Social and Economic Aspects of Sea Turtle Conservation
367
A principal lesson offered by Hardin’s (1968) description of the tragedy of the
commons is that there is no technological escape from it. Rather, preventing the loss
of our common resources will take what Hardin termed “mutual coercion mutually
agreed upon”; that is, rule of law. The key to avoiding tragic loss of sea turtle
populations and species will be to manage oceans not as a commons but as an area
with turtles having specific identifiable ownership and legal responsibility (Eckert,
1991; Crowder, 2000).
14.8 CASE STUDIES OF SEA TURTLE VALUE
AND CONSERVATION
14.8.1 M ANAGING L IGHT P OLLUTION
Artificial lighting that is visible from the beach discourages females from emerging
onto the beach to nest (Witherington, 1992) and disrupts the orientation of hatchlings
in their attempt to find the sea from their nest (Witherington, 1997). The potential
of light pollution to change spatial nesting patterns (Salmon et al., 2000) and cause
mass mortality in misled hatchlings (Witherington, 1997) makes this an important
conservation problem. The complexity of the problem is well represented in the case
of lighted development on Florida nesting beaches.
Stakeholders in the problem of light pollution in Florida include resident beachfront property owners, beachfront businesses, the public at large with varied interests,
governmental agencies at several levels and with varied interests, and nongovernmental organizations representing either business or sea turtle conservation. How
the interests of these stakeholders compete can be described by the values sought
by each of them. Resident property owners experience economic value from lighting
that prevents theft and creates comfort (beautiful, comfortable homes are worth
more), and businesses experience a similar value from lighting, but with additional
value stemming from conspicuous lighting that attracts customers. Sea turtles on
Florida beaches (principally loggerheads, green turtles, and leatherbacks) are a public
resource. Because harvesting is illegal, they are presumed to be most valued for
their nonconsumptive use, existence, and intrinsic value. Florida state and U.S.
federal laws prohibiting sea turtle harassment are evidence that the value of Florida’s
sea turtles extends to people who live far from the state’s beaches.
Although stakeholders are widely spread, the principal regulation of beach light
pollution has come from local county and municipal laws. As of this writing, laws
prohibiting light visible from the beach during the nesting season have been passed
in 20 coastal counties (of 25 coastal counties where sea turtles nest) and 46 municipalities in Florida whose jurisdictions encompass approximately 95% of loggerhead
and green turtle nesting in the state (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data). When most of these ordinances were proposed to local
governing commissions, arguments were made regarding costs and benefits of darkening the beach to protect sea turtles (B.E. Witherington, personal observation).
Although the weight of the various arguments was not measured, many of the
commissioners speaking during ordinance deliberations placed emphasis on light
management that would maintain the value of lighting (i.e., allow it to be used so
1123 book.book Page 367 Monday, November 11, 2002 11:11 AM
367
A principal lesson offered by Hardin’s (1968) description of the tragedy of the
commons is that there is no technological escape from it. Rather, preventing the loss
of our common resources will take what Hardin termed “mutual coercion mutually
agreed upon”; that is, rule of law. The key to avoiding tragic loss of sea turtle
populations and species will be to manage oceans not as a commons but as an area
with turtles having specific identifiable ownership and legal responsibility (Eckert,
1991; Crowder, 2000).
14.8 CASE STUDIES OF SEA TURTLE VALUE
AND CONSERVATION
14.8.1 M ANAGING L IGHT P OLLUTION
Artificial lighting that is visible from the beach discourages females from emerging
onto the beach to nest (Witherington, 1992) and disrupts the orientation of hatchlings
in their attempt to find the sea from their nest (Witherington, 1997). The potential
of light pollution to change spatial nesting patterns (Salmon et al., 2000) and cause
mass mortality in misled hatchlings (Witherington, 1997) makes this an important
conservation problem. The complexity of the problem is well represented in the case
of lighted development on Florida nesting beaches.
Stakeholders in the problem of light pollution in Florida include resident beachfront property owners, beachfront businesses, the public at large with varied interests,
governmental agencies at several levels and with varied interests, and nongovernmental organizations representing either business or sea turtle conservation. How
the interests of these stakeholders compete can be described by the values sought
by each of them. Resident property owners experience economic value from lighting
that prevents theft and creates comfort (beautiful, comfortable homes are worth
more), and businesses experience a similar value from lighting, but with additional
value stemming from conspicuous lighting that attracts customers. Sea turtles on
Florida beaches (principally loggerheads, green turtles, and leatherbacks) are a public
resource. Because harvesting is illegal, they are presumed to be most valued for
their nonconsumptive use, existence, and intrinsic value. Florida state and U.S.
federal laws prohibiting sea turtle harassment are evidence that the value of Florida’s
sea turtles extends to people who live far from the state’s beaches.
Although stakeholders are widely spread, the principal regulation of beach light
pollution has come from local county and municipal laws. As of this writing, laws
prohibiting light visible from the beach during the nesting season have been passed
in 20 coastal counties (of 25 coastal counties where sea turtles nest) and 46 municipalities in Florida whose jurisdictions encompass approximately 95% of loggerhead
and green turtle nesting in the state (Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, unpublished data). When most of these ordinances were proposed to local
governing commissions, arguments were made regarding costs and benefits of darkening the beach to protect sea turtles (B.E. Witherington, personal observation).
Although the weight of the various arguments was not measured, many of the
commissioners speaking during ordinance deliberations placed emphasis on light
management that would maintain the value of lighting (i.e., allow it to be used so
1123 book.book Page 367 Monday, November 11, 2002 11:11 AM