Phase 12 082 Science Report Final

8/14/2019 Phase 12 082 Science Report Final

1/53

GVI Costa Rica

Coastal Rainforest and Wildlife

Research Expedition

Phase Report 081

11th

January 21st

March 2008

Phase Report 082

11th April 20th June 2008


2/53

GVI Costa Rica Coastal Rainforest and Wildlife Research Expedition Report

Submitted in whole to:Global Vision International

The Canadian Organisation for Tropical Education and Rainforest Conservation

(COTERC)Steven Furino, Waterloo University, Canada

Submitted in part to:The Ministry of Environment and Energy of Costa Rica (MINAE)

Produced byDavid Jones Base Manager

Rebeca Chaverri - Country DirectorDiogo Verissimo Expedition Staff

Sara Calada Expedition StaffBrooke McIntyre Expedition StaffTom Bregman Expedition Intern

And

Kate Isger Expedition Member Imogen Wilson Expedition Member

Amanda King Expedition Member Will Straker Expedition Member

Michelle Miller Expedition Member Ivan Holubetz Expedition Member

Richard Phillips Expedition Member Olivia Couchman Expedition Member

William Boyko Expedition Member Felicity North Expedition Member

Gary Cook Expedition Member Kayla Nadeau Expedition Member

Sarah Keynes Expedition Member Amanda Platts Expedition Member

Sophie Pryor Expedition Member Kathleen Sims Expedition Member

Reena Nobeen Expedition Member Joseph Welch Expedition Member

GVI Costa Rica Coastal Rainforest and Wildlife Research Expedition

Address: Estacin Biolgica Cao Palma, Tortuguero, Costa RicaTel: (+506) 2709 8052

Email: [email protected]

Web page:

http://www.gvi.co.uk

http://gvicostarica.blogspot.com
mailto:[email protected]://www.gvi.co.uk/http://gvicostarica.blogspot.com/http://gvicostarica.blogspot.com/http://www.gvi.co.uk/mailto:[email protected]


3/53

Executive Summary

The 12th ten-week phase (phase 082) of the Global Vision International (GVI) Costa

Rica Coastal Rainforest and Wildlife Research Expedition has now been completed. The

research expedition, based at Estacin Biolgica Cao Palma (EBCP), has continued towork towards the gathering of important environmental scientific data whilst working with

local, national and international partners and has maintained working relationships with

local communities through both English classes and local community events. The

following projects were conducted during phase 082:

Marine Turtle Monitoring and Conservation Programme. In collaboration with the

Canadian Organization for Tropical Education and Rainforest Conservation

(COTERC) and the Costa Rican Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE) andin association with the Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC).

Monitoring of Jaguar Predation on Marine Turtles. In collaboration with MINAE.

Jaguar Camera Trapping Study in Tortuguero National Park (TNP). In collaboration

with MINAE.

Large Mammal Monitoring Programme. Volunteers supplied to COTERC.

Canal Bird Monitoring Programme. In collaboration with Steven Furino from

Waterloo University, Canada.

Cao Palma Biological Station Incidental Species Study Canal Boat Impact Study on Cao Palma canal.

Meteorology and Environmental Study. In collaboration with COTERC.

English Language and Environmental Education lessons. In collaboration with the

San Francisco community and Tortuguero Canopy.

3


4/53

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ..........................................................................................................31 General introduction.................................................................................................. 82 Marine Turtle Monitoring and Conservation Programme ........................................11

2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 112.2 Aims ................................................................................................................ 122.3 Methodology.................................................................................................... 12

2.3.1 Study site.................................................................................................122.3.2 Pre-season preparations .........................................................................132.3.3 Data collection .........................................................................................13

2.4 Results ............................................................................................................163 Jaguar Predation of Marine Turtles Study...............................................................19


3.3.1 Study site.................................................................................................203.3.2

Survey technique.....................................................................................21

3.3.3 Data collection .........................................................................................21

3.4 Results ............................................................................................................234 Jaguar Camera Trapping Study ..............................................................................24


4.3.1 Study site.................................................................................................254.3.2 Survey techniques ...................................................................................254.3.3 Data collection .........................................................................................26

4.4 Results ............................................................................................................275 Canal Bird Monitoring Programme ..........................................................................30

5.1

Introduction...................................................................................................... 30

5.2 Aims ................................................................................................................ 305.3 Methodology.................................................................................................... 31

5.3.1 Study site.................................................................................................315.3.2 Data collection .........................................................................................31

5.4 Results ............................................................................................................336 Incidental Species Study.........................................................................................37


6.3.1 Data collection .........................................................................................376.4 Results ............................................................................................................37

7 Canal Boat Impact Study.........................................................................................407.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 407.2 Aims ................................................................................................................ 407.3 Methodology.................................................................................................... 41

7.3.1 Data collection .........................................................................................417.4 Results ............................................................................................................42

8 Meteorology and Environmental Study ...................................................................458.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 458.2 Aim .................................................................................................................. 45

4


5/53

8.3 Methodology.................................................................................................... 458.4 Data collection.................................................................................................458.5 Results ............................................................................................................46

9 English Language and Environmental Education....................................................479.1 Introduction to English Teaching ..................................................................... 479.2 Introduction to Environmental Education......................................................... 479.3 Aims ................................................................................................................ 479.4 Methodology.................................................................................................... 48

9.4.1 Training....................................................................................................489.4.2 Teaching..................................................................................................48

9.5 Results ............................................................................................................4910 References..............................................................................................................51

5


6/53

List of Tables

Table 2-1: Summary of Phase 082 results for Playa Norte and Nesting Season so far . 17Table 3-1 Breakdown of main results for phase and season .......................................... 23Table 4-1 General data ................................................................................................... 27Table 4-2 Trapping site information ................................................................................27Table 4-3 Presence / absence of known species this phase .......................................... 28Table 5-1 Canal Bird Monitoring Study Species .............................................................31Table 5-2 General phase totals for all canals.................................................................. 33Table 5-3 Unusual recordings for phase per canal ......................................................... 34Table 5-4 Presence/absence of species for phase......................................................... 34Table 5-5 Presence/absence of species per canal for phase .........................................35Table 6-1 Overview of incidental totals this phase.......................................................... 37Table 6-2 Most commonly recorded species by class for phase ....................................38Table 6-3 Special Interest sightings for phase ................................................................39Table 7-1 Boat use restriction on Cao Palma, Tortuguero, Costa Rica. .......................40Table 7-2 General Canal boat impact data for phase .....................................................42

Table 7-3 Average canal usage for phase by ACTo time restriction...............................42

Table 7-4 Activity by usage type ..................................................................................... 43Table 8-1 Weekly environmental averages for phase.....................................................46Table 8-2 Monthly environmental averages for year ....................................................... 46

