting 
surveys are also being conducted on the Halaniyat Islands. There are no 
specific efforts underway to designate Halaniyat nesting beaches as 
Protected Areas in the face of proposed development plans. Although 
important management actions are underway on the nesting beaches, their 
effectiveness has yet to be determined and the potential for strong 
habitat protection and restoration of degraded nesting habitat remains 
uncertain. At present, hatchling production is not measured.
    The only research that has been conducted on the nesting population 
to date was a study of internesting and post-nesting movements 
conducted in 2006 when 20 nesting females were

[[Page 12645]]

instrumented with satellite transmitters. This research identified 
important inter-seasonal foraging grounds but is considered incomplete, 
and additional nesting females will be satellite tagged in 2010-2012 to 
assess clutch frequency, interactions with local fisheries, and inter-
nesting and post-nesting movements. In 2009, efforts to investigate 
loggerhead bycatch in gillnet fisheries at Masirah were initiated, and 
some fisherman have agreed to cooperate and document bycatch in 2010.
    While conservation efforts for the North Indian Ocean loggerhead 
DPS are substantive and improving, they still remain inadequate to 
ensure the long-term viability of the population. For example, there is 
currently no assessment of hatchling production on the main nesting 
beaches, no efforts underway to restore the largely degraded nesting 
habitat on the major nesting beaches, and little understanding or 
knowledge of foraging grounds for juveniles or adults and the extent of 
their interactions with fisheries. There is no information on bycatch 
from fisheries off the main nesting beaches other than reports that 
this bycatch occurs. A comprehensive conservation program for this 
population is under development, but is incomplete relative to 
fisheries bycatch and long-term nesting habitat protection.

Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS

    The level of anthropogenic mortalities is low for the Southeast 
Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS, based on the best available information. 
However, there are many known opportunities for conservation efforts 
that would aid recovery. Some significant conservation efforts are 
underway.
    One of the principal nesting beaches for this DPS, Australia's Dirk 
Hartog Island, is part of the Shark Bay World Heritage Area and was 
recently announced to become part of Australia's National Park System. 
This designation may facilitate monitoring of nesting beaches and 
enforcement of prohibitions on direct take of loggerheads and their 
eggs. Loggerheads are listed as Endangered under Australia's 
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act of 1999.
    Conservation efforts on nesting beaches have included invasive 
predator control. On the North West Cape and the beaches of the 
Ningaloo coast of mainland Australia, a long established feral European 
red fox (Vulpes vulpes) population preyed heavily on eggs and is 
thought to be responsible for the lower numbers of nesting turtles on 
the mainland beaches (Baldwin et al., 2003). Fox populations have been 
eradicated on Dirk Hartog Island and Murion Islands (Baldwin et al., 
2003), and threat abatement plans have been implemented for the control 
of foxes (1999) and feral pigs (2005).
    The international regulatory mechanisms described in Section 5.1.4. 
of the Status Review apply to loggerheads found in the Southeast Indo-
Pacific Ocean. In addition, loggerheads of this DPS benefit from the 
Indian Ocean-South-East Asian Marine Turtle Memorandum of Understanding 
(IOSEA). Efforts facilitated by IOSEA have focused on reducing threats, 
conserving important habitat, exchanging scientific data, increasing 
public awareness and participation, promoting regional cooperation, and 
seeking resources for implementation. Currently, there are 30 IOSEA 
signatory states.
    In 2000, the use of turtle excluder devices in the Northern 
Australian Prawn Fishery (NPF) was made mandatory. Prior to the use of 
TEDs in this fishery, the NPF annually took between 5,000 and 6,000 sea 
turtles as bycatch, with a mortality rate estimated to be 40 percent 
(Poiner and Harris, 1996). Since the mandatory use of TEDs has been in 
effect, the annual bycatch of sea turtles in the NPF has dropped to 
less than 200 sea turtles per year, with a mortality rate of 
approximately 22 percent (based on recent years). Beginning progress 
has been made to measure the threat of incidental capture of sea 
turtles in other artisanal and commercial fisheries in the Southeast 
Indo-Pacific Ocean (Lewison et al., 2004; Limpus, 2009), however, the 
data remain inadequate for stock assessment.
    As in other DPSs, persistent marine debris poses entanglement and 
ingestion hazards to loggerheads. In 2009, Australia's Department of 
the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts published a threat 
abatement plan for the impacts of marine debris on vertebrate marine 
life.
    In spite of these conservation efforts, considerable uncertainty in 
the status of this DPS lies with inadequate efforts to measure bycatch 
in the region, a short time-series of monitoring on nesting beaches, 
and missing vital rates data necessary for population assessments.

Southwest Indian Ocean DPS

    The Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is small but has experienced an 
increase in numbers of nesting females. Although there is considerable 
uncertainty in anthropogenic mortalities, especially in the water, the 
DPS may have benefitted from important conservation efforts at the 
nesting beaches.
    All principal nesting beaches, centered in South Africa, are within 
protected areas (Baldwin et al., 2003). In Mozambique, nesting beaches 
in the Maputo Special Reserve (approximately 60 kilometers of nesting 
beach) and in the Paradise Islands are also within protected areas 
(Baldwin et al., 2003; Costa et al., 2007).
    The international regulatory mechanisms described in Section 5.1.4. 
of the Status Review apply to loggerheads found in the Southwest Indian 
Ocean. In addition, loggerheads of this DPS benefit from the Indian 
Ocean-South-East Asian Marine Turtle Memorandum of Understanding 
(IOSEA) and the Nairobi Convention for the Protection, Management and 
Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Eastern 
African Region.
    In spite of these conservation efforts, caution in the status of 
this DPS lies with its small population size, inadequate efforts to 
measure bycatch in the region, and missing vital rates data necessary 
for population assessments.

Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS

    The main threats to Northwest Atlantic Ocean loggerheads include 
fishery bycatch mortality, particularly in gillnet, longline, and trawl 
fisheries; nesting beach habitat loss and degradation (e.g., beachfront 
lighting, coastal armoring); and ingestion of marine debris during the 
epipelagic lifestage. In addition, mortality from vessel strikes is 
increasing and likely also a significant threat to this DPS.
    Mortality resulting from domestic and international commercial 
fishing ranks among the most significant threats to Northwest Atlantic 
loggerheads. Fishing gear types include gillnets, trawls, hook and line 
(e.g., longlines), seines, dredges, and various types of pots/traps. 
Among these, gillnets, longlines, and trawl gear collectively result in 
tens of thousands of Northwest Atlantic loggerhead deaths annually 
throughout their range (see for example, Lewison et al., 2004; NMFS, 
2002, 2004).
    Considerable effort has been expended since the 1980s to document 
and reduce commercial fishing bycatch mortality. NMFS has implemented 
observer programs in many Federally managed and some State-managed 
fisheries to collect turtle bycatch data and estimate mortality. NMFS, 
working with industry and other partners, has reduced bycatch in some 
fisheries by developing technological solutions to prevent capture or 
to allow most turtles to escape without harm (e.g., TEDs), by

