St. Kitts and Nevis are located in the eastern Caribbean at 17°12′N, 62°27′W. There are 3 species of sea turtles actively nesting on the beaches in St. Kitts, and these include Dermochelys coriacea (leatherbacks), Eretmochelys imbricata (hawksbills), and Chelonia mydas (greens) (Meylan 1983; Wilkins and Meylan 1984; Arendt 1985; D'Arbeau 1989; Eckert and Honebrink 1992; Butler 2001), of which greens and hawksbills actively forage in the nearshore waters of St. Kitts and Nevis year-round. Loggerheads (Caretta caretta) are occasionally seen foraging in the area. Leatherbacks use the beaches for nesting from late February to mid-July annually with hawksbills and greens nesting typically from July through February annually. Leatherbacks are the primary nesting species and the focus of this study. The leatherback nesting population is estimated to be at minimum 259 individuals based on night survey data collected since 2006 during their nesting season (Stewart et al. 2006; St. Kitts Sea Turtle Monitoring Network [SKSTMN], unpubl. data, 2014).

Approximately 21% (9/43) of nations and territories in the wider Caribbean still harvest sea turtles (Dow et al. 2007). St. Kitts and Nevis have an established sea turtle fishery (St. Kitts Fisheries (Fisheries Regulations 1995) that is open from 1 October through 28 February annually in which all species of sea turtles can be captured offshore and rendered for human consumption as long as they meet minimum weight requirements, which are established for each species. The current regulations in St. Kitts stipulate that, to be considered a legal catch, leatherbacks must be at least 158.18 kg (350 lbs), greens 81.66 kg (180 lbs), hawksbills 38.6 kg (85 lbs), and loggerheads 72.59 kg (160 lbs) (Fisheries Regulations 1995). Nesting animals and their nests are protected year-round because it is illegal to interfere with a nesting turtle or a turtle nest. Because these species are listed as vulnerable (leatherbacks), critically endangered (hawksbills), and endangered (greens and loggerheads) (International Union for Conservation of Nature [IUCN] 2015) and with the pressure on the local environment from development, poaching, and the open fishing season (Eckert and Honebrink 1992; Butler 2001; Bräutigam and Eckert 2006; Dow et al. 2007; SKSTMN, pers. comm., May 2015), the need for strengthened protection measures, and the development of nonconsumable sources of income based on sea turtle conservation, rather than the harvest, is critical.

Eckert and Honebrink (1992) reported in the Sea Turtle Recovery Action Plan (STRAP) for St. Kitts and Nevis that “10–20, perhaps fewer, part-time turtle fishermen based in Nevis; the annual reported catch in the last five years has sometimes exceeded 100 turtles (Wilkins and Barrett 1987; Barrett 1988).” At the time the STRAP was prepared, there were no data on the number of St. Kitts fishers involved in the turtle fishing industry, but the total number of sea turtles landed was estimated to exceed 100 (Eckert and Honebrink 1992). These figures had not been updated in the literature as of the last report on the fishery in 2006 because no additional data had been obtained for St. Kitts (Bräutigam and Eckert 2006). Updated figures for Nevis were more recently provided by Humber et al. (2014). Based on personal communications between the SKSTMN and the St. Kitts Department of Marine Resources (DMR) in 2006, it was estimated that there were approximately 10 fishers in St. Kitts who still depended financially on the harvest of sea turtles. The sea turtle fishery in Nevis is still active, but sea turtle fishers, both numbers of fishers and the status of the fishery, from Nevis were not assessed in this study attributable to logistical and financial constraints.

The apparently low number of fishers engaged in this industry, coupled with the potential for development of sources of income based on conservation rather than harvest of sea turtles, prompted the SKSTMN to set out in 2006 to determine the status of sea turtle stocks in St. Kitts and to determine the feasibility of developing a local community-based ecotourism project focused on sea turtles. Various examples of programs offering incentives for sea turtle conservation activities versus harvest, including the Brazilian Sea Turtle Conservation Project (TAMAR), were reviewed prior to program development and design (Marcovaldi et al. 2005; Stronza and Pêgas 2008). One program, Nature Seekers in Trinidad, was visited by one of the authors to gain insight and ideas on successful development and implementation of sea turtle ecotourism projects. The SKSTMN designed and implemented a sustainable leatherback ecotourism project in 2009, employing fishers in the hope it would decrease sea turtle fishing pressure in St. Kitts and promote tourism. The purpose of this article is to review the activities and outcomes associated with the Leatherback Ecotourism Project.