6


7/53

List of Figures

Figure 2-1 Nest Status as determined by morning census Jan June 2008..................18Figure 4-1 Gray four-eyed opossum; nine-banded armadillo..........................................28Figure 4-2 Great curassow (male); common opossum ...................................................29Figure 4-3 Red brocket deer; paca .................................................................................29Figure 6-1 Most commonly recorded species for phase (recorded 75% of days).........38Figure 7-1 Percentage canal usage tourist vs. non-tourist..............................................43Figure 7-2 Breakdown of canal usage by Tourist Lodge.................................................44Figure 7-3 Total number of boat by time for phase ......................................................... 44Figure 9-1 Community Event focusing on awareness of birds and the environment ......49Figure 9-2 Community Event focusing on forests around the world and the importance of

rainforests .......................................................................................................................50

7


8/53

1 General introduction

Global Vision International (GVI) was formed in 1998 to provide support and services to

international charities, non-profits and governmental agencies, through volunteering

opportunities and direct funding. GVI is guided by a unique commitment to its volunteersand to its partners. To the volunteer it offers a safe responsible travel experiences,

exceptional training and career development opportunities, and facilitates the ability to

make a real difference. To its partners it commits all research ownership rights and all

work is undertaken under their direction, in conjunction with the local community. In July

2006, GVI established the Costa Rica expedition based at Estacin Biolgica Cao

Palma (EBCP), Tortuguero.

The biological station is located in the southern section of the Barra del Colorado WildlifeRefuge (BCWR) directly to the north of Tortuguero National Park (TNP). The area of

operation for the expedition covers both TNP and the BCWR; both of which are included

in the Tortuguero Conservation Area (ACTo). The area consists of a collection of

waterways running through Caribbean lowland rainforest. The coastal habitats are

generally similar in type throughout the area of operation with small variation in boarding

habitats, width of the beach and quantity and type of debris found on the beach. The

forest habitats vary more considerably with several distinct habitats being present.

Altitudinal differences of a couple metres have a large effect on both habitat and speciescomposition in the area. Lower areas, such as those found around the station, tend have

large areas of flooded forest whereas the drier areas associated to the national park

tend to only be submerged during times of flooding. Within ACTo there are also areas

containing higher ground of up to 311m in Lomas de Sierpe. Most of the research is

carried out within TNP and BCWR, where the highest elevation is El Cerro (119 m).

Although these are not particularly high, they do provide non-floodable habitat. The

ecological importance of the ACTo has been recognized for some time; however, the

level of active research has been minimal aside from the world-renowned turtle studies.

The EBCP was purchased in 1991 by the Canadian Organization for Tropical Education

and Rainforest Conservation (COTERC). The stations research was intended to focus

on terrestrial ecology studies leaving the monitoring of the turtle population to the

Caribbean Conservation Corporation (CCC). Prior to GVIs arrival a number of studies

8


9/53

had been undertaken looking at various species and habitats but no longer term

monitoring projects had been possible.

GVIs volunteer resource made long-term studies possible and needs were assessed

and partnerships sourced. Currently GVI is working closely with MINAE, COTERC,Waterloo University, the local community of San Francisco and the CCC.

Along with the individual needs of partners, GVI seeks to meet several of its own aims

when undertaking work in an area. These aims are:

Document biodiversity of the area

Increase scientific knowledge

Encourage scientific interest in the area

Increase community awareness and capacity building

Support sustainable development.

The Tortuguero area has been of strong interest to the scientific community since Archie

Carrs studies of the Marine Turtles of Tortuguero beach during the 1950s. Archie Carr

highlighted the importance of this stretch of coast for green turtles (Chelonia mydas) and

his work promoted the TNP establishment in 1975 (Boza & Mendoza 1981).

Being a large charismatic species, green turtles tend to attract both researches andtourists: data collected by MINAE has shown a steady increase in the number of visitors

each year to Tortuguero (Bermdez & Hernndez 2003, Allan Valverde pers. comm.

2007). Although many visitors come specifically to see the turtles, others visit TNP for its

canals and abundant wildlife. Often referred to as the Amazon of Costa Rica, Tortuguero

offers visitors a chance to view wildlife from both boats and on foot.

The impact of this human presence is becoming more obvious within ACTo. Lodges are

in need to expand and as a result they are consuming more forested areas; new homes

are being built for the workers of these hotels and associated industries; and an increase

in demand for building materials and general goods is resulting in increased use of the

canals. Areas that had previously not been visited by tourists are now beginning to open

up and although some limits are being put in place to control tourist numbers in certain

locations, many areas are uncontrolled and not monitored.

9


10/53

As tourism has increased so has job availability and as a result the population of

Tortuguero has increased and new settlements have developed. The most significant

new settlement has been the establishment of the San Francisco community. San

Francisco began its history as a home to a few families in 1989. It was not until 2000 that

the population began to increase more significantly. Now San Francisco is home to 274people and this number is continuing to increase (Van Oudenhoven 2007).

San Francisco is increasing in size almost constantly and as a result is having an

obvious impact on the local environment. This increased demand on local resources is

demonstrating the need for management of both TNP and the BCWR as well as the

importance of the monitoring programme on Playa Norte.

The projects currently being run by GVI in ACTo aim to help raise awareness of the

effect these changes are having on the environment. This is being done in numerous

ways some of which have a direct effect on the conservation of the area whilst others

have longer-term educational benefits.

This report briefly looks at the work undertaken during Phase 082 (11 th April 20th June

2008). Its aim is to present an outline of the specific aims, methodologies and results

gained during this period. In some cases, such as the turtle-monitoring programme,

season reports are produced and therefore no results have been included. In addition to

this report, a year report is produced annually presenting in more detail findings from the

year and in some cases comparing to previous years work. Throughout this document,

those persons who have received additional training in order to be able to train and lead

others on surveys are referred to as Research Staff (RS) or Patrol Leaders (PLs), as

appropriate. Persons trained to assist the RS in all aspects of their work are referred to

as Research Assistants (RAs)

10


11/53

2 Marine Turtle Monitoring and Conservation Programme

2.1 Introduction

Over the past 20 years, there has been an extensive decline in marine turtle populations

worldwide due to illegal harvesting of meat and eggs, unsustainable fishing practices,water contamination, and habitat destruction. As a result, the World Conservation Union

(IUCN) lists all marine turtle species as either endangered or critically endangered

(IUCN, 2006).

Having six out of the worlds seven species of marine turtles, not only is Central America

known for diversity but also for the large number of marine turtle nesting on its beaches.

Within this sub-continent, Costa Rica hosts some of the largest populations of

leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), green and olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea)turtles, assuming a pivotal role in marine turtle conservation.

Two years after its creation in 1990, COTERC was approached by the CCC with a

proposal of monitoring the marine turtle population on Playa Norte (Greg Mayne written

comm. 2007), the beach to the north of Laguna Tortuguero. Between 2004 and 2005,

COTERC undertook a feasibility study in order to establish the significance of the

nesting site on Playa Norte and to assess whether the number of marine turtles

warranted a programme (Greg Mayne written comm. 2007). Playa Norte adjoins the

aforementioned community of San Francisco, currently borders two hotels, Cabinas

Vista al Mar and Turtle Beach Lodge, approximately eight private homes and there are

plans for a larger hotel within the survey area. Existing just north of the boundary of the

National Park it has gone without the regular law enforcement and protection afforded to

Tortuguero Beach for decades.

