14
Biology of Sea Turtles, Volume II
Some of the most detailed interpretations of animal remains have been done for
sites in the Caribbean by Wing (2001a; 2001b). Using a series of estimates of body
size, minimum number of individuals, biomass contribution, and trophic level, she
provided a number of lines of evidence that nonindustrial, indigenous peoples made
serious impacts on the animal populations that they exploited, essentially “fishing
down the food web.” This phenomenon, described in detail by Pauly et al. (1998)
for modern fisheries, involves a trend in taking relatively fewer select species (e.g.,
top predators) and relatively more lower trophic level species (e.g., herbivores) over
time; it is a clear indication of overfishing and nonsustainable resource use. Wing’s
analysis (2001a: Tables 5–12) indicates that the relative contribution of marine turtle
biomass declined markedly over time in two of the four sites that were evaluated.
In addition to direct consumption, there is evidence from the Caribbean that
tortoiseshell was fashioned into fishhooks during pre-Columbian times (Price, 1966:
1364; Wing and Reitz, 1982: 24). The use of tortoiseshell by peoples of the southeastern plain has been mentioned above.
Numerous archaeological sites along the shores of the Yucatán Peninsula have
been identified as Maya (e.g., Andrews et al., 1974; Miller, 1982; Hamblin, 1984;
Andrews and Robles, 1986; Carr, 1989a; 1989b). Given the antiquity, permanence,
and level of sophistication of the Mayan civilization (Drew, 1999), together with the
fact that the Yucatán Peninsula is a major nesting area for three species of marine
turtle (Frazier, 1993), it is expected that archaeological remains of these animals
should be common and widespread. However, there seem to be remarkably few
reports — much less systematic studies — of marine turtle remains in Maya sites
(Table 1.4).
A large coastal midden on Cancún Island was dated at no older than 630 B.C.E.
(Andrews et al., 1974: 157, 166). The vertebrate remains were exclusively marine,
and marine turtles were the most abundant taxa, with more than 2250 carapace
fragments recovered. It was estimated that “at least nine large individuals” were
represented, but species identification was not possible (Wing, 1974: 187). Remains
of C. mydas were recorded at Dzibilchaltun, a site just north of Mérida that was
occupied for millennia; it was argued that marine life was not important in the diet,
but was important for religious and ritual activities of the Maya (Wing and Steadman,
1980). However, there were also suggestions that marine resources were underrepresented because of transport practices (Andrews in Wing and Steadman, 1980: 331,
footnote). Miller (1982: 6), reporting from Tancah-Tulum, on the Caribbean coast
of the Peninsula, states that marine subsistence patterns did not change between the
Maya Preclassic and Colonial periods (a span of about 1.5 millennia). He indicates
that turtle carapaces were consistently found in different levels; however, no specific
information was provided.
Hamblin (1984) performed one of the most detailed studies of animal remains
in the Maya area, working with a remarkable volume of animal bone (some 20,649
specimens) and diversity of species (at least 77) from the island of Cozumel.
Included were many species not usually identified, particularly animals of small
body size and with relatively delicate bones. Although turtle bones were abundant,
there were just 19 bones from marine turtles (only about 1% of all turtle bones
found, the vast majority being from smaller, freshwater species). At least two
1123_C01.fm Page 14 Friday, November 15, 2002 11:13 AM
Biology of Sea Turtles, Volume II
Some of the most detailed interpretations of animal remains have been done for
sites in the Caribbean by Wing (2001a; 2001b). Using a series of estimates of body
size, minimum number of individuals, biomass contribution, and trophic level, she
provided a number of lines of evidence that nonindustrial, indigenous peoples made
serious impacts on the animal populations that they exploited, essentially “fishing
down the food web.” This phenomenon, described in detail by Pauly et al. (1998)
for modern fisheries, involves a trend in taking relatively fewer select species (e.g.,
top predators) and relatively more lower trophic level species (e.g., herbivores) over
time; it is a clear indication of overfishing and nonsustainable resource use. Wing’s
analysis (2001a: Tables 5–12) indicates that the relative contribution of marine turtle
biomass declined markedly over time in two of the four sites that were evaluated.
In addition to direct consumption, there is evidence from the Caribbean that
tortoiseshell was fashioned into fishhooks during pre-Columbian times (Price, 1966:
1364; Wing and Reitz, 1982: 24). The use of tortoiseshell by peoples of the southeastern plain has been mentioned above.
Numerous archaeological sites along the shores of the Yucatán Peninsula have
been identified as Maya (e.g., Andrews et al., 1974; Miller, 1982; Hamblin, 1984;
Andrews and Robles, 1986; Carr, 1989a; 1989b). Given the antiquity, permanence,
and level of sophistication of the Mayan civilization (Drew, 1999), together with the
fact that the Yucatán Peninsula is a major nesting area for three species of marine
turtle (Frazier, 1993), it is expected that archaeological remains of these animals
should be common and widespread. However, there seem to be remarkably few
reports — much less systematic studies — of marine turtle remains in Maya sites
(Table 1.4).
A large coastal midden on Cancún Island was dated at no older than 630 B.C.E.
(Andrews et al., 1974: 157, 166). The vertebrate remains were exclusively marine,
and marine turtles were the most abundant taxa, with more than 2250 carapace
fragments recovered. It was estimated that “at least nine large individuals” were
represented, but species identification was not possible (Wing, 1974: 187). Remains
of C. mydas were recorded at Dzibilchaltun, a site just north of Mérida that was
occupied for millennia; it was argued that marine life was not important in the diet,
but was important for religious and ritual activities of the Maya (Wing and Steadman,
1980). However, there were also suggestions that marine resources were underrepresented because of transport practices (Andrews in Wing and Steadman, 1980: 331,
footnote). Miller (1982: 6), reporting from Tancah-Tulum, on the Caribbean coast
of the Peninsula, states that marine subsistence patterns did not change between the
Maya Preclassic and Colonial periods (a span of about 1.5 millennia). He indicates
that turtle carapaces were consistently found in different levels; however, no specific
information was provided.
Hamblin (1984) performed one of the most detailed studies of animal remains
in the Maya area, working with a remarkable volume of animal bone (some 20,649
specimens) and diversity of species (at least 77) from the island of Cozumel.
Included were many species not usually identified, particularly animals of small
body size and with relatively delicate bones. Although turtle bones were abundant,
there were just 19 bones from marine turtles (only about 1% of all turtle bones
found, the vast majority being from smaller, freshwater species). At least two
1123_C01.fm Page 14 Friday, November 15, 2002 11:13 AM