METHODS

RESULTS

Sea Turtle Fisher Surveys

Seven of the estimated 10 individuals involved in the sea turtle fishery representing the fishing communities of Dieppe Bay and Sandy Point, St. Kitts, participated in the survey (Table 1). All were actively engaged in the sea turtle fisheries industry, and all set nets as their capture method. Earnings for turtles ranged from 5 to 7 Eastern Caribbean Dollars (ECD) (USD 1.86–2.60) per pound for meat to ECD 280–400 (USD 104–148) for a whole animal. All of the respondents were interested in participating in a conservation program where they could be paid (Table 1). All were interested in participating in further training programs and in participating further in the SKSTMN's initiatives and provided contact information so that they could be informed.

Table 1. Results of St. Kitts Fishers' Survey. PFS = personal food source; HB = hawksbill; GRN = green; LB = leatherback; SRC = sunrise check; SSC = sunset check; RP = research projects; NP = taking individuals out on night walks; NT = no tourists; MS = morning surveys; OBBS = taking individuals out by boat for snorkeling; T = tagging workshops; S = sampling workshops; DC = data collection workshops; E = ecotourism workshops.

View Fullscreen

Development of a Fisher Technician Program

In St. Kitts, the minimum wage per hour in 2009 was ECD 8 (USD 2.98) (increased 1 November 2014 to ECD 9/hr (USD 3.35). This wage rate, combined with the minimal number of fishers engaged in the sea turtle fishing industry, the need for sustainable income to maintain these positions, the potential income from ecotourism, and the interest level of fishers from the Fisher Survey, lead the authors to deem that the concept of employment through ecotourism versus harvest was a feasible opportunity. Fishers who had expressed interest in employment on the conservation program during the Fisher Survey were offered positions as night patrol staff.

Survey Results on the Feasibility of a Leatherback Ecotour Project

A combined total of 407 people representing tourists, residents, and citizens responded to the survey. Tourists were classified as temporary visitors to the island, citizens as individuals born in St. Kitts, and residents as individuals living in St. Kitts but not born in St. Kitts. Tourists represented 36.8% (n = 150) of those surveyed, citizens 18.2% (n = 74), residents 37.8% (n = 154), and 7.1% (n = 29) did not reveal their status. Significantly (p = 0.0001) more females (60.3%, n = 245) responded to the survey than males (39.7%, n = 162). There was a significant difference in gender by location (p = 0.001), with female citizens and tourists being more likely to answer the survey than males.

The majority of the tourists surveyed were from ships (64.8%, n = 264); the remaining respondents were from hotels (19.1%, n = 78) or did not reveal their affiliation (16.1%, n = 65). Citizens (67.6%, n = 50) and residents (89.6%, n = 154) were significantly (χ² = 169.4, p = 0.0001) more likely than tourists (16.7%, n = 25) to know turtles were present on St. Kitts and Nevis. Similarly, citizens (47.2%, n = 34) and residents (53.0%, n = 26) were significantly (χ² = 55.28, p = 0.0001) more likely than tourists (6.7%, n = 8) to know the SKSTMN existed. Although the majority of tourists said they would go on a leatherback ecotour (62.7%, n = 50), residents (85.6%, n = 131) were significantly (χ² = 26.40, p = 0.003) more likely to reply positively.

When asked whether additional items should be included with the proposed Leatherback Ecotour Package, respondents suggested a t-shirt, transport to the beach, a snack/meal, and a craft product, in that order from most to least important, as potential considerations (Table 2).

Table 2. Results from question 7 on the SKSTMN Feasibility of a Leatherback Ecotour Project Survey (Appendix 2) in which respondents were asked if they would like to see specific items added to the SKSTMN Ecotour Package and, if so (indicated below by yes or no), how much they would be willing to pay above the base tour fee for these individual items to be added. The median represents the best estimate of the central tendency. The 10%–90% represent the range in which 80% of the data lies. The minimum and maximum were the lowest and highest values, respectively.

View Fullscreen

Evaluation of the Effects of the Fisher Technician Program on the Sea Turtle Harvest

Fishers who accepted employment on the Fisher Technician Program reported that they had consequently ceased their sea turtle harvest activities. Based on the individual harvest rates that these fishers had reported in the initial Fishers' Survey conducted in 2006, it was estimated that as a result of these individuals ceasing their activities that the sea turtle harvest was reduced by 150–200 sea turtles per year.