Based on the findings of the preliminary study, in 2005 a marine turtle monitoring and

conservation programme was implemented and initiated, with the assistance of GVI in

2006.

This report is a summary account of the work developed and data collected from 11 th

April 20th June 2008.

11


12/53

2.2 Aims

The overall aims of this programme are to monitor the population dynamics of marine

turtles on Playa Norte and investigate the impact of human activities on their

conservation status.

In terms of species conservation the programmes aims are to 1) reduce poaching rates

by constant presence on the beach, disguising and relocating nests as necessary, 2)

educate the community and tourists about marine turtle conservation and 3) manage the

beach habitat as to increase availability of nesting sites 4) investigate the impact of

human development on the marine turtle population

In terms of species monitoring the programmes aims are to 1) gather selected biometric

data on nesting marine turtles, 2) record the spatial and seasonal distribution of nesting

turtles, 3) monitor the number of nesting emergences, 4) determine the level of illegal

poaching on turtles and their nests, 5) record survival of the nests and hatchling success

rates, 6) monitor for the apparent physical health of nesting females, 7) track re-

emergences to the nesting beach and or migration between beaches, and 8) register

tourist and human development around the nesting site.

2.3 Methodology

The methodology used for the marine turtle-monitoring programme follows the

GVI/COTERC protocols. For further, more specific methodologies, please refer to the

2008 Marine Turtle Conservation and Monitoring Programme Night and Day Protocols.

Furthermore, a logical framework for the programme was designed in March of this year

to maintain the objectives and aims through time and allow evaluation of management

practices at the end of the season.

2.3.1 Study site

The sand on Playa Norte is black and fine, typical of a high energy-beach. The width of

the nesting beach platform, or berm, varies from two to 38 meters, but the configuration

of its shape and size changes constantly in response to long shore drift and exposure

levels.

12


13/53

The dominant plants on the nesting beach are morning glory (Ipomoea pes-caprae), rea-

purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum) and rush grass (Sporobolus virginicus). The berm is

bordered by a hedgerow of cocoplum (Chrysobalanus icaco) and sea grapes (Coccoloba

uvifera) with a mixture of coconut palms (Cocos nucifera) and various tropical

hardwoods behind.

Playa Norte, which contains the study area of 31/8 miles long, (approximately 5 km),

extends from the Tortuguero River mouth (N10 35.673 W83 31.495) on the southern end

of the beach to Laguna Cuatro (N10 38.115 W83 32.528) to the north. Although this

beach is not located within the TNP boundaries, it is situated adjacent to the BCWR,

which, like the TNP, is managed by ACTo under the MINAE.

The study area is marked as mile marker (MM) 0 at the Tortuguero River mouth and MM

31/8 just north of Laguna Cuatro. The length of the beach is divided and marked with mile

markers at every eighth of a mile (approximately 200 m), to allow for the documentation

of spatial distribution and density of nests along the beach.

The nearest village to the study site is San Francisco, situated south of MM 0. On the

southern side of the Tortuguero river mouth is Tortuguero beach, which the CCC

monitors from MM -3/8 to Jalova lagoon at MM 18.

2.3.2 Pre-season preparations

Before the season began, each mile-marker was repaired or replaced if necessary. Each

volunteer and patrol leader was trained thoroughly both in the classroom and in the field

in order to ensure competent data collection and ethical behaviour on the beach. At the

end of the training, all RAs and PLs were submitted to a test. For RAs the passing mark

was 95%. Patrol Leaders were subject to more intense and thorough training with

corresponding testing, for which the passing mark was 100%.

2.3.3 Data collection

Daily track census and nest surveys

A track census and nest survey was conducted every day, beginning on 22nd February

for the season. It started between 5:00 and 6:00 am, depending on the specific time of

13


14/53

sunrise, and lasted up to two and a half hours depending on the volume of data to collect

and the need to disguise nests or tracks. The survey involved walking the beach

between MM 0 and MM 31/8, recording and monitoring tracks and nests from the night

before. The survey team identified tracks as nests, half moons (non-nesting

emergences) or a lifted turtle (no tracks going back into the sea).

All tracks not seen the night before were documented using Global Positioning System

(GPS) coordinates, the northern mile marker and vertical position. The nests seen by the

night team the previous night were monitored on the two days after they were first

discovered and identified as natural, poached, predated or unknown (if the nest had

many signs of poaching, such as an accumulation of flies, stick holes, and human and or

dog prints, but no egg shells or cavity).

Night surveys

Night surveys were conducted every night beginning 29th February for the season. Each

night at least one survey team walked the study area a minimum of four hours. If one

team was on the beach, they patrolled around 22:00 to 02:00. When two teams

patrolled, the first team patrolled the beach from approximately 20:30 to 00:30 whilst the

second team patrolled from 23:00 to 03:00.

When a turtle track was found, the PL determined whether the turtle was still on thebeach. If not, the PL determined if the track was a half moon, nest, or lifted turtle. If it

was deemed a half moon, the species, GPS coordinate, closest Northern mile-marker,

and time track was seen were all recorded. If deemed a nest, the species, GPS

coordinate, closest Northern mile-marker, time the track was seen, vertical position, and

nest status were recorded. If deemed a lifted turtle the species, GPS coordinate, closest

Northern mile-marker, time the track was seen and vertical position (if it had nested),

were recorded.

When a turtle was encountered, the PL tried to determine what stage of the nesting

process she was in (emerging, selecting a nest site, digging a body pit, digging the egg

chamber, oviposition, covering the egg chamber, disguising the nest or returning to sea).

All patrol members who were to come in contact with the turtle put on gloves. Once the

egg-laying process had started, the eggs were counted (yolkless and fertile counted

14


15/53

separately) and triangulation of the nest was completed. When the turtle completed

oviposition and began to cover her egg chamber, she was then checked for tags, Old

Tag Notches (OTNs) and Old Tag Holes (OTHs) and tagged if necessary. Leatherback

turtles were tagged in the thin skin between the rear flippers and the tail using Monel #49

tags (National Band & Tag Co., Newport, USA). Green turtles were tagged on the frontflippers before the first scale using Inconel #681 tags (National Band & Tag Co.,

Newport, USA).

Once tagging, was finished, and if appropriate, the minimum curved carapace length

(CCLmin) and maximum curved carapace width (CCWmax) were taken to the nearest

millimetre, three times each. If the measurements were not within three millimetres of

each other more were taken until the data was consistent. For leatherbacks, CCLmin

was taken from the nuchal notch where the skin touches the carapace, along the back tothe right of the central ridge until the end of the caudal projection. It was also noted

whether the caudal projection was complete or not. For green, loggerhead (Caretta

caretta), and hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles, CCLmin was taken from where

the skin touches the carapace along the back until the posterior notch (not the longest

length of the carapace). For all species, CCWmax was always taken along the widest

part of the turtle.