[[Page 12646]]

implementing time and area closures to prevent interactions from 
occurring (e.g., prohibitions on gillnet fishing along the mid-Atlantic 
coast during the periods of high loggerhead abundance), and by 
modifying gear (e.g., requirements to reduce mesh size in the leaders 
of pound nets to prevent entanglement, requirements to use large circle 
hooks with certain bait types in segments of the pelagic longline 
fishery). NMFS is currently working to implement a coastwide, 
comprehensive strategy to reduce bycatch of sea turtles in State and 
Federal fisheries in the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico. This 
approach was developed to address sea turtle bycatch issues on a per-
gear basis, with a goal of developing and implementing coastwide 
solutions for reducing turtle bycatch inshore, nearshore, and offshore.
    The development and implementation of TEDs in the shrimp trawl 
fishery is arguably the most significant conservation accomplishment 
for Northwest Atlantic loggerheads in the marine environment since 
their listing. In the southeast U.S. and Gulf of Mexico, TEDs have been 
mandatory in shrimp and flounder trawls for over a decade. However, 
TEDs are not required in all trawl fisheries, and significant 
loggerhead mortality continues in some trawl fisheries. In addition, 
enforcement of TED regulations depends on available resources, and 
illegal or improperly installed TEDs continue to contribute to 
mortality.
    Gillnets of various mesh sizes are used extensively to harvest fish 
in the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. All size classes of 
loggerheads in coastal waters are prone to entanglement in gillnets, 
and, generally, the larger the mesh size the more likely that turtles 
will become entangled. State resource agencies and NMFS have been 
addressing this issue on several fronts. In the southeast U.S., 
gillnets are prohibited in the State waters of South Carolina, Georgia, 
Florida, and Texas and are restricted to fishing for pompano and mullet 
in saltwater areas of Louisiana. Reducing bycatch of loggerheads in the 
remaining State and Federally regulated gillnet fisheries of the U.S. 
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico has not been fully accomplished. NMFS has 
addressed the issue for several Federally managed fisheries, such as 
the large-mesh gillnet fishery (primarily for monkfish) along the 
Atlantic coast, where gillnets larger than 8-inch stretched mesh are 
now regulated in North Carolina and Virginia through rolling closures 
timed to match the northward migration of loggerheads along the mid-
Atlantic coast in late spring and early summer. The State of North 
Carolina, working with NMFS through the ESA section 10 process, has 
been making some progress in reducing bycatch of loggerheads in gillnet 
fisheries operating in Pamlico Sound. The large mesh driftnet fishery 
for sharks off the Atlantic coast of Florida and Georgia remains a 
concern as do gillnet fisheries operating elsewhere in the range of the 
DPS, including Mexico and Cuba.
    Observer programs have documented significant bycatch of 
loggerheads in the U.S. longline fishery operating in the Atlantic 
Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. In recent years, NMFS has dedicated 
significant funding and effort to address this bycatch issue. In 
partnership with academia and industry, NMFS has funded and conducted 
field experiments in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean to develop gear 
modifications that eliminate or significantly reduce loggerhead 
bycatch. As a result of these experiments, NMFS now requires the use of 
circle hooks fleet wide and larger circle hooks in combination with 
whole finfish bait in the Northeast Distant area (69 FR 40734, June 1, 
2004).
    The incidental capture and mortality of loggerheads by 
international longline fleets operating in the North Atlantic Ocean and 
Mediterranean Sea is of great concern. The U.S. has been attempting to 
work through Regional Fisheries Management Organizations, such as the 
International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, to 
encourage member nations to adopt gear modifications (e.g., large 
circle hooks) that have been shown to significantly reduce loggerhead 
bycatch. To date, limited success in reducing loggerhead bycatch has 
been achieved in these international forums.
    Although numerous efforts are underway to reduce loggerhead bycatch 
in fisheries, and many positive actions have been implemented, it is 
unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced 
across the range of the DPS in the near future because of the diversity 
and magnitude of the fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the 
lack of comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies.
    In the southeast U.S., nest protection efforts have been 
implemented on the majority of nesting beaches, and progress has been 
made in reducing mortality from human-related impacts on the nesting 
beach. A key effort has been the acquisition of Archie Carr National 
Wildlife Refuge in Florida, where nesting densities often exceed 600 
nests per km (1,000 nests per mile). Over 60 percent of the available 
beachfront acquisitions for the Refuge have been completed as the 
result of a multi-agency land acquisition effort. In addition, 14 
additional refuges, as well as numerous coastal national seashores, 
military installations, and State parks in the Southeast where 
loggerheads regularly nest are also provided protection. However, 
despite these efforts, alteration of the coastline continues, and 
outside of publicly owned lands, coastal development and associated 
coastal armoring remains a serious threat.
    Efforts are also ongoing to reduce light pollution on nesting 
beaches. A significant number of local governments in the southeast 
U.S. have enacted lighting ordinances designed to reduce the effects of 
artificial lighting on sea turtles. However, enforcement of the 
lighting ordinances varies considerably.
    With regard to marine debris, the MARPOL Convention (International 
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as 
modified by the Protocol of 1978) is the main international convention 
that addresses prevention of pollution (including oil, chemicals, 
harmful substances in packaged form, sewage, and garbage) of the marine 
environment by ships from operational or accidental causes. However, 
challenges remain to implementation and enforcement of the MARPOL 
Convention, and on its own the Convention does not suffice to prevent 
all instances of marine pollution.
    The seriousness of the threat caused by vessel strikes to 
loggerheads in the Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico cannot be overstated. 
This growing problem is particularly difficult to address. In some 
cases, NMFS, through section 7 of the ESA, has worked with the U.S. 
Coast Guard in an attempt to reduce the probability of vessel strikes 
during permitted offshore race events. However, most vessel strikes 
occur outside of these venues and the growing number of licensed 
vessels, especially inshore and nearshore, exacerbates the conflict.
    A number of regulatory instruments at international, regional, 
national, and local levels have been developed that provide legal 
protection for loggerhead sea turtles globally and within the Northwest 
Atlantic Ocean. The Status Review identifies and includes a discussion 
of these regulatory instruments (Conant et al., 2009). The

[[Page 12647]]

problems with existing international treaties are often that they have 
not realized their full potential, do not include some key countries, 
do not specifically address sea turtle conservation, and are 
handicapped by the lack of a sovereign authority to enforce 
environmental regulations.
    In summary, while conservation efforts for the Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean loggerhead DPS are substantive and improving, they remain 
inadequate to ensure the long-term viability of the population.

Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS

    Since 2002, all sea turtles and their habitats in Cape Verde have 
been protected by law (Decreto-Regulamentar n[deg] 7/2002). The 
reality, however, is that the laws are not respected or enforced and 
that in recent years until 2008 up to 25-30 percent of nesting females 
were illegally killed for meat each year on the nesting beaches. Egg 
collection is also a serious threat on some of the islands. Other major 
threats include developments and commensurate light pollution behind 
one important nesting beach on Boa Vista and the most important nesting 
beach on Sal, as well as sand mining on many of the islands. Other 
planned and potential developments on these and other islands present 
future threats. Bycatch and directed take in coastal waters is likely a 
significant mortality factor to the population given the importance of 
the coastal waters as loggerhead foraging grounds and the extensive 
fisheries occurring there. Adult females nesting in Cape Verde have 
been found foraging along the mainland coast of West Africa as well as 
in the oceanic environment, thereby making them vulnerable to impacts 
from a wide range of fisheries (Hawkes et al., 2006). Unfortunately, 
law enforcement on the nesting beaches and in the marine environment is 
lacking in Cape Verde.
    Conservation efforts in Cape Verde began in the mid 1990s and 
focused on efforts to raise local, national, and international 
awareness of the importance of the Cape Verdian loggerhead population 
and the ongoing slaughter of nesting females. A field camp set up by 
the non-governmental organization Natura 2000 in 1999 on the 10-
kilometer Ervatao Beach, the single most important nesting beach at Boa 
Vista, grew out of this initial effort. This camp established a 
presence to deter poaching and gather data on nesting and poaching 
activity. In 2008, The Turtle Foundation, another non-governmental 
organization began to work at Porto Ferreira Beach, the second most 
important nesting area on Boa Vista. The non-governmental organization 
SOS Tartarugas began conservation work on the important nesting beaches 
of Sal in 2008. In May 2009, USFWS funded a workshop in Cape Verde to 
bring together representatives from the three non-governmental 
organizations and the universities involved with loggerhead 
conservation in Cape Verde and government representatives from the 
Ministry of Environment, Military and Municipalities to discuss the 
threats, current conservation efforts, and priority actions needed. A 
Sea Turtle Network was established to better coordinate and expand 
conservation efforts throughout the Cape Verdean islands.
    Natura 2000 has continued its efforts on Ervatao Beach and in 2009 
assumed responsibility for work on Porto Ferreira Beach. Natura 2000 
has reduced poaching to about 5 percent on these two important beaches, 
which represent 75 percent of the nesting on Boa Vista. The Turtle 
Foundation also conducts extensive public outreach on sea turtle 
conservation issues. The Turtle Foundation covered four other important 
beaches in 2009 with the assistance of the Cape Verdian military and 
likewise believes poaching was reduced to about 5 percent of nesting 
females on the beaches covered. The University of Algarve established a 
research project on Santiago Island in 2007; activities included nest 
monitoring and protection, collecting biological data and information 
on poaching, and outreach through the media and to the government 
representatives (Loureiro, 2008). This project minimized its efforts in 
2009. The Turtle Foundation continued to focus its primary efforts on 
patrolling beaches to protect nesting females on Boa Vista with the 
assistance of the military. SOS Tartarugas has also been doing regular 
monitoring of beaches with support from the military, extensive public 
outreach on light pollution behind nesting beaches, and relocating 
nests to a hatchery to alleviate hatchling disorientation and 
misorientation, as well as assisting with training of turtle projects 
on the islands of Maio and Sao Nicolau.
    In the last 2 years, new efforts to better coordinate and expand 
projects being conducted by the three non-governmental organizations, 
as well as engage the national and municipal governments, are 
dramatically decreasing the poaching of nesting turtles and with 
sustained and planned efforts may be able to reduce it to less than 1 
percent in the next few years. The issues of light pollution, sand 
mining on nesting beaches, long-term protection of even the most 
important nesting beaches, law enforcement, and bycatch have not even 
begun to be addressed. While there is definite improvement in a once 
gloomy situation as recent as 2 years ago, the future of the population 
is tenuous.