Outcome Assessment Survey of the Leatherback Ecotour Project (2009–2014)

From the base of over 500 former tour participants, a total of 206 who had gone on a SKSTMN Leatherback Ecotour between 2009 and 2014 shared their email addresses on SKSTMN Leatherback Ecotour waivers and were contacted to participate in the survey. Of the invitations sent to these people, 88 (43%) opened the survey, 40 (45%) of these started the survey, and overall 38 (18%) completed the survey.

Only a few respondents became aware of the SKSTMN Leatherback Ecotours through the SKSTMN website (8%, n = 3), Facebook Page (11%, n = 4), or advertisements in hotels or businesses (8%, n = 3). Of the 74% (n = 28) that stated “other” as the source of their awareness, most said they had heard about the tours through participants on the project or students at RUSVM. Only a few respondents booked the tour through the Sea Turtle Hotline (13%, n = 5), with most using email (41%, n = 16) or other (46%, n = 17) (family member or friend on island or a hotel).

Most respondents (61%, n = 23) saw a nesting female leatherback on the tour, and a smaller number (16%, n = 6) saw a leatherback hatchling. All respondents felt that the tour enhanced their understanding of sea turtles and that ecotourism had a positive impact on sea turtles. Many (92%, n = 34) felt that the tour provided them with knowledge on how to make a positive impact on turtles, and those who had misconceptions about turtles prior to the tour (8%, n = 3) said it was simply a lack of knowledge and that the tour had broadened their understanding. A majority of respondents (59%, n = 20) who received supplementary information about the tour found it useful and 97% (n = 32) thought this material should remain part of the package. One respondent suggested disseminating the material electronically rather than in a paper format. A majority of respondents (88%, n = 30) also thought that the drink offered on the tour should remain part of the package.

Most (82%, n = 30) of the respondents said the cost of the tour was reasonable, and all said they would recommend the tour to others. All of the respondents also said that in the future they would be more conscientious of how their actions on the beaches might affect turtles and that more beaches should be designated as protected instead of being further developed. They also agreed that involving turtle fishers in ecotourism was a viable economic alternative for them and an important part of sustainable conservation. Nearly all respondents (97%, n = 36) felt that the conservation of sea turtles was an urgent issue and that they would now be more likely to report sightings of turtle nests and injured turtles.

The majority of respondents (95%, n = 35) said they would take the tour again. The two dissenting respondents said the decision was price related.

DISCUSSION

Sea turtles are keystone species within their natural range and play an important role in maintaining the marine ecosystem (Gulko and Eckert 2003). Without these animals, the entire system suffers. Loss of habitat, such as coral reefs or seagrass beds, leads to diminished fishing, snorkeling, and diving. In addition to the biological and ecological relevance of these animals to the country, sea turtles are also an engaging species, capturing human emotions and drawing individuals in as proponents for the ecosystem. Sea turtle populations in St. Kitts are primarily under pressure attributable to coastal development, sand mining, and the sea turtle fishery (Eckert and Honebrink 1992; Butler 2001; Bräutigam and Eckert 2006; Dow et al. 2007; SKSTMN, pers. comm., May 2015).

Because little is known about turtle fishing and its effects on sea turtle populations in St. Kitts, we organized a meeting with local turtle fishers to establish baseline data on their activities. Based on the Fisher Survey results and information from the St. Kitts DMR, it is likely that approximately 340 sea turtles were captured annually in St. Kitts prior to 2007. This represents a dramatic difference (3.4 times higher) in the number of turtles harvested compared with the estimates of Eckert and Honebrink (1992). Over that 15-yr (1992–2007) period alone, it could represent a loss of 5000 animals. The primary species taken in the St. Kitts harvest are hawksbills, which are listed as critically endangered, followed by greens, which are listed as endangered (IUCN 2015). It is imperative that preemptive sustainable measures be taken to eliminate continued harvest of these endangered animals.

Our survey showed turtle fishers captured turtles that were smaller than that stipulated by current law, but respondents stated these smaller animals were released if they were still alive. There are currently, however, no formal inspections at the landing sites or offshore to inspect catches, and although limited field surveys by SKSTMN have found most harvested sea turtles to be within the regulatory limits (SKSTMN, unpubl. data, 2009), it is uncertain that the majority of sea turtle fishers abide by the regulations at all times. Of particular note, our survey showed the income from harvested turtles was substantial for many fishers and that all we surveyed were interested in being trained in various aspects of conservation and to be employed in turtle conservation programs.