Once tagging and measurements were completed, the turtle was checked for bite marks,

abnormalities and fibropapillomas tumours. All abnormalities were recorded.

The GPS coordinates of the egg chamber, closest northern mile marker, stage the turtle

was encountered in, encounter time, direction whilst nesting, and vertical position were

also recorded.

Nest fate, nest survivorship and hatching success

Nests were triangulated during oviposition whenever possible in order to gather as much

information about the poaching rate and hatchling success as possible. Triangulation

was done in order to enable the excavation of the nests 70 days after the nest was laid

for green turtles or 75 for leatherback turtles. Triangulation was conducted using three

pieces of flagging tape that featured the direction (north, centre, and south) and the

station name. These were attached to the vegetation behind the nest. The distance from

15


16/53

the centre of the egg chamber to each of these tags was measured to the nearest

centimetre whilst the turtle was laying eggs. The distance to the most recent high tide

line was also recorded. Three triangulation points were used to compensate for the loss

of any points of reference: if one point is lost it is still possible to locate the nest using the

other two points.

Disguising nests

For all leatherback nests, considerable effort was put into disguising the nests from

poachers. Several strategies were used, such as erasing the tracks with a long piece of

wood, throwing dry sand all over the area, sweeping the sand with a coconut leaf,

placing logs and other debris on top of the nest and remove them later, etc. For green

turtles, although the body pit was always obvious, some disguising efforts, like erasing

the tracks, were also put into place.

Collection of human impact data

During each night survey, the number of red and white mobile lights, fires, locals and

tourists on the beach were recorded. Furthermore, each month during the new moon the

number of stationary white and red lights were also recorded.

Habitat management

Sixteen beach cleans were completed this phase to increase the availability of nesting

sites. After mid-phase a new management scheme was implemented where the morning

census teams evaluated the condition of each eighth of a mile of the study area and

passed that information to the beach clean teams as to allow for more effective beach

cleans.

2.4 Results

During phase 082, 70 morning surveys and 140 night surveys were completed. A total of

1500 miles were walked on morning surveys and night surveys together this season for

a total of 834 hours of survey.

16


17/53

This phase we have recorded the presence of leatherback, green and hawksbill turtles

nesting on Playa Norte.

Table 2-1: Summary of Phase 082 results for Playa Norte and Nesting Season so far

Status of nests found this phase 79% Natural; 16% Unknown; 5% Poached

Status of nests found this season 79% Natural; 15% Unknown; 6% Poached

Number of nests recorded this phase Dc: 50; Cm: 6; Ei: 1; Cc: 0

Number of nests recorded this season Dc: 84; Cm: 9; Ei: 6; Cc: 0

Area of highest nesting this phase Mile 7/8 ; 2 1/8

Area of highest nesting this season Mile 1 2/8; 1 5/8

Number of relocations this phase Dc: 6; Ei: 0

Number of relocations this season Dc: 9; Ei: 0

Hour with the most encountered turtles this phase 22:00 - 23:00

Hour with the most encountered turtles this season 23: 00 - 00: 00

Number of REC this phase Dc: 5; Cm: 1; Ei: 0; Cc: 0

Number of REM this phase Dc: 23; Cm: 2; Ei: 1; Cc: 0

Number renesting turtles this phase Dc: 7; Cm: 1; Ei: 0; Cc: 0

Area of highest HLF this phase Mile 3

Number of hatched nests this season Dc: 13; Cm: 1; Ei: 0; Cc: 0

Number of hatchlings this phase Dc: 619; Cm:87 ; Ei: 0; Cc: 0

Number of hatchlings this season Dc: 654; Cm: 87; Ei: 0; Cc: 0

17


18/53

Status of excavated nests this phase 100 % Natural; 0% Partially Poached; 0% Poached; 0% Predated;0% Unknown

Status of excavated nests this season 100 % Natural; 0% Partially Poached; 0% Poached; 0% Predated;0% Unknown

Percentage success rate for normal nests this

season

Dc: 66% ; Cm: 100% ; Ei: N/A ; Cc: N/A

Percentage success rate for relocated nests thisseason

N/A

Number of LIF records 0

Number of DEC records 0

Figure 2-1 Nest Status as determined by morning census Jan June 2008

Nest Status Jan - June 2008

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 9

Natural

Poached

Unknown

0

Sum of Percentage

Nest status

18


19/53

3 Jaguar Predation of Marine Turtles Study

3.1 Introduction

The only species that are known to kill adult marine turtles are sharks (i.e. Carcharhinus

leucas, Carcharodon carchariasand Galeocerdo cuvier), orca (Orcinus orca), crocodiles(Crocodylus acutus and Crocodylus porosus) and jaguars (Panthera onca) (Hirth, 1997;

Oritz et al., 1997 in Trong 2000). Information on jaguar predation of marine turtles has

been recorded sporadically in different areas of the Neotropics.

At least eighty-two green turtles, three leatherbacks and seven olive ridley were

identified as being predated by jaguars in Suriname from 1963-1973. In 1980, 13 green

turtles were killed within only a few days close to this nesting beach (Autar, 1994).

Koford (1983) mentions that jaguars prey on marine turtles in Costa Rica, although no

specific species are mentioned. On the Pacific coast of this country, jaguars have been

recorded preying upon olive ridley, black (Chelonia mydas agassizii), and hawksbill

turtles (Carrillo et al., 1994, Chinchilla, 1997). Although much research has been carried

out on turtles in TNP, data collection methods on jaguar predated turtles in TNP has

been inconsistent. From 1971, the CCC began regular track census along Tortuguero

beach. Before 1997 only two green turtles were recorded as being killed by jaguars, one

in 1981 (Carrillo et al., 1994) and another in 1984 (J. Mortimer pers. comm. in Trong

2000).

In 1997, the CCC began collecting specific information on turtles predated by jaguars

during their weekly track censuses (Trong 1997, Trong et al. 1999). That year, four

green turtles killed by jaguars were recorded, both fresh and old kills (Trong 1997).

During 1998 and 1999 only fresh kills, i.e. those killed within the last 24 hours were

recorded. In 1998, 25 dead green turtles were found, and in 1999, 22 green and two

leatherback turtles were found (Trong, 2000). In 2002, Magally Castro Alvarez, in

conjunction with MINAE and WCS began a study on the predation of marine turtles by

jaguars in TNP. Castro Alvarez recorded all kills, both fresh and old. In 2002, 60 turtle

carcasses were encountered, and in 2003, 65 (M. Castro Alvarez, unpublished data).

In 2005, MINAE invited GVI to continue data collection on jaguar presence and

predation of marine turtles in TNP on their behalf. GVI began data collection on 11 th July

19


20/53

2005, modifying the MINAE protocols in line with agreed aims and available resources.

The study found 60 turtle carcasses from July to December 2005 and 131 turtles in the

first full year, 2006. In 2007, 144 dead turtle carcasses were recorded as jaguar quarry.