Mediterranean Sea DPS

    The main threats to Mediterranean Sea loggerheads include fishery 
bycatch, as well as pollution/debris, vessel collisions, and habitat 
destruction impacting eggs and hatchlings at nesting beaches. There are 
a number of existing international regulatory mechanisms specific to 
the Mediterranean Sea that contain provisions for the protection to sea 
turtles. The most important with respect to sea turtles are the 
Barcelona Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea 
against Pollution (and the associated Protocol Concerning Specially 
Protected Areas and Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean); the 
Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural 
Habitats (Bern Convention); the Convention on the Conservation of 
Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) (Bonn Convention); and the 
Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and 
of Wild Fauna and Flora (EC Habitats Directive). More information on 
these mechanisms can be found at Conant et al. (2009), but a few 
specific applications are noted below.
    Under the framework of the Barcelona Convention (to which all 
Mediterranean countries are parties), the Action Plan for the 
Conservation of Mediterranean Marine Turtles was adopted in 1989 and 
updated in 1999 and 2007. The objective of the Action Plan is the 
recovery of sea turtle populations through (1) appropriate protection, 
conservation, and management of turtle habitats, including nesting, 
feeding, wintering, and migrating areas; and (2) improvement of 
scientific knowledge by research and monitoring. Coordination of this 
Action Plan occurs through the Regional Activity Centre for Specially 
Protected Areas (RAC/SPA). To help implement the Action Plan 
objectives, the RAC/SPA has published guidelines for designing 
legislation and regulations to protect turtles; developing and 
improving rescue centers; and handling sea turtles by fishermen. To 
assess the degree of implementation of the Action Plan, RAC/SPA sent a 
survey to the National Focal Points for Specially Protected Areas 
(Demetropoulos, 2007). Of the 16 country responses received, 14 
countries have enacted some form of legislation protecting sea turtles 
and more than half of the responders noted

[[Page 12648]]

their participation in tagging programs, development of public 
awareness programs, and beach inventories. The area with the fewest 
positive responses was the implementation of measures to reduce 
incidental catch (n=5). The 2007 Action Plan includes a revised list of 
important priority measures and an Implementation Timetable (UNEP MAP 
RAC/SPA 2007). The deadline for many of the actions is as soon as 
possible (e.g., enforce legislation to eliminate deliberate killing, 
prepare National Action Plan), while others are 3 to 4 years after 
adoption (e.g., restoration of damaged nesting habitats, implementation 
of fishing regulations in key areas). If all parties adopt all of the 
measures in the identified time period, there will be notable sea 
turtle conservation efforts in place in the Mediterranean. However, 
while priority actions for implementing the Action Plan have been 
adopted to some extent at both regional and national levels, the degree 
of expected implementation by each signatory and corresponding level of 
sea turtle protection are still relatively uncertain. As such, these 
efforts do not currently sufficiently mitigate the threats to and 
improve the status of loggerheads in the Mediterranean, and without 
specific commitment from each of the Barcelona Convention signatories, 
it is difficult to determine if the efforts will do so in the near 
future.
    Under the Bern Convention, sea turtles are on the ``strictly 
protected'' list. Article 6 of this Convention notes the following 
prohibited acts for these strictly protected fauna species: all forms 
of deliberate capture and keeping and deliberate killing; the 
deliberate damage to or destruction of breeding or resting sites; the 
deliberate disturbance of wild fauna; and the deliberate destruction or 
taking or keeping of eggs from the wild. Most Mediterranean countries, 
with the exception of Algeria, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Libya, and 
Syria, are parties to this Convention, so these international 
protection measures are in place.
    It is apparent that the international framework for sea turtle 
protection is present in the Mediterranean, but the efficacy of these 
actions is uncertain. The measures in most of these Conventions have 
been in place for years, and the threats to loggerhead turtles remain. 
As such, while laudable, the enforcement and follow up of many of these 
articles needs to occur before the sea turtle protection goals of the 
Conventions are achieved.
    Most Mediterranean countries have developed national legislation to 
protect sea turtles and/or nesting habitats (Margaritoulis, 2007). 
These initiatives are also likely captured in the country responses to 
the survey detailed in Demetropoulos (2007) as discussed above. 
National protective legislation generally prohibits international 
killing, harassment, possession, trade, or attempts at these 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003). Some countries have site specific 
legislation for turtle habitat protection. In 1999, a National Marine 
Park was established on Zakynthos in western Greece, with the primary 
aim to provide protection to loggerhead nesting areas (Dimopoulos, 
2001). Zakynthos represents approximately 43 percent of the average 
annual nesting effort of the major and moderate nesting areas in Greece 
(Margaritoulis et al., 2003) and about 26 percent of the documented 
nesting effort in the Mediterranean (Touliatou et al., 2009). It is 
noteworthy for conservation purposes that this site is legally 
protected. While park management has improved over the last several 
years, there are still some needed measures to improve and ensure 
sufficient protection at this Park (Panagopoulou et al., 2008; 
Touliatou et al., 2009).
    In Turkey, five nesting beaches (Belek, Dalyan, Fethiye, Goksu 
Delta, and Patara) were designated Specially Protected Area status in 
the context of the Barcelona Convention (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). 
Based on the average annual number of nests from the major nesting 
sites, these five beaches represent approximately 56 percent of nesting 
in Turkey (World Wildlife Fund, 2005). In Cyprus, the two nesting 
beaches of Lara and Toxeftra have been afforded protection through the 
Fisheries Regulation since 1989 (Margaritoulis, 2007), and Alagadi is a 
Specially Protected Area (World Wildlife Fund, 2005). Of the major 
Cyprus nesting sites included in the 2005 World Wildlife Fund Species 
Action Plan, the nesting beaches afforded protection represent 51 
percent of the average annual number of nests in Cyprus. Note, however, 
that the annual nesting effort in Cyprus presented in Margaritoulis et 
al. (2003) includes additional sites, so the total proportion of 
protected nesting sites in Cyprus is much lower, potentially around 22 
percent. In Italy, a reserve to protect nesting on Lampedusa was 
established in 1984 (Margaritoulis et al., 2003). In summary, 
Mediterranean loggerhead nesting primarily occurs in Greece, Libya, 
Turkey, and Cyprus, and a notable proportion of nesting in those areas 
is protected through various mechanisms. It is important to recognize 
the success of these protected areas, but as the protection has been in 
place for some time and the threats to the species remain (particularly 
from increasing tourism activities), it is unlikely that the 
conservation measures discussed here will change the status of the 
species as outlined in Conant et al. (2009).
    Protection of marine habitats is at the early stages in the 
Mediterranean, as in other areas of the world. Off Zakynthos, the 
National Marine Park established in 1999 also included maritime zones. 
The marine area of Laganas Bay is divided into three zones controlling 
maritime traffic from May 1 to October 31: Zone A--no boating activity; 
Zone B--speed limit of 6 knots, no anchoring; Zone C--speed limit of 6 
knots. The restraints on boating activity are particularly aimed at 
protecting the internesting area surrounding the Zakynthos Laganas Bay 
nesting area. However, despite the regulations, there has been 
insufficient enforcement (especially of the 6 knot speed limit), and a 
high density of speedboats and recorded violations within the marine 
area of the Park have been reported. In 2009, 13 of 28 recorded 
strandings in the area of the National Marine Park bore evidence of 
watercraft injuries and fishing gear interactions, and four live 
turtles were found with fishing gear lines/hooks. Another marine zone 
occurs in Cyprus; off the nesting beaches of Lara and Toxeftra, a 
maritime zone extends to the 20 meter isobath as delineated by the 
Fisheries Regulation (Margaritoulis, 2007).
    The main concern to loggerheads in the Mediterranean includes 
incidental capture in fisheries. While there are country specific 
fishery regulations that may limit fishing effort to some degree (to 
conserve the fishery resource), little, if anything, has been 
undertaken to reduce sea turtle bycatch and associated mortality in 
Mediterranean fisheries. Given the lack of conservation efforts to 
address fisheries and the limited in-water protection provided to 
turtles to reduce the additional impacts of vessel collisions and 
pollution/debris interactions, it is unlikely that the status of the 
species will change given the measures discussed here.
    It should be reiterated that it appears that international and 
national laws are not always enforced or followed. This minimizes the 
potential success of these conservation efforts. For example, in Egypt, 
international and national measures to protect turtles were not 
immediately adhered to, but in recent years, there has been a notable 
effort to enforce laws and regulations that prohibit the trade of sea 
turtles at fish markets. However, the illegal trade of turtles in the 
Alexandria fish market has

