320
The Biology of Sea Turtles, Vol. II
First, in an effort to reduce turtle drownings in shrimp trawls, use of TEDs was
made mandatory under U.S. law in 1989, after 10 years of failed attempts to
encourage voluntary use (Crouse, 1999; Margavio and Forsyth, 1996). Some shrimpers resisted the legislation, claiming that TEDs result in reduced catch and arguing
that they should be compensated for property loss (Anonymous, 1995). However,
resistance was more than economic. In their book, Caught in the Net , Margavio and
Forsyth (1996) explore the cultural context of the TEDs conflict. For example, they
describe traditional Cajun culture in Louisiana, its roots in fishing and hunting and
its emphasis on family, and the role shrimping plays in supporting this. Resistance
to TEDs was based on a desire to protect this culture. Resistance was also to
regulation in general, the marginalization of shrimping in the face of other economic
activities, and erosion of independence.
Second, TEDs can be described as the technocratic solution to the turtle drowning
problem, and were designed as “an effective way to allow shrimping to proceed
virtually unimpeded while protecting most sea turtles from drowning in trawls”
(Crouse, 1999). Thus, TEDs are part of a solution that does not address the overcapitalization of the shrimp and other commercial fishing industries, and which is
firmly imbedded in late-stage capitalism, a defining characteristic of Western culture.
Third, when U.S. shrimpers and environmentalists appealed to the U.S. government to expand the TEDs requirement to shrimp imports (which it did under Section
609 of Public Law 101–162), several Asian countries brought a dispute to the World
Trade Organization (WTO). Even Thailand, a country that uses TEDs and would
not have been embargoed, joined the dispute on principle. As Crouse (1999) points
out, several issues were at stake in the dispute: sovereignty and rights to dictate
fishing policy in territorial waters, rights of developed countries to dictate environmental policy in developing countries, rights of the U.S. to restrict access to its
domestic market in the era of free trade, and obligations of a global trade system to
protect endangered species. Values clearly play a role in this debate, and the prioritization of issues by individual countries reflects cultural biases and their coexistence
in a global system (sea turtles have played a more general role in antiglobalization
protests, as discussed in Section 12.2.3.4).
12.2.2.2 Habitat Use
In the mid-1990s, a conflict erupted in Volusia County, FL, and involved environmentalists, recreational drivers using a 28-mile stretch of sea turtle nesting beach,
and county government officials. Because of impacts of beach driving and artificial
lighting on sea turtles, environmentalists launched a lawsuit against the county for
violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The county responded by devising
a management plan with the objective of obtaining a permit to “take” sea turtles and
eggs (indirectly) under the ESA, and argued that beach driving constituted a cultural
asset (Fletemeyer, 1996). Other issues that arose included the rights of people to
hold local government accountable for actions impacting endangered species, and
the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution that prevents the federal government
from compelling states or localities to implement national programs. Two legal think
tanks with little stake in the turtle conservation outcome became involved in the
1123 book.book Page 320 Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:50 AM
The Biology of Sea Turtles, Vol. II
First, in an effort to reduce turtle drownings in shrimp trawls, use of TEDs was
made mandatory under U.S. law in 1989, after 10 years of failed attempts to
encourage voluntary use (Crouse, 1999; Margavio and Forsyth, 1996). Some shrimpers resisted the legislation, claiming that TEDs result in reduced catch and arguing
that they should be compensated for property loss (Anonymous, 1995). However,
resistance was more than economic. In their book, Caught in the Net , Margavio and
Forsyth (1996) explore the cultural context of the TEDs conflict. For example, they
describe traditional Cajun culture in Louisiana, its roots in fishing and hunting and
its emphasis on family, and the role shrimping plays in supporting this. Resistance
to TEDs was based on a desire to protect this culture. Resistance was also to
regulation in general, the marginalization of shrimping in the face of other economic
activities, and erosion of independence.
Second, TEDs can be described as the technocratic solution to the turtle drowning
problem, and were designed as “an effective way to allow shrimping to proceed
virtually unimpeded while protecting most sea turtles from drowning in trawls”
(Crouse, 1999). Thus, TEDs are part of a solution that does not address the overcapitalization of the shrimp and other commercial fishing industries, and which is
firmly imbedded in late-stage capitalism, a defining characteristic of Western culture.
Third, when U.S. shrimpers and environmentalists appealed to the U.S. government to expand the TEDs requirement to shrimp imports (which it did under Section
609 of Public Law 101–162), several Asian countries brought a dispute to the World
Trade Organization (WTO). Even Thailand, a country that uses TEDs and would
not have been embargoed, joined the dispute on principle. As Crouse (1999) points
out, several issues were at stake in the dispute: sovereignty and rights to dictate
fishing policy in territorial waters, rights of developed countries to dictate environmental policy in developing countries, rights of the U.S. to restrict access to its
domestic market in the era of free trade, and obligations of a global trade system to
protect endangered species. Values clearly play a role in this debate, and the prioritization of issues by individual countries reflects cultural biases and their coexistence
in a global system (sea turtles have played a more general role in antiglobalization
protests, as discussed in Section 12.2.3.4).
12.2.2.2 Habitat Use
In the mid-1990s, a conflict erupted in Volusia County, FL, and involved environmentalists, recreational drivers using a 28-mile stretch of sea turtle nesting beach,
and county government officials. Because of impacts of beach driving and artificial
lighting on sea turtles, environmentalists launched a lawsuit against the county for
violation of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The county responded by devising
a management plan with the objective of obtaining a permit to “take” sea turtles and
eggs (indirectly) under the ESA, and argued that beach driving constituted a cultural
asset (Fletemeyer, 1996). Other issues that arose included the rights of people to
hold local government accountable for actions impacting endangered species, and
the tenth amendment of the U.S. Constitution that prevents the federal government
from compelling states or localities to implement national programs. Two legal think
tanks with little stake in the turtle conservation outcome became involved in the
1123 book.book Page 320 Thursday, November 14, 2002 11:50 AM