Though predation upon turtles by jaguars is not a new phenomenon, from the CCC andMagally Castro Alvarez studies it can be inferred that the level of predation has been

increasing over the past years within TNP, but the magnitude of this apparent increase

may be due to changes in data collection methods. Trong (2000) counted only fresh

carcasses with evidence of jaguar predation for two out of the three years of his study,

whilst Castro Alvarez study considered all carcasses with no contrary evidence to be

jaguar predated.

These studies identified a phenomenon within Tortuguero beach and GVIs personnel

carry regular surveys with an established methodology and aims at conducting them

over a greater period of time in order to understand its implications on a larger scale

3.2 Aims

This project aims to 1) document the magnitude of jaguar predation on the nesting

population of marine turtles and 2) increase knowledge of jaguar ecology in Tortuguero

National Park.

This information can be used to help MINAE develop management strategies that cross

the multiple habitats contained within the National Park, benefiting both the turtles and

the jaguars.

3.3 Methodology

3.3.1 Study site

The beach of TNP, which contains the study area, is 18 miles long (approximately 29

kilometres), and extends from the Tortuguero River mouth on the northern end of thebeach to the Jalova River mouth at the Southern end. The park is managed by ACTo

under MINAE

The study area is Mile 34/8 at the southern border of Tortuguero village to mile 18 at the

Jalova river mouth. The length of the beach is divided and marked with mile markers at

20


21/53

every eighth of a mile (approximately 200 meters) until mile five, and is marked at every

half mile thereafter. The mile markers run in ascending order from mile zero at the

Tortuguero River mouth to mile 18 at the Jalova river mouth.

During the marine turtle nesting seasons, there is a high level of human activity betweenmile zero and mile five-and-a-half of Tortuguero Beach. This area is the focus of the

CCCs marine turtle work where they conduct one morning survey and two night surveys

per day in season; it also hosts a large number of tourists on turtle watching tours. At the

southern end of the study site is a large cattle and coconut farm. These areas of human

activity may affect jaguar behaviour.

3.3.2 Survey technique

Weekly surveys were conducted over the 14-mile study site, beginning at dawn. one

team surveyed the entire study site, between Mile 34/8 (Tortuguero) and Mile 18 (Jalova)

when possible. The average team consisted of one RS and three RAs collecting the data

outlined below.


General data

For each survey, the following general information was recorded:

Research team initials

Starting point

Start and end time

Weather data (recorded at mile markers 4, 8, 12 and 16): time, sand condition (dry,

moist, wet), percentage cloud cover, precipitation (none, light, medium or heavy) and

beach width (measured from the mile marker to the high tide line)

Comments e.g. jaguar tracks not clearly visible due to a very high tide

Turtle track data

The number of full turtle tracks (indicating the presence of a nest) and half moons

(indicating no nesting has occurred) were recorded at every half mile. These definitions

21


22/53

have been standardised due to the vast number of tracks present on the beach during

the peak times. A full track was defined as a set of ascending and descending tracks

that traversed more than half the width of the beach. Tracks that traversed less than half

the width of the beach were classified as half moons. For every half-mile section, full

tracks were recorded using a manual clicker-counter or Maria, and half moonsremembered. Only those tracks deemed fresh (from the previous night) were counted

and, during leatherback season (March-July), the species of turtle was distinguished. In

line with previous studies and the continuing protocol of the CCC track surveys, tracks

were recorded as leatherback or green, with hawksbill and loggerhead, which nest in

much fewer numbers, included in the green count.

Jaguar track data

When fresh, intact tracks were positively identified, the following information was

recorded:

Presence / absence per half mile

Entrance / exit was recorded for a track clearly entering the beach from the

vegetation or a track clearly exiting the beach into the vegetation

Dead turtle data

Marine turtle carcasses were recorded as jaguar predated if no contradictory evidence

was present. The following data was recorded on all jaguar predated marine turtles

where relevant:

Species (leatherback, green, hawksbill or loggerhead)

Turtle ID number (species initials and record number for the season e.g. Cm001)

Locality (distance from Northern mile marker and GPS coordinates)

Vertical position (open, border or vegetation)

Point of attack

Parts of turtle eaten by jaguar

Estimated number of nights since kill (determined by signs of decay)

Curved carapace length (CCL)

Whether the turtle was resting on its plastron or carapace (front or back)

22


23/53

Any other comments e.g. drag marks, jaguar prints near the carcass, high vulture

activity, tag numbers

Due to rapid rates of decay and the activity of scavengers, point of attack, parts eaten

and CCL were recorded on fresh cadavers only (within 1-2 days). Photographic recordswere taken for evidence of predation, turtle identification and location. These records

also provide an additional method of ensuring against double counting.

3.4 Results

Six surveys were conducted this phase covering a total of 82 miles, resulting in a total of

507.5 miles for the season (Jul 07-Jun 08).

Table 3-1 Breakdown of main results for phase and season

Jag sightings 2

Number of full turtles tracks this phase: 1076

Number of full turtles tracks this season:47027

Number of newly recorded dead turtles this phase 35

Number of dead turtles this year 37

Number of dead turtles this season (Jul - Jun): 146

Area of highest turtle activity this phase 6 1/2

Area of highest jag activity this phase Mile 6; 7.5 ; 8.5 - 9.5; 10.5; 11.5 - 12;13.5 - 15;

Area of highest turtle predation this phase Mile 6.5; 9; 10

23


24/53


25/53

are 1) to determine the areas where jaguars are present, 2) to record their hours of

activity and other habits, 3) to compare jaguar activity at different sites along the coastal

forest.

4.3 Methodology4.3.1 Study site

TNP beach is described in detail in section 3.3.1. There is a trail parallel to the beach

running from mile zero to mile 15, known locally as Sendero Jaguar. Along the trail close

to Tortuguero there are many paths that lead to the beach, slowly becoming more

dispersed the further south you travel. Tourists use the trail between miles zero and six

frequently during green turtle season (June to November). During off-season tourists

and local people use the trail much less.

4.3.2 Survey techniques

Location of cameras

Camera sites were selected in the forest along the edge of the TNP beach based upon

data collected by GVI on location and number of jaguar tracks and jaguar predated

marine turtles. This data has been recorded for over two years during Jaguar Predation

on Marine Turtles surveys (see section 3).

Many factors were considered before selecting a camera site such as jaguar and human

presence, vegetation cover, trail width, and indirect sunlight. Ideally, the cameras sites

are placed no more than two miles apart, minimizing the possibility of unmonitored area

for a jaguar to pass through. When possible, cameras were placed on trails that are not

used often by humans, in order to avoid theft and photos of humans.

Setting the cameras

DS-06 Camtrakker

The Camtrakkers are heat and motion-activated digital cameras. They were set on high

sensitivity and with a ten-second delay to take two pictures each time motion was

25


26/53

detected. The date and time of activation was automatically recorded. A silicone sachet

was placed inside the casing and cameras were secured to trees with a chain or cable.