[[Page 12649]]

persisted and a black market has been created (Nada and Casale, 2008). 
This is an example of ineffective sea turtle protection and continuing 
threat to the species, even with conservation efforts in place.

South Atlantic Ocean DPS

    The only documented and confirmed nesting locations for loggerhead 
turtles in the South Atlantic occur in Brazil, and major nesting 
beaches are found in the states of Rio de Janeiro, Espirito Santo, 
Bahia, and Sergipe (Marcovaldi and Marcovaldi, 1999). Protection of 
nesting loggerheads and their eggs in Brazil is afforded by national 
law that was established in 1989 and most recently reaffirmed in 2008. 
Illegal practices, such as collecting eggs or nesting females for 
consumption or sale, are considered environmental crimes and are 
punishable by law. Other State or Federal laws have been established in 
Brazil to protect reproductive females, incubating eggs, emergent 
hatchlings, and nesting habitat, including restricting nighttime 
lighting adjacent to nesting beaches during the nesting/hatching 
seasons and prohibiting vehicular traffic on beaches. Projeto TAMAR, a 
semi-governmental organization, is responsible for sea turtle 
conservation in Brazil. In general, nesting beach protection in Brazil 
is considered to be effective and successful for loggerheads and other 
species of nesting turtles (e.g., Marcovaldi and Chaloupka, 2007; da 
Silva et al., 2008; Thome et al., 2008). Efforts at protecting 
reproductive turtles, their nests, hatchlings and their nesting beaches 
have been supplemented by the establishment of Federally mandated 
protected areas that include major loggerhead nesting populations: 
Reserva Biologica de Santa Isabel (established in 1988 in Sergipe) and 
Reserva Biologica de Comboios (established in 1984 in Espirto Santo); 
at the State level, Environmental Protection Areas have been 
established for many loggerhead nesting beaches in Bahia and Espirito 
Santo (Marcovaldi et al., 2005). In addition, Projeto TAMAR has 
initiated several high-profile public awareness campaigns, which have 
focused national attention on the conservation of loggerheads and other 
marine turtles in Brazil.
    Loggerhead turtles of various sizes and life stages occur 
throughout the South Atlantic, although density/observations are more 
limited in equatorial waters (Ehrhart et al., 2003). Within national 
waters of specific countries, various laws and actions have been 
instituted to mitigate threats to loggerheads and other species of sea 
turtles; less protection is afforded in the high seas of the South 
Atlantic. Overall, the principal in-water threat to loggerheads in the 
South Atlantic is incidental capture in fisheries. In the southwest 
Atlantic, the South Atlantic Association is a multinational group that 
includes representatives from Brazil, Uruguay, and Argentina, and meets 
biannually to share information and develop regional action plans to 
address threats including bycatch (http://www.tortugasaso.org/). At the 
national level, Brazil has developed a national plan for the reduction 
of incidental capture of sea turtles that was initiated in 2001 
(Marcovaldi et al., 2002a). This national plan includes various 
activities to mitigate bycatch, including time-area restrictions of 
fisheries, use of bycatch reduction devices, and working with fishermen 
to successfully release live-captured turtles. In Uruguay, all sea 
turtles are protected from human impacts, including fisheries bycatch, 
by presidential decree (Decreto presidencial 144/98). The Karumbe 
conservation project in Uruguay has been working on assessing in-water 
threats to loggerheads and marine turtles for several years (see http://www.seaturtle.org/promacoda), with the objective of developing 
mitigation plans in the future. In Argentina, various conservation 
organizations are working toward assessing bycatch of loggerheads and 
other sea turtle species in fisheries, with the objective of developing 
mitigation plans for this threat (see http://www.prictma.com.ar). 
Overall, more effort to date has been expended on evaluating and 
assessing levels of fisheries bycatch of loggerhead turtles, than 
concretely reducing bycatch in the Southwest Atlantic, but this 
information is necessary for developing adequate mitigation plans. In 
the southeastern Atlantic, efforts have been directed toward assessing 
the distribution and levels of bycatch of loggerheads in coastal waters 
of southwestern Africa (Weir et al., 2007; Petersen et al., 2007, 
2009). Bycatch of loggerheads has been documented in longline fisheries 
off the Atlantic coasts of Angola, Namibia, and South Africa (Petersen 
et al., 2007), and several authors have highlighted the need to develop 
regional mitigation plans to reduce bycatch of loggerheads and other 
sea turtle species in coastal waters (Formia et al., 2003; Weir et al., 
2007; Petersen et al., 2009). On the high seas of the South Atlantic, 
little is known about exact bycatch levels, but there are some areas of 
higher concentration of longline effort that are likely to result in 
loggerhead bycatch (Lewison et al., 2004).
    Overall, conservation efforts for loggerhead turtles in the South 
Atlantic are dichotomous. On the nesting beaches (almost exclusively in 
Brazil), conservation actions are successful at protecting nesting 
females and their clutches, resulting in large numbers of hatchlings 
being released each year. In contrast, fisheries bycatch in coastal and 
oceanic waters remains a serious threat, despite regional emphasis on 
assessing bycatch rates in various fisheries on both sides of the South 
Atlantic. Comprehensive management actions to reduce or eliminate 
bycatch mortality are lacking in most areas, which is likely to result 
in a decline of this DPS in the future.

Finding

    Regarding the petitions to (1) reclassify loggerhead turtles in the 
North Pacific Ocean as a DPS with endangered status and designate 
critical habitat and (2) reclassify loggerhead turtles in the Northwest 
Atlantic as a DPS with endangered status and designate critical 
habitat, we find that both petitioned entities qualify as DPSs (North 
Pacific Ocean DPS and Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS, respectively) as 
described in this proposed rule. We also find that seven additional 
loggerhead sea turtle DPSs exist. We have carefully considered the best 
scientific and commercial data available regarding the past, present 
and future threats faced by the these nine loggerhead sea turtle DPSs. 
We believe that listing the North Pacific Ocean, South Pacific Ocean, 
North Indian Ocean, Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean, Northeast Atlantic Ocean, and Mediterranean Sea DPSs of the 
loggerhead sea turtle as endangered and the Southwest Indian Ocean and 
South Atlantic Ocean DPSs as threatened is warranted for the reasons 
described below for each DPS.

North Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the North Pacific, loggerhead nesting is essentially restricted 
to Japan where monitoring of loggerhead nesting began in the 1950s on 
some beaches, and expanded to include most known nesting beaches since 
approximately 1990. While nesting numbers have gradually increased in 
recent years and the number for 2009 is similar to the start of the 
time series in 1990, historical evidence indicates that there has been 
a substantial decline over the last half of the 20th century. In 
addition, based on nest count data for nearly the past 2 decades, the 
North Pacific population of loggerheads is small. The

[[Page 12650]]

SQE approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested 
that the North Pacific Ocean DPS appears to be declining, is at risk, 
and is thus likely to decline in the future. The stage-based 
deterministic modeling approach suggested that the North Pacific Ocean 
DPS would grow slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model 
indicates that the population would be likely to substantially decline 
in the future. These results are largely driven by the mortality of 
juvenile and adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs 
throughout the North Pacific Ocean, including the coastal pound net 
fisheries off Japan, coastal fisheries impacting juvenile foraging 
populations off Baja California, Mexico, and undescribed fisheries 
likely affecting loggerheads in the South China Sea and the North 
Pacific Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North 
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due 
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported 
fisheries, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing 
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated 
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations 
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive 
bycatch reduction technologies. In addition to fishery bycatch, coastal 
development and coastal armoring on nesting beaches in Japan continues 
as a substantial threat (Factor A). Coastal armoring, if left 
unaddressed, will become an even more substantial threat as sea level 
rises. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the 
Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the 
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we 
believe that the North Pacific Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction 
throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as 
endangered.

South Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the South Pacific, loggerhead nesting is almost entirely 
restricted to eastern Australia (primarily Queensland) and New 
Caledonia. In eastern Australia, there has been a marked decline in the 
number of females breeding annually since the mid-1970s, with an 
estimated 50 to 80 percent decline in the number of breeding females at 
various Australian rookeries up to 1990 and a decline of approximately 
86 percent by 1999. Comparable nesting surveys have not been conducted 
in New Caledonia, however. Information from pilot surveys conducted in 
2005, combined with oral history information collected, suggest that 
there has been a decline in loggerhead nesting (see the Status of the 
Nine DPSs section above for additional information). Similarly, studies 
of eastern Australia loggerheads at their foraging areas revealed a 
decline of 3 percent per year from 1985 to the late 1990s on the coral 
reefs of the southern Great Barrier Reef. A decline in new recruits was 
also measured in these foraging areas. The SQE approach described in 
the Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count 
data for the past 3 decades, the population is at risk and thus likely 
to decline in the future. The stage-based deterministic modeling 
approach provided a wide range of results: In the case of the lowest 
anthropogenic mortality rates (or the best case scenario), the 
deterministic model suggests that the South Pacific Ocean DPS will grow 
slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model indicates that the 
population is likely to substantially decline in the future. These 
results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and adult 
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South 
Pacific Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South 
Pacific are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in the near future due 
to the challenges of mitigating illegal, unregulated, and unreported 
fisheries, the continued expansion of artisanal fleets in the 
southeastern Pacific, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing 
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated 
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations 
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive 
bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the 
actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section above will be 
fully implemented in the near future or that they will be sufficiently 
effective. Therefore, we believe that the South Pacific Ocean DPS is in 
danger of extinction throughout all of its range, and propose to list 
this DPS as endangered.

North Indian Ocean DPS

    In the North Indian Ocean, nesting occurs in greatest density on 
Masirah Island. Reliable trends in nesting cannot be determined due to 
the lack of standardized surveys at Masirah Island prior to 2008. 
However, a reinterpretation of the 1977-1978 and 1991 estimates of 
nesting females was compared to survey information collected since 2008 
and results suggest a significant decline in the size of the nesting 
population, which is consistent with observations by local rangers that 
the population has declined dramatically in the last three decades. 
Nesting trends cannot be determined elsewhere in the northern Indian 
Ocean where loggerhead nesting occurs because the time series of 
nesting data based on standardized surveys is not available. The SQE 
approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on 
nesting data; however, an adequate time series of nesting data for this 
DPS was not available. Therefore, we could not use this approach to 
evaluate extinction risk. The stage-based deterministic modeling 
approach indicated the North Indian Ocean DPS is likely to decline in 
the future. These results are driven by cumulative mortality from a 
variety of sources across all life stages. Threats to nesting beaches 
are likely to increase, which would require additional and widespread 
nesting beach protection efforts (Factor A). Little is currently being 
done to monitor and reduce mortality from neritic and oceanic fisheries 
in the range of the North Indian Ocean DPS; this mortality is likely to 
continue and increase with expected additional fishing effort from 
commercial and artisanal fisheries (Factor E). Reduction of mortality 
would be difficult due to a lack of comprehensive information on 
fishing distribution and effort, limitations on implementing 
demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is 
highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the Conservation 
Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the near future or 
that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we believe that 
the North Indian Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction throughout all of 
its range, and propose to list this DPS as endangered.

Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean DPS

    In the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean, loggerhead nesting is 
restricted to

[[Page 12651]]

western Australia, with the greatest number of loggerheads nesting on 
Dirk Hartog Island. Loggerheads also nest on the Muiron Islands and 
North West Cape, but in smaller numbers. Although data are insufficient 
to determine trends, evidence suggests the nesting population in the 
Muiron Islands and North West Cape region was depleted before recent 
beach monitoring programs began. The SQE approach described in the 
Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on nesting data; however, an 
adequate time series of nesting data for this DPS was not available; 
therefore, we could not use this approach to evaluate extinction risk. 
The stage-based deterministic modeling approach provided a wide range 
of results: In the case of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates, 
the deterministic model suggests that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
DPS will grow slightly, but in the worst-case scenario, the model 
indicates that the population is likely to substantially decline in the 
future. These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and 
adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the 
region, as can be inferred from data from Australia's Pacific waters 
(Factor E). Although national and international governmental and non-
governmental entities are currently working toward reducing loggerhead 
bycatch, and some positive actions have been implemented, it is 
unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced in 
the near future due to the challenges of mitigating illegal, 
unregulated, and unreported fisheries, the continued expansion of 
artisanal fleets, the lack of comprehensive information on fishing 
distribution and effort, limitations on implementing demonstrated 
effective conservation measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations 
on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive 
bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the 
actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section above will be 
fully implemented in the near future or that they will be sufficiently 
effective. Therefore, we believe that the Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean 
DPS is in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, and propose 
to list this DPS as endangered.

Southwest Indian Ocean DPS

    In the Southwest Indian Ocean, the highest concentration of nesting 
occurs on the coast of Tongaland, South Africa, where surveys and 
management practices were instituted in 1963. A trend analysis of index 
nesting beach data from this region from 1965 to 2008 indicates an 
increasing nesting population between the first decade of surveys and 
the last 8 years. These data represent approximately 50 percent of all 
nesting within South Africa and are believed to be representative of 
trends in the region. Loggerhead nesting occurs elsewhere in South 
Africa, but sampling is not consistent and no trend data are available. 
Similarly, in Madagascar, loggerheads have been documented nesting in 
low numbers, but no trend data are available. The SQE approach 
described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section, based on a 37-year 
time series of nesting female counts at Tongaland, South Africa (1963-
1999), indicated this segment of the population, while small, has 
increased, and the likelihood of quasi-extinction is negligible. We 
note that the SQE approach we used is based on past performance of the 
DPS (nesting data from 1963-1999) and does not fully reflect ongoing 
and future threats to all life stages within the DPS. The stage-based 
deterministic modeling approach provided a wide range of results: In 
the case of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates, the deterministic 
model suggests that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS will grow slightly, 
but in the worst-case scenario, the model indicates that the population 
is likely to substantially decline in the future. These results are 
largely driven by mortality of juvenile loggerheads from fishery 
bycatch that occurs throughout the Southwest Indian Ocean (Factor E). 
This mortality is likely to continue and may increase with expected 
additional fishing effort from commercial and artisanal fisheries. 
Reduction of mortality would be difficult due to a lack of 
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in 
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the 
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. We have 
determined that although the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is likely not 
currently in danger of extinction throughout all of its range, the 
extinction risk is likely to increase in the future. Therefore, we 
believe that the Southwest Indian Ocean DPS is likely to become an 
endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all of its 
range, and propose to list this DPS as threatened.

Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS

    Nesting occurs within the Northwest Atlantic along the coasts of 
North America, Central America, northern South America, the Antilles, 
and The Bahamas, but is concentrated in the southeastern U.S. and on 
the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico. The results of comprehensive analyses 
of the status of the nesting assemblages within the Northwest Atlantic 
Ocean DPS using standardized data collected over survey periods ranging 
from 10 to 23 years and using different analytical approaches were 
consistent in their findings--there has been a significant, overall 
nesting decline within this DPS. The SQE approach described in the 
Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count 
data for the past 2 decades, the population is at risk and thus likely 
to decline in the future. These results are based on nesting data for 
loggerheads at index/standardized nesting survey beaches in the USA and 
the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. The stage-based deterministic modeling 
indicated the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to decline in the 
future, even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality 
rates. These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and 
adult loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the North 
Atlantic Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the North 
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch, and 
some positive actions have been implemented, it is unlikely that this 
source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced across the range of the 
DPS in the near future because of the diversity and magnitude of the 
fisheries operating in the North Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive 
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on 
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities, limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of 
availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is 
highly uncertain whether the actions identified in the Conservation 
Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the near future or 
that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we believe that 
the Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS is in danger of extinction throughout 
all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as endangered.

Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS

    In the Northeast Atlantic Ocean, the Cape Verde Islands support the 
only

[[Page 12652]]

large nesting population of loggerheads in the region. Nesting occurs 
at some level on most of the islands in the archipelago with the 
largest nesting numbers reported from the island of Boa Vista where 
studies have been ongoing since 1998. Due to limited data available, a 
population trend cannot currently be determined for the Cape Verde 
population; however, available information on the directed killing of 
nesting females suggests that this nesting population is under severe 
pressure and likely significantly reduced from historic levels. In 
addition, based on interviews with elders, a reduction in nesting from 
historic levels at Santiago Island has been reported. Elsewhere in the 
northeastern Atlantic, loggerhead nesting is non-existent or occurs at 
very low levels. The SQE approach described in the Status of the Nine 
DPSs section is based on nesting data. However, we had insufficient 
nest count data over an appropriate time series for this DPS and could 
not use this approach to evaluate extinction risk. The stage-based 
deterministic modeling approach indicated the Northeast Atlantic Ocean 
DPS is likely to decline in the future, even under the scenario of the 
lowest anthropogenic mortality rates. These results are largely driven 
by the ongoing directed lethal take of nesting females and eggs (Factor 
B), low hatching and emergence success (Factors A, B, and C), and 
mortality of juveniles and adults from fishery bycatch (Factor E) that 
occurs throughout the Northeast Atlantic Ocean. Currently, conservation 
efforts to protect nesting females are growing, and a reduction in this 
source of mortality is likely to continue in the near future. Although 
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities 
in the Northeast Atlantic are currently working toward reducing 
loggerhead bycatch, and some positive actions have been implemented, it 
is unlikely that this source of mortality can be sufficiently reduced 
across the range of the DPS in the near future because of the lack of 
bycatch reduction in high seas fisheries operating within the range of 
this DPS, lack of bycatch reduction in coastal fisheries in Africa, the 
lack of comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in 
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the 
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we 
believe that the Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS is in danger of 
extinction throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as 
endangered.

Mediterranean Sea DPS

    Nesting occurs throughout the central and eastern Mediterranean in 
Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, the Sinai, 
Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia. In addition, sporadic nesting has been 
reported from the western Mediterranean, but the vast majority of 
nesting (greater than 80 percent) occurs in Greece and Turkey. There is 
no discernible trend in nesting at the two longest monitoring projects 
in Greece, Laganas Bay and southern Kyparissia Bay. However, the 
nesting trend at Rethymno Beach, which hosts approximately 7 percent of 
all documented loggerhead nesting in the Mediterranean, shows a highly 
significant declining trend (1990-2004). In Turkey, intermittent 
nesting surveys have been conducted since the 1970s with more 
consistent surveys conducted on some beaches only since the 1990s, 
making it difficult to assess trends in nesting. A declining trend 
(1993-2004) has been reported at Fethiye Beach, which represents 
approximately 10 percent of loggerhead nesting in Turkey. The SQE 
approach described in the Status of the Nine DPSs section is based on 
nesting data; however, region-wide nesting data for this DPS were not 
available. Therefore, we could not use this approach to evaluate 
extinction risk. The stage-based deterministic modeling approach 
indicated the Mediterranean Sea DPS is likely to decline in the future, 
even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality rates. 
These results are largely driven by mortality of juvenile and adult 
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the 
Mediterranean Sea (Factor E), as well as anthropogenic threats to 
nesting beaches (Factor A) and eggs/hatchlings (Factors A, B, C, and 
E). Although conservation efforts to protect some nesting beaches are 
underway, more widespread and consistent protection is needed. Although 
national and international governmental and non-governmental entities 
in the Mediterranean Sea are currently working toward reducing 
loggerhead bycatch, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be 
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future 
because of the lack of bycatch reduction in commercial and artisanal 
fisheries operating within the range of this DPS, the lack of 
comprehensive information on fishing distribution and effort, 
limitations on implementing demonstrated effective conservation 
measures, geopolitical complexities, limitations on enforcement 
capacity, and lack of availability of comprehensive bycatch reduction 
technologies. It is highly uncertain whether the actions identified in 
the Conservation Efforts section above will be fully implemented in the 
near future or that they will be sufficiently effective. Therefore, we 
believe that the Mediterranean Sea DPS is in danger of extinction 
throughout all of its range, and propose to list this DPS as 
endangered.

South Atlantic Ocean DPS

    In the South Atlantic nesting occurs primarily along the mainland 
coast of Brazil from Sergipe south to Rio de Janeiro. Prior to 1980, 
loggerhead nesting populations in Brazil were considered severely 
depleted. More recently, a long-term, sustained increasing trend in 
nesting abundance has been observed over a 16-year period from 1988 
through 2003 on 22 surveyed beaches containing more than 75 percent of 
all loggerhead nesting in Brazil. The SQE approach described in the 
Status of the Nine DPSs section suggested that, based on nest count 
data for the past 2 decades, the population is unlikely to decline in 
the future. These results are consistent with Marcovaldi and 
Chaloupka's (2007) nesting beach trend analyses. We note that the SQE 
approach is based on past performance of the DPS (nesting data) and 
does not fully reflect ongoing and future threats to all life stages 
within the DPS. The stage-based deterministic modeling approach 
indicated the South Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to decline in the 
future, even under the scenario of the lowest anthropogenic mortality 
rates. This result is largely driven by mortality of juvenile 
loggerheads from fishery bycatch that occurs throughout the South 
Atlantic Ocean (Factor E). Although national and international 
governmental and non-governmental entities on both sides of the South 
Atlantic are currently working toward reducing loggerhead bycatch in 
the South Atlantic, it is unlikely that this source of mortality can be 
sufficiently reduced across the range of the DPS in the near future 
because of the diversity and magnitude of the commercial and artisanal 
fisheries operating in the South Atlantic, the lack of comprehensive 
information on fishing distribution and effort, limitations on 
implementing demonstrated effective conservation measures, geopolitical 
complexities,

[[Page 12653]]

limitations on enforcement capacity, and lack of availability of 
comprehensive bycatch reduction technologies. It is highly uncertain 
whether the actions identified in the Conservation Efforts section 
above will be fully implemented in the near future or that they will be 
sufficiently effective. We have determined that although the South 
Atlantic Ocean DPS is not currently in danger of extinction throughout 
all of its range, the extinction risk is likely to increase 
substantially in the future. Therefore, we believe that the South 
Atlantic Ocean DPS is likely to become an endangered species within the 
foreseeable future throughout all of its range, and propose to list 
this DPS as threatened.

