Proceedings of the Eighteenth International Sea Turtle Symposium, 3-7 March 1998, Mazatlán, Sinaloa, Mexico

For the first time in its history, the International Symposium on Sea Turtle Biology and Conservation migrated to a site outside of the United States. Thus the Eighteenth edition was hosted by the Mazatlán Research Unit of the Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología of the Mexican National Autonomous University (UNAM) in Mazatlán, Sinaloa (Mexico) where it was held from 3-7, March, 1998. Above all, our symposium is prominent for its dynamism and enthusiasm in bringing together specialists from the world´s sea turtle populations. In an effort to extend this philosophy, and fully aware of how fast the interest in sea turtles has grown, the organizers paid special attention to bring together as many people as possible. With the tremendous efforts of the Travel Committee and coupled with a special interest by the Latin American region´s devotees, we managed to get 653 participants from 43 countries. The number of presentations increased significantly too, reaching a total of 265 papers, ranging from cutting-edge scientific reports based on highly sophisticated methods, to the experiences and successes of community-based and environmental education programs. A priority given by this symposium was the support and encouragement for the construction of "bridges" across cultural and discipline barriers. We found success in achieving a multinational dialogue among interest groups- scientists, resource managers, decision makers, ngo's, private industry. There was a broad representation of the broad interests that stretch across these sectors, yet everyone was able to listen and offer their own best contribution towards the central theme of the Symposium: the conservation of sea turtles and the diversity of marine and coastal environments in which they develop through their complicated and protracted life cycle. Our multidisciplinary approach is highly important at the present, finding ourselves at a cross roads of significant initiatives in the international arena of environmental law, where the conservation of sea turtles has a key role to play. Many, many people worked hard over the previous 12 months, to make the symposium a success. Our sincerest thanks to all of them: Program committee: Laura Sarti (chair), Ana Barragán, Rod Mast, Heather Kalb, Jim Spotilla, Richard Reina, Sheryan Epperly, Anna Bass, Steve Morreale, Milani Chaloupka, Robert Van Dam, Lew Ehrhart, J. Nichols, David Godfrey, Larry Herbst, René Márquez, Jack Musick, Peter Dutton, Patricia Huerta, Arturo Juárez, Debora Garcia, Carlos Suárez, German Ramírez, Raquel Briseño, Alberto Abreu; Registration and Secretary: Jane Provancha (chair), Lupita Polanco; Informatics: Germán Ramírez, Carlos Suárez; Cover art: Blas Nayar; Designs: Germán Ramírez, Raquel Briseño, Alberto Abreu. Auction: Rod Mast; Workshops and special meetings: Selina Heppell; Student prizes: Anders Rhodin; Resolutions committee: Juan Carlos Cantú; Local organizing committee: Raquel Briseño, Jane Abreu; Posters: Daniel Ríos and Jeffrey Semminoff; Travel committee: Karen Eckert (chair), Marydele Donnelly, Brendan Godley, Annette Broderick, Jack Frazier; Student travel: Francisco Silva and J. Nichols; Vendors: Tom McFarland and J. Nichols; Volunteer coordination: Richard Byles; Latin American Reunión: Angeles Cruz Morelos; Nominations committee: Randall Arauz, Colleen Coogan, Laura Sarti, Donna Shaver, Frank Paladino. Once again, Ed Drane worked his usual magic with the Treasury of the Symposium Significant financial contributions were generously provided by government agencies. SEMARNAP (Mexico´s Ministry of Environment, Natural Resources and Fisheries) through its central office, the Mazatlán Regional Fisheries Research Center (CRIP-Mazatlán) and the National Center for Education and Capacity Building for Sustainable Development (CECADESU) contributed to the logistics and covered the costs of auditoria and audiovisual equipment for the Symposium, teachers and their hotels for the Community Development and Environmental Education workshop in the 5th Latin American Sea Turtle Specialists; DIF (Dept of Family Affairs) provided free accomodation and food for the more than 100 participants in the Latin American Reunion. In this Reunion, the British Council-Mexico sponsored the workshop on the Project Cycle. The National Chamber of the Fisheries Industry (CANAINPES) kindly sponsored the Symposium´s coffee breaks. Personnel from the local Navy (Octave Zona Naval) provided invaluable aid in transport and logistics. The Scientific Coordination Office from UNAM (CICUNAM) and the Latin American Biology Network (RELAB) also provided funding. Our most sincere recognition to all of them. In the name of this Symposium´s compilers, I would like to also express our gratitude to Wayne Witzell, Technical Editor for his guidance and insights and to Jack Frazier for his help in translating and correcting the English of contributions from some non-native English speakers. Many thanks to Angel Fiscal and Tere Martin who helped with the typing in the last, last corrections and editions for these Proceedings. To all, from around the world, who generously helped make the 18th Symposium a huge success, shared their experiences and listened to ours, our deepest gratitude! (PDF contains 316 pages)

Maintaining the "public good" nature of improved fish strains: dissemination of knowledge and materials

Many sources of information that discuss currents problems of food security point to the importance of farmed fish as an ideal food source that can be grown by poor farmers, (Asian Development Bank 2004). Furthermore, the development of improved strains of fish suitable for low-input aquaculture such as Tilapia, has demonstrated the feasibility of an approach that combines “cutting edge science” with accessible technology, as a means for improving the nutrition and livelihoods of both the urban poor and poor farmers in developing countries (Mair et al. 2002). However, the use of improved strains of fish as a means of reducing hunger and improving livelihoods has proved to be difficult to sustain, especially as a public good, when external (development) funding sources devoted to this area are minimal1. In addition, the more complicated problem of delivery of an aquaculture system, not just improved fish strains and the technology, can present difficulties and may go explicitly unrecognized (from Sissel Rogne, as cited by Silje Rem 2002). Thus, the involvement of private partners has featured prominently in the strategy for transferring to the public technology related to improved Tilapia strains. Partnering with the private sector in delivery schemes to the poor should take into account both the public goods aspect and the requirement that the traits selected for breeding “improved” strains meet the actual needs of the resource poor farmer. Other dissemination approaches involving the public sector may require a large investment in capacity building. However, the use of public sector institutions as delivery agents encourages the maintaining of the “public good” nature of the products.

Scale-Dependent Habitat Selection of Nesting Great Egrets and Snowy Egrets

Foraging habitat selection of nesting Great Egrets ( Ardea alba ) and Snowy Egrets ( Egretta thula ) was investigated within an estuary with extensive impounded salt marsh habitat. Using a geographic information system, available habitat was partitioned into concentric bands at five, ten, and 15 km radius from nesting colonies to assess the relative effects of habitat composition and distance on habitat selection. Snowy Egrets were more likely than Great Egrets to depart colonies and travel to foraging sites in groups, but both species usually arrived at sites that were occupied by other wading birds. Mean flight distances were 6.2 km (SE = 0.4, N = 28, range 1.8-10.7 km) for Great Egrets and 4.7 km (SE = 0.48, N = 31, range 0.7-12.5 km) for Snowy Egrets. At the broadest spatial scale both species used impounded (mostly salt marsh) and estuarine edge habitat more than expected based on availability while avoiding unimpounded (mostly fresh water wetland) habitat. At more local scales habitat use matched availability. Interpretation of habitat preference differed with the types of habitat that were included and the maximum distance that habitat was considered available. These results illustrate that caution is needed when interpreting the results of habitat preference studies when individuals are constrained in their choice of habitats, such as for central place foragers.