Both types of camera were set up off the trail, in a location where a jaguar might be

expected to pass. Trapping stations of two cameras per site were used; one camera wasset on the time function and the other one on the date function. Since the purpose is to

use the animals flanks for identifications, both sides must be pictured (Silver et al.,

2004, Karanth & Nichols 2000). Cameras were secured to trees two to four meters apart,

at a height of 30-60 cm above the ground (Silver et al, 2004).

Once a location was chosen and the cameras secured, they were directed at each other

and sticks were used to adjust the angle of the camera sight to 30 to 60 cm from the

ground. After setting the cameras, a tampon or silica gel packet was placed inside the

camera case to absorb moisture. As problems of water seepage have been encountered

whilst using the Stealth Cams, silicone sealant and duct tape were used to close all

seams and prevent water from entering. A few drops of feline bait, Wildcat #2, was

placed on a log or coconut husk between the cameras in an attempt to attract any

jaguars in the area to the exact camera location.

Checking the cameras

The cameras were checked once every two weeks to minimise human disturbance ofthe camera sites. At this time, the memory card and/or batteries were replaced as

necessary and cameras checked for proper functioning. When several photos had been

taken (minimum of nine non-test photos), or the cameras were non-functional, they were

removed and replaced. Digital photographs were saved into the database and labelled

by site location.


The following information was recorded for each camera site:

Site number

Nearest northern mile marker,

GPS co-ordinates

Physical description of the site

26


27/53

Date of first instalment

The following information was recorded when a camera site was checked, installed or

removed:

Site number

Date

Survey team initials

Camera numbers

Number of photos taken and species recorded on each camera

Action taken with each camera i.e. checked, installed or removed

Problems encountered and any other relevant information (e.g. number of test

photographs registered).

4.4 Results

Table 4-1 General data

Number of cameras deployed in field12

Number of trapping sites10

Table 4-2 Trapping site information

Cam site one Cam site two

Position (MM) 15 Position (MM) 14.5

Date set 20-Apr-08 Date set 20-Apr-08

Cam site three Cam site four

Position (MM) 6 Position (MM) 5.5

Date set 23-Apr-08 Date set 23-Apr-08

Cam site five Cam site six

Position (MM) 7 Position (MM) 8

Date set 17-May-08 Date set 17-May-08

Cam site seven Cam site eight

27


28/53

Position (MM) 8.5 Position (MM) 14

Date set 17-May-08 Date set 18-May-08

Cam site nine Cam site ten

Position (MM) 13 Position (MM) 6Date set 18-May-08 Date set 26-May-08

Table 4-3 Presence / absence of known species this phase

Species Presence/Absence

Baird's tapir (Tapirus bairdii) 0

Central American spider monkey (Ateles geoffroyi) 0

Collared peccary (Tayassu tajacu) 1

Common opossum (Didelphis marsupialis) 1

Gray four-eyed opossum (Philander opossum) 1Great curassow (Crax rubra) 1

Great tinamou (Tinamus major) 1

Jaguar (Panthera onca) 0

Mantled howler monkey (Alouatta palliata) 0

Margay (Leopardus wiedii) 0

Nine-banded armadillo (Dasypus novemcinctus) 1

Northern racoon (Procyon lotor) 0

Paca (Agouti paca) 1

Red brocket deer (Mazama americana) 1

Tayra (Eira barbara) 0

White-faced capuchin (Cebus capucinus) 0

White-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari) 0

White-nosed coati (Nasua narica) 1

White-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) 0

Figure 4-1 Gray four-eyed opossum; nine-banded armadillo

28


29/53

Figure 4-2 Great curassow (male); common opossum

Figure 4-3 Red brocket deer; paca

29


30/53

5 Canal Bird Monitoring Programme

5.1 Introduction

Growing concerns about the status of birds in the rainforests of Central America has

lead to the establishment of long-term monitoring programmes and has in part lead tothe initiation of this study. The Canal Bird Monitoring Programme aims to quantify

diversity and abundance of the species that live and breed in the area of Caribbean

Lowland Rainforest around EBCP, 7km North of TNP.

The nature of Costa Ricas bird life has meant that it has been a popular location to

study behaviour and diversity for many years. Much of this focus has been directed

towards migratory birds and the information on resident species is still in need of

considerable research.

The aquatic environment is of major importance to the tourism and ecology of the

tortuguero area. This habitat is being increasingly utilized and it is expected that this use

will, in time, have an impact on the avian population it supports.

The, EBCP Resident Bird Project monitoring survey began in July of 2005 and has been

developed into the current incarnation which is an ongoing project. Further collection of

data is important in order to establish reliable population trends for local bird species.

The GVI protocol is modified from the original protocol created by Steven Furino of

Waterloo University, Canada. The modifications have been made to the protocol so that

data collectors with minimal field experience are able to collect high quality data suitable

for the study. This has involved reducing the number of species and study areas as well

as limiting the amount of technical data collected on species. In all other aspects the

research follows the original protocol.

5.2 Aims

This research programme is intended to accumulate data that will help researchers

examine long-term changes in specific bird population. The specific aims of the project

are 1) to identify study species use of the study areas, 2) monitor long-term changes in

use of these areas, and 3) to aid in the collection of both resident and migratory avian

population data sets for wider public use.

30


31/53


32/53

Boat-billed heron Cochlearius cochlearius

Cattle egret Bubulcus ibis

Great blue heron Ardea herodias

Great egret Casmerodius albus

Green heron Butorides s. virescensGreen ibis Mesembrinibis cayennensis

Green kingfisher Chloroceryle americana

Green-and-rufus kingfisher Chloroceryle inda

Gray-necked wood-rail Aramides cajanea

Least bittern Ixobrychus exilis

Limpkin Aramus guarauna

Little blue heron Egretta caerulea

Neotropical cormorant Phalacrocorax olivaceus

Northern jacana Jacana spinosa

Purple gallinule Porphyrula martinica

Reddish egret Egretta rufescens

Ringed kingfisher Ceryle torquata

Rufescent tiger-heron Tigrisoma lineatum

Snowy egret Egretta thula

Sunbittern Eurypyga helias

Sungrebe Heliornis fulica

Tricoloured heron Egretta tricolour

White-throated crake Laterallus albigularis

Yellow-crowned night heron Nyctanassa violacea

For each area search only positively identified species were recorded. For each positive

record made the following data was collected:

Sector code at which species was observed

Number seen or heard (S: seen only, H: heard only, SH: seen and heard)

Any comments e.g. breeding plumage or behaviour

32


33/53

5.4 Results

Table 5-2 General phase totals for all canals

Canal Number of surveys

Cao Harold 7

Cao Palma 7

Cao Chiquero 7

Number of species recorded Phase Total

All canals 22

Cao Palma 15

AQTs 18

Cao Chiquero 14

Cao Harold 14

Number of individuals recorded Phase Total

Cao Palma 106

AQTs 188

Cao Chiquero 66

Cao Harold 119

Total 479

Most commonly recorded species this phase

Cao Palma Green ibis

AQTs Little blue heron

Cao Harold Green heron

Cao Chiquero Sungrebe, bare-throated tiger-heron

Overall Green ibis (65), green heron (60)