Critical Habitat

    Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires us to designate critical 
habitat for threatened and endangered species ``on the basis of the 
best scientific data available and after taking into consideration the 
economic impact, the impact on national security, and any other 
relevant impact, of specifying any particular area as critical 
habitat.'' This section grants the Secretary of the Interior or of 
Commerce discretion to exclude an area from critical habitat if he 
determines ``the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of 
specifying such area as part of the critical habitat.'' The Secretary 
may not exclude areas if exclusion ``will result in the extinction of 
the species.'' In addition, the Secretary may not designate as critical 
habitat any lands or other geographical areas owned or controlled by 
the Department of Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject 
to an integrated natural resources management plan under section 101 of 
the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines in writing 
that such a plan provides a benefit to the species for which critical 
habitat is proposed for designation (see section 318(a)(3) of the 
National Defense Authorization Act, Pub. L. 108-136).
    The ESA defines critical habitat under section 3(5)(A) as: ``(i) 
the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the 
species, at the time it is listed * * *, on which are found those 
physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of 
the species and (II) which may require special management 
considerations or protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the 
geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed * * 
*, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential 
for the conservation of the species.''
    Once critical habitat is designated, section 7 of the ESA requires 
Federal agencies to ensure they do not fund, authorize, or carry out 
any actions that will destroy or adversely modify that habitat. This 
requirement is in addition to the other principal section 7 requirement 
that Federal agencies ensure their actions do not jeopardize the 
continued existence of listed species.
    The Services have not designated critical habitat for the 
loggerhead sea turtle. Critical habitat will be proposed, if found to 
be prudent and determinable, in a separate rulemaking.

Peer Review

    In December 2004, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued 
a Final Information Quality Bulletin for Peer Review, establishing 
minimum peer review standards, a transparent process for public 
disclosure of peer review planning, and opportunities for public 
participation. The OMB Bulletin, implemented under the Information 
Quality Act (Pub. L. 106-554), is intended to enhance the quality and 
credibility of the Federal government's scientific information, and 
applies to influential or highly influential scientific information 
disseminated on or after June 16, 2005. We obtained independent peer 
review of the scientific information compiled in the 2009 Status Review 
(Conant et al., 2009) that supports this proposal to list nine DPSs of 
the loggerhead sea turtle as endangered or threatened.
    On July 1, 1994, the Services published a policy for peer review of 
scientific data (59 FR 34270). The intent of the peer review policy is 
to ensure that listings are based on the best scientific and commercial 
data available. Prior to a final listing, we will solicit the expert 
opinions of three qualified specialists, concurrent with the public 
comment period. Independent specialists will be selected from the 
academic and scientific community, Federal and State agencies, and the 
private sector.

References

    A complete list of the references used in this proposed rule is 
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

Classification

National Environmental Policy Act

    Proposed ESA listing decisions are exempt from the requirement to 
prepare an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact 
statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 
(NEPA) (NOAA Administrative Order 216-6.03(e)(1); Pacific Legal 
Foundation v. Andrus, 675 F. 2d 825 (6th Cir. 1981)). Thus, we have 
determined that the proposed listing determinations for the nine 
loggerhead DPSs described in this notice are exempt from the 
requirements of NEPA.

Information Quality Act

    The Information Quality Act directed the Office of Management and 
Budget to issue government wide guidelines that ``provide policy and 
procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the 
quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information (including 
statistical information) disseminated by Federal agencies.'' Under the 
NOAA guidelines, this action is considered a Natural Resource Plan. It 
is a composite of several types of information from a variety of 
sources. Compliance of this document with NOAA guidelines is evaluated 
below.
     Utility: The information disseminated is intended to 
describe a management action and the impacts of that action. The 
information is intended to be useful to State and Federal agencies, 
non-governmental organizations, industry groups and other interested 
parties so they can understand the management action, its effects, and 
its justification.
     Integrity: No confidential data were used in the analysis 
of the impacts associated with this document. All information 
considered in this document and used to analyze the proposed action, is 
considered public information.
     Objectivity: The NOAA Information Quality Guidelines 
standards for Natural Resource Plans state that plans be presented in 
an accurate, clear, complete, and unbiased manner. NMFS and USFWS 
strive to draft and present proposed management measures in a clear and 
easily understandable manner with detailed descriptions that explain 
the decision making process and the implications of management measures 
on natural resources and the public. This document was reviewed by a 
variety of biologists, policy analysts, and attorneys from NMFS and 
USFWS.

Administrative Procedure Act

    The Federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) establishes 
procedural requirements applicable to informal rulemaking by Federal 
agencies. The purpose of the APA is to ensure public access to the 
Federal rulemaking process and to give the public notice and an 
opportunity to comment before

[[Page 12654]]

the agency promulgates new regulations.

Coastal Zone Management Act

    Section 307(c)(1) of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 
1972 requires that all Federal activities that affect any land or water 
use or natural resource of the coastal zone be consistent with approved 
State coastal zone management programs to the maximum extent 
practicable. NMFS and FWS have determined that this action is 
consistent to the maximum extent practicable with the enforceable 
policies of approved Coastal Zone Management Programs of Maine, New 
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New 
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, California, 
Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
Letters documenting our determination, along with the proposed rule, 
are being sent to the coastal zone management program offices of these 
States. A list of the specific State contacts and a copy of the letters 
are available upon request.

Executive Order 13132 Federalism

    Executive Order (E.O.) 13132, otherwise known as the Federalism 
E.O., was signed by President Clinton on August 4, 1999, and published 
in the Federal Register on August 10, 1999 (64 FR 43255). This E.O. is 
intended to guide Federal agencies in the formulation and 
implementation of ``policies that have Federal implications.'' Such 
policies are regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation, 
and other policy statements or actions that have substantial direct 
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national 
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and 
responsibilities among the various levels of government. In addition, 
E.O. 13132 requires Federal agencies to have a process to ensure 
meaningful and timely input by State and local officials in the 
development of regulatory policies that have federalism implications. A 
Federal summary impact statement is also required for rules that have 
federalism implications.
    Pursuant to E.O. 13132, the Assistant Secretary for Legislative and 
Intergovernmental Affairs will provide notice of the proposed action 
and request comments from the appropriate official(s) in Maine, New 
Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New 
Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, 
Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas, California, 
Oregon, Washington, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Environmental Justice

    Executive Order 12898 requires that Federal actions address 
environmental justice in decision-making process. In particular, the 
environmental effects of the actions should not have a disproportionate 
effect on minority and low-income communities. The proposed listing 
determinations are not expected to have a disproportionate effect on 
minority or low-income communities.

Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act, and Paperwork 
Reduction Act

    As noted in the Conference Report on the 1982 amendments to the 
ESA, economic impacts shall not be considered when assessing the status 
of a species. Therefore, the economic analysis requirements of the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act are not applicable to the listing process. 
In addition, this rule is exempt from review under E.O. 12866. This 
proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information requirement 
for the purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

List of Subjects

50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

50 CFR Part 223

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

50 CFR Part 224

    Administrative practice and procedure, Endangered and threatened 
species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, 
Transportation.