From 2010 to 2014, the SKSTMN has appreciated a steady flow of tourists, with over 500 individuals taking a tour prior to the initiation of the Leatherback Ecotour Assessment Survey in 2014. The number of respondents the SKSTMN had for the Leatherback Ecotour Assessment Survey was relatively low, but this was found to be because the majority of tour participants who left their email addresses for further contact were RUSVM students who had completed their studies, left the island, and had their university email accounts deactivated. Although the number of responses was relatively small, there was a very high level of agreement among responders that was consistent with local experience that the ecotours met and exceeded expectations. Of note is that respondents reported that the tour was a success even if they did not see a nesting female or hatchling, and that a majority of respondents still stated that they would take the tour again and recommend it to others. The positive responses to the St. Kitts Leatherback Ecotour Program were similar to those reported by Tisdell and Wilson (2005) in their assessment of the role sea turtle ecotourism played in promoting environmental learning and sustaining conservation at Mons Repos Conservation Park in Queensland, Australia (Tisdell and Wilson 2002, 2003, Fleischer 2009). In visitor survey results from Tisdell and Wilson (2002), 99% of respondents indicated that their experience was educational. Following their tour at Mon Repos, survey respondents indicated that more should be done to conserve sea turtles and, that now that they were aware of issues affecting sea turtles, they would alter their behavior to be more considerate of these animals. A large number said they would be more likely to donate for sea turtle conservation programs than had they not participated in this experience at Mon Repos (Tisdell and Wilson 2002).

The positive engagement of fishers and subsequent decrease in harvest pressure has been seen on long–standing sea turtle conservation programs such as TAMAR (Marcavaldi et al. 2005; Stronza and Pêgas 2008; Pêgas and Stronza 2010). For example, when residents of the Praia do Forte area were assessed through a survey process, the majority of respondents indicated that they now valued sea turtles differently than in the past because they could see the importance of sea turtle ecotourism to the local economy (Pêgas and Stronza 2010). Additionally, increases in employment of residents of the area working for the program coupled with increasing numbers of hawksbill and loggerhead nests at TAMAR's Praia do Forte location are indicators of success (Marcovaldi and Chaloupka 2007; Marcovaldi et al. 2007; Pêgas and Stronza 2010). The positive survey responses on the SKSTMN Outcome Assessment Survey of the Leatherback Ecotour Project were also consistent with local experience on St. Kitts, which further showed the project had been successful in raising local awareness about the importance of protecting the main turtle nesting beaches, as well as the potential for sustainable income generation from conservation-related projects. The recommendation to disseminate supplemental educational material electronically rather than in a paper format was incorporated into the SKSTMN Leatherback Ecotour Program. Consequently, electronic copies of all supplemental educational materials are emailed to participants following their tour rather than distributed in paper format. The SKSTMN was not able to determine the exact number of sea turtles saved because of the reemployment of turtle fishers into the program and the educational programs offered; however, based on previous reported harvest rates, we suggested a conservative estimate of 150–200 turtles per year.

As a result of the apparent success of the Leatherback Ecotour Program to date, and for the sea turtle ecotour industry in St. Kitts to become fully sustainable and incorporate all desired elements identified through the survey process, development of a centralized low impact area for tour origination, craft production and marketing, educational displays, rehabilitation tanks, and guest accommodation would be highly beneficial and is the next step in expansion for the SKSTMN. This is also a way to maintain tour participant numbers during low nesting seasons because participants will be able to view turtles and educational materials even if the nesting females are not present at the time of their tour. Additionally, it will be open year-round, not only during leatherback nesting season, thereby serving as an educational outlet and sustainable income source during all months of the year. This is the next step in the progression of preemptive measures to protect the main nesting beaches, while at the same time providing community-based sustainable sources of income based on sea turtle conservation.

In summary, we found the turtle fishers of St. Kitts harvested substantial numbers of turtles each year, and this was an important source of income for those engaged in the industry. Most of the fishers, however, wanted to learn more about conservation and were interested in gaining employment in conservation-related fields. In response, interested fishers were initially recruited and trained as Sea Turtle Technicians collecting research data, and later their employment was maintained through provision of ecotours through the Leatherback Ecotour Program. After 5 yrs of operation and over 500 tour participants, a survey to assess the business demonstrated that respondents were positive about the tour, which has led to plans to further develop the business. The Leatherback Ecotour Program has become an example of a successful self-sustaining business that promotes conservation-based employment.