Number of hours on survey Phase Total

Cao Palma23:55

Cao Chiquero22:04

Cao Harold31:54

Total number of hours on survey77:53

33


34/53

Table 5-3 Unusual recordings for phase per canal

CanalUnusual sightings recorded

Cao Palma Cattle egret, gray-necked wood-rail, little blue heron

AQTs Purple gallinule

Cao Chiquero Northern jacana, rufescent tiger-heron

Cao Harold Agami heron, rufescent tiger-heron

Table 5-4 Presence/absence of species for phase

KeyUncommonly recordedUncommonly recorded on indicated canal

Species recorded for Phase1/0

Agami heron 1Amazon kingfisher 1American pygmy kingfisher 1Anhinga 1Bare-throated tiger-heron 1Belted kingfisher 1Boat-billed heron 1Cattle egret 1

Great blue heron 0Great egret 1Green heron 1Green ibis 1Green kingfisher 1Green-and-rufus kingfisher 1Gray-necked wood-rail 1Least bittern 0Limpkin 0Little blue heron 1

Neotropical cormorant 0Northern jacana 1Purple gallinule 1Reddish egret 0Ringed kingfisher 1Rufescent tiger-heron 1Snowy egret 1

34


35/53

Sunbittern 0Sungrebe 1Tricoloured heron 0White-throated crake 0Yellow-crowned night heron 1

Total Species 22

Table 5-5 Presence/absence of species per canal for phase

Speciesrecorded forPalma 1/0

Speciesrecorded forAQTs 1/0

Speciesrecorded forChiquero 1/0

Speciesrecorded forHarold 1/0

Agami heron 0 Agami heron 0 Agami heron 0 Agami heron 1Amazonkingfisher 1

Amazonkingfisher 1

Amazonkingfisher 1

Amazonkingfisher 1

American

pygmykingfisher 1

American

pygmykingfisher 0

American pygmy

kingfisher 0

American

pygmykingfisher 1Anhinga 1 Anhinga 1 Anhinga 1 Anhinga 1Bare-throatedtiger-heron 1

Bare-throatedtiger-heron 1



Beltedkingfisher 1

Beltedkingfisher 1

Belted kingfisher1

Beltedkingfisher 1

Boat-billedheron 0

Boat-billedheron 1

Boat-billedheron 1

Boat-billedheron 1

Cattle egret 1 Cattle egret 1 Cattle egret 0 Cattle egret 0Great blueheron 0

Great blueheron 0

Great blueheron 0

Great blueheron 0

Great egret 1 Great egret 1 Great egret 0 Great egret 0Green heron 1 Green heron 1 Green heron 1 Green heron 1Green ibis 1 Green ibis 1 Green ibis 1 Green ibis 1Greenkingfisher 1

Greenkingfisher 1

Green kingfisher1

Greenkingfisher 1

Green-and-rufus kingfisher 1


Green-and-rufuskingfisher 1


Gray-neckedwood-rail 1




Least bittern 0 Least bittern 0 Least bittern 0 Least bittern 0Limpkin 0 Limpkin 0 Limpkin 0 Limpkin 0Little blue

heron 1

Little blue

heron 1

Little blue heron

1

Little blue

heron 1Neotropicalcormorant 0

Neotropicalcormorant 0



Northernjacana 0

Northernjacana 1

Northern jacana1

Northernjacana 0

Purplegallinule 0

Purplegallinule 1

Purple gallinule0

Purplegallinule 0

Reddish egret 0 Reddish egret 0 Reddish egret 0 Reddish egret 0Ringed 1 Ringed 1 Ringed 1 Ringed 1

35


36/53

kingfisher kingfisher kingfisher kingfisher

Rufescenttiger-heron 0


Rufescent tiger-heron 1


Snowy egret 0 Snowy egret 1 Snowy egret 0 Snowy egret 0Sunbittern 0 Sunbittern 0 Sunbittern 0 Sunbittern 0Sungrebe

0Sungrebe

1Sungrebe

1Sungrebe

0Tricolouredheron 0

Tricolouredheron 0

Tricolouredheron 0

Tricolouredheron 0

White-throatedcrake 0




Yellow-crowned nightheron 1


Yellow-crownednight heron

0


Total Species 15 Total Species 18 Total Species 14 Total Species 14

36


37/53

6 Incidental Species Study

6.1 Introduction

The EBCP Incidental Species Study was initiated during phase 071 (January March2007). The project has gone through various changes over the phases in order to

simplify the data collection methods and ensure each species is positively identified and

accurately recorded. By keeping a daily record of the occurrence of species found

around base, we can determine which species are seen most frequently and determine if

there any changes in the frequency of sightings of certain species over time. This is

important to determine if the presence of people around base for the majority of the year

is having an effect on the wildlife present.

6.2 Aims

The aim of the study is to maintain a formal, accurate record of the daily occurrences of

birds, mammals, reptiles and amphibians sighted within the property boundaries of the

station.

6.3 Methodology


Laminated, picture cards of the different types of birds, amphibians, reptiles and

mammals commonly found around base were posted on the kitchen wall of the station.

Each day of phase 081, all persons on base marked off the appropriate photo if they

saw, heard, and could accurately identify one or more of the species listed. Positive IDs

of any species not displayed on the boards were written in the space provided. Species

presence was recorded for a 24-hour period.

6.4 Results

Table 6-1 Overview of incidental totals this phase

Number of species recorded this phase 168

Total number of records this phase 2662

37


38/53

Table 6-2 Most commonly recorded species by class for phase

Birds Mammals Amphibians Reptiles

Species

Daysrecorded

(%) Species

Daysrecorded

(%) Species

Daysrecorded

(%) Species

Daysrecorded

(%)

White-collaredmanakin(Manacuscandei) 97

Mantled howlermonkey(Alouattapalliata) 93

Strawberrypoison frog(Dendrobatespumilio) 88

Green basilisk(Basiliscusplumifrons) 81

Montezumaoropendola(Psarocoliusmontezuma) 96

Brazilian long-nosed bat(Rhynchonycterisnaso) 55

Marine toad(Bufomarinus) 83

Green iguana(Iguanaiguana) 78

Olive-backedeuphonia(Euphoniagouldi) 93

CentralAmericanspider monkey(Ateles geoffroyi) 30

Smoki junglefrog(Leptodactyluspentadactylus) 39

Yellow-headed gecko(Gonatodesalbogularis) 72

Greatkiskadee(Pitangussulphuratus) 93

White-facedcapuchin(Cebuscapucinus) 26

Greenclimbing toad(Bufoconiferus) 20

Festivejungle-runner(Ameivafestiva) 70

Slaty-tailedtrogon(Trogonmassena) 91

NeotropicalRiver Otter(Lutralongicaudis) 10

Red-eyedtree frog(Agalychniscallidryas) 9

Black riverturtle(Rhinoclemmysfunerea) 42

Figure 6-1 Most commonly recorded species for phase (recorded 75% of days)