    Dated: March 8, 2010.
Eric C. Schwaab,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    Dated: March 3, 2010.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

    For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR parts 17, 223, and 
224 are proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 17--ENDANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS

    1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

    2. In Sec.  17.11(h) remove the entry for ``Sea turtle, 
loggerhead'', and add nine entries for ``Sea turtle, loggerhead'' in 
its place, to read as follows:


Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Species                                                    Vertebrate
--------------------------------------------------------                        population where                                  Critical     Special
                                                            Historic range       endangered or         Status      When listed    habitat       rules
           Common name                Scientific name                              threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
Sea turtle, loggerhead,            Caretta caretta.....  Mediterranean Sea    Mediterranean Sea    E               ...........           NA           NA
 Mediterranean Sea.                                       Basin..              east of 5[deg]36'
                                                                               W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, North      Caretta caretta.....  North Indian Ocean   North Indian Ocean   E               ...........           NA           NA
 Indian Ocean.                                            Basin..              north of the
                                                                               equator and south
                                                                               of 30[deg] N. Lat.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, North      Caretta caretta.....  North Pacific Ocean  North Pacific north  E               ...........           NA           NA
 Pacific Ocean.                                           Basin..              of the equator and
                                                                               south of 60[deg]
                                                                               N. Lat.

[[Page 12655]]

 
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Northeast  Caretta caretta.....  Northeast Atlantic   Northeast Atlantic   E               ...........           NA           NA
 Atlantic Ocean.                                          Ocean Basin..        Ocean north of the
                                                                               equator, south of
                                                                               60[deg] N. Lat.,
                                                                               east of 40[deg] W.
                                                                               Long., and west of
                                                                               5[deg]36' W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Northwest  Caretta caretta.....  Northwest Atlantic   Northwest Atlantic   E               ...........           NA           NA
 Atlantic Ocean.                                          Ocean Basin..        Ocean north of the
                                                                               equator, south of
                                                                               60[deg] N. Lat.,
                                                                               and west of
                                                                               40[deg] W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, South      Caretta caretta.....  South Atlantic       South Atlantic       T               ...........           NA           NA
 Atlantic Ocean.                                          Ocean Basin..        Ocean south of the
                                                                               equator, north of
                                                                               60[deg] S. Lat.,
                                                                               west of 20[deg] E.
                                                                               Long., and east of
                                                                               67[deg] W. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, South      Caretta caretta.....  South Pacific Ocean  South Pacific south  E               ...........           NA           NA
 Pacific Ocean.                                           Basin..              of the equator,
                                                                               north of 60[deg]
                                                                               S. Lat., west of
                                                                               67[deg] W. Long.,
                                                                               and east of
                                                                               139[deg] E. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Southeast  Caretta caretta.....  Southeast Indian     Southeast Indian     E               ...........           NA           NA
 Indo-Pacific Ocean.                                      Ocean Basin; South   Ocean south of the
                                                          Pacific Ocean        equator, north of
                                                          Basin as far east    60[deg] S. Lat.,
                                                          as 139[deg] E        and east of
                                                          Long..               80[deg] E. Long.;
                                                                               South Pacific
                                                                               Ocean south of the
                                                                               equator, north of
                                                                               60[deg] S. Lat.,
                                                                               and west of
                                                                               139[deg] E. Long.
Sea turtle, loggerhead, Southwest  Caretta caretta.....  Southwest Indian     Southwest Indian     T               ...........           NA           NA
 Indian Ocean.                                            Ocean Basin..        Ocean north of the
                                                                               equator, south of
                                                                               30[deg] N. Lat.,
                                                                               west of 20[deg] E.
                                                                               Long., and east of
                                                                               80[deg] E. Long.
 
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PART 223--THREATENED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES

    3. The authority citation for part 223 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 1543; subpart B, Sec.  223.201-202 
also issued under 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.; 16 U.S.C. 5503(d) for 
Sec.  223.206(d)(9).

    4. Amend the table in Sec.  223.102 by redesignating paragraph 
(b)(3) as paragraph (b)(4), and by removing the existing paragraph 
(b)(2), and by adding a new paragraph (b)(2) and (b)(3) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  223.102  Enumeration of threatened marine and anadromous species.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Species \1\                                                                     Citation(s)
----------------------------------------------------                            Citation(s) for    for critical
                                                           Where listed             listing           habitat
          Common name              Scientific name                             determination(s)   designation(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                                  * * * * * * *
(2) Sea turtle, loggerhead,      Caretta caretta...  South Atlantic Ocean     [INSERT FR                     NA
 South Atlantic Ocean DPS.                            south of the equator,    CITATION WHEN
                                                      north of 60[deg] S.      PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      Lat., west of 20[deg]    FINAL RULE].
                                                      E. Long., and east of
                                                      67[deg] W. Long..
(3) Sea turtle, loggerhead,      Caretta caretta...  Southwest Indian Ocean    [INSERT FR                    NA
 Southwest Indian Ocean DPS.                          north of the equator,    CITATION WHEN
                                                      south of 30[deg] N.      PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      Lat., west of 20[deg]    FINAL RULE].
                                                      E. Long., and east of
                                                      80[deg] E. Long..
 

[[Page 12656]]

 
                                                  * * * * * * *
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement,
  see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56
  FR 58612, November 20, 1991).

PART 224--ENDANGERED MARINE AND ANADROMOUS SPECIES

    5. The authority citation for part 224 continues to read as 
follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531-1543 and 16 U.S.C. 1361 et seq.

    6. Amend Sec.  224.101 by revising paragraph (c) to read as 
follows:


Sec.  224.101  Enumeration of endangered marine and anadromous species.

* * * * *
    (c) Sea turtles. The following table lists the common and 
scientific names of endangered sea turtles, the locations where they 
are listed, and the citations for the listings and critical habitat 
designations.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Species \1\                                                                     Citation(s)
----------------------------------------------------                            Citation(s) for    for critical
                                                           Where listed             listing           habitat
          Common name              Scientific name                             determination(s)   designation(s)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 (1) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  Mediterranean Sea east   [INSERT FR                     NA
 Mediterranean Sea DPS.                               of 5[deg]36[min] W.      CITATION WHEN
                                                      Long.                    PUBLISHED AS A
                                                                               FINAL RULE].
 (2) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  North Indian Ocean       [INSERT FR                     NA
 North Indian Ocean DPS.                              north of the equator     CITATION WHEN
                                                      and south of 30[deg]     PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      N. Lat.                  FINAL RULE].
 (3) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  North Pacific north of   [INSERT FR                     NA
 North Pacific Ocean DPS.                             the equator and south    CITATION WHEN
                                                      of 60[deg] N. Lat.       PUBLISHED AS A
                                                                               FINAL RULE].
 (4) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  Northeast Atlantic       [INSERT FR                     NA
 Northeast Atlantic Ocean DPS.                        Ocean north of the       CITATION WHEN
                                                      equator, south of        PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      60[deg] N. Lat., east    FINAL RULE].
                                                      of 40[deg] W. Long.,
                                                      and west of
                                                      5[deg]36[min] W. Long.
 (5) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  Northwest Atlantic       [INSERT FR                     NA
 Northwest Atlantic Ocean DPS.                        Ocean north of the       CITATION WHEN
                                                      equator, south of        PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      60[deg] N. Lat., and     FINAL RULE].
                                                      west of 40[deg] W.
                                                      Long.
 (6) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  South Pacific south of   [INSERT FR                     NA
 South Pacific Ocean DPS.                             the equator, north of    CITATION WHEN
                                                      60[deg] S. Lat., west    PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      of 67[deg] W. Long.,     FINAL RULE].
                                                      and east of 139[deg]
                                                      E. Long.
 (7) Sea turtle, loggerhead,     Caretta caretta...  Southeast Indian Ocean   [INSERT FR                     NA
 Southeast Indo-Pacific Ocean                         south of the equator,    CITATION WHEN
 DPS.                                                 north of 60[deg] S.      PUBLISHED AS A
                                                      Lat., and east of        FINAL RULE].
                                                      80[deg] E. Long.;
                                                      South Pacific Ocean
                                                      south of the equator,
                                                      north of 60[deg] S.
                                                      Lat., and west of
                                                      139[deg] E. Long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Species includes taxonomic species, subspecies, distinct population segments (DPSs) (for a policy statement,
  see 61 FR 4722, February 7, 1996), and evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) (for a policy statement, see 56
  FR 58612, November 20, 1991).

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2010-5370 Filed 3-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P