50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70

Green Iguana

Keel-billed Toucan

Long-billed Hermit

Green Basilisk

Marine ToadTurkey Vulture

Chestnut-mandibled Toucan

Mealy Parrot

Black Vulture

Clay-colored Robin

Purple-throated Fruitcrow

Short-billed Pigeon

Strawberry Poison Frog

Slaty-tailed Trogon

Great Kiskadee

Olive-backed Euphonia

Mantled Howler Monkey

Montezuma Oropendola

White-collared Manakin

38


39/53

Table 6-3 Special Interest sightings for phase

Sightings of special interest this phase Number of records

Broad-winged hawk (Buteo platypterus) 1

Collared forest falcon (Micrastur semitorquatus) 1

Giant cowbird (Molothrus oryzivorus) 1

Great-tailed grackle (Quiscalus mexicanus) 1

Mexican tree frog (Smilisca baudinii) 1

Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus) 1

Rufescent tiger-heron (Tigrisoma lineatum) 1

Scarlet webbed tree frog (Hyla rufitela) 1

Snail kite (Rosthramus sociabilis) 1

Two-toed sloth (Choloepus hoffmanni) 1

Eyelash viper(Bothriechis schlegelii) 2

Northern raccoon (Procyon lotor) 4

39


40/53

7 Canal Boat Impact Study

7.1 Introduction

Although not an official part of the national park, Cao Palma is included in the

Management Plan for Visitors to TNP as it provides a suitable alternative to the nationalpark for wildlife viewing, thus helping to reduce the demand on other canals within the

parks boundaries (Bermdez and Hernndez, 2004). Restrictions on the number of

boats allowed into TNP per day were put into place on the 24 th of April 2006, See Table

7-1 for a breakdown of allowed boat usage on Cao Palma. Thus, this change is likely

to have resulted in an increase in the number of tourist boats using Cao Palma. Boat

surveys were initiated in phase 061 (January16th - March 27th, 2006) before these

changes took place. With tourist numbers rising (now approaching 90,000 visitor per

year), (MINAE Tortuguero National Park Headquarters, 2007) continuing to monitor thenumber of boats associated with tourist activity utilizing Cao Palma is imperative to

gauge any changes in intensity of activity and potential impact this may have on the

wildlife in this area.

Table 7-1 Boat use restriction on Cao Palma, Tortuguero, Costa Rica.

ACTo Time restriction Number of boats allowed

06:00 08:00 10

08:00 10:00 1010:00 12:00 10

12:00 14:00 10

14:00 16:00 10

16:00 - 18:0010

7.2 Aims

The Canal Boat Impact survey conducted from EBCP aims to monitor the number of

boats frequenting Cao Palma in order to estimate the intensity of tourist activity within

the greater Tortuguero area. It is an ongoing study and aims to collect consistent data

throughout the entire phase of each expedition.

40


41/53

7.3 Methodology

Surveys were conducted once a week between 06:00 and 18:00. As possible, all days of

the week are surveyed throughout the phase. Two personnel conduct surveys, each

taking a six-hour shift, between either 06:00 and 12:00 or 12:00 and 18:00.


Survey date - recorded for each entry Time Time that the boat passes by the station (24 hour) Direction Direction that the boat is travelling when passing the station (N or S) Boat Name Name or number of boat as written on the boat Lodge Lodge that owns the boat. These data will fall into one of the following

categories, Turtle Beach, Vista al Mar, Pachira, Evergreen, Samoa, Tortuga,Jungle or Laguna Lodge. If it is owned by the biological station, Cao Palma is

recorded. If it is public transport, it is recorded as "taxi". All other personalwatercraft (or any unknown, unnamed boats) are recorded as Private.

Tourism Whether or not the boat is associated with tourism. For a boat to beassociated with tourism, it must fall into any one of these categories: Be from atourist lodge; be a taxi carrying tourists; or be a private boat carrying tourists. Atourist is defined as a short-term visitor to the area (domestic or international).

Number of People aboard the boat Includes the driver and any guides. Motor Four-stroke engine, two-stroke engine or none (canoe or kayak). Return Time Time when the boat returns past the station (if it returns). Comments Any additional comments pertaining to the nature of the study.

41


42/53

7.4 Results

Table 7-2 General Canal boat impact data for phase

Number of surveys this phase 8

Average number of boats per day for the phase 30

Average number of passengers per tourist boat for phase 9

Average number of passengers per private boat for phase 3

Average number of people per day 198

Most commonly recorded tourist boat for phase Scarlet (Vista al Mar)

Most commonly recorded private boat for phaseKinkajou (EBCP canoe)

Most commonly recorded lodge for phaseVista al Mar

Table 7-3 Average canal usage for phase by ACTo time restriction

Av Number of boats 06:00 08:00 5






Total number of boats for the phase 241

42


43/53

Table 7-4 Activity by usage type

Total number of tourist boats 142

Total number of non-tourist boats 98

Total number of passengers in tourist boats 1276

Total number of passengers in non-tourist boats 304

Percentage of boats using 4s engines 96%

Figure 7-1 Percentage canal usage tourist vs. non-tourist

59%

41% N of tourist boats

N of non-tourist boats

43


44/53

Figure 7-2 Breakdown of canal usage by Tourist Lodge

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DE's

TBL

Pachira Lodge

ML

LL

Laguna

Mawamba

Turtle Beach

Vista al Mar

Pachira

Number of records for hase

Lodge

Figure 7-3 Total number of boat by time for phase

0 20 40

06:00 08:00

08:00 10:00

10:00 12:00

12:00 14:00

14:00 16:00

16:00 18:00

60

Number of Boats

44


45/53

8 Meteorology and Environmental Study

8.1 Introduction

COTERC have been recording weather information at the Biological Station to varying

degrees since 1991. Since January 2007, GVI Costa Rica have been assisting COTERCin the collection and compilation of set data into the climatological and environmental

conditions experienced at EBCP each day.

8.2 Aim

To compile a consistent, long-term data set of climatic conditions at the station.

8.3 Methodology

Weather data are to be collected at 06:00 and 18:00 hours, daily. The total precipitation,

temperatures, relative humidity and percentage cloud cover are collected. The river

variables are recorded from the right hand side of the boat dock.

8.4 Data collection

Rainfall (mm)

Air Temperature (maximum, minimum and current) (C)

Relative humidity (%)

Percentage cloud cover

River direction (north / south)

Canal colour (black, brown or green)

Canal depth (cm)

45


46/53

8.5 Results

Table 8-1 Weekly environmental averages for phase

Week Rainfall (mm) Max Temp

(6PM)

Min Temp

(6AM)

Average Humidity (%) Average Canal Depth

(cm)one 20.2 29.4 23.7 85 88

two 5.2 30.7 25.3 83 111

three 5 29.7 23.6 84 91

four 2.4 30 24.3 81 87

five 6 30.4 25.6 82 97

six 3.1 29.7 24.7 85 88

seven 3.6 29.4 24.1 86 90

eight 0.8 29.6 23.6 85 86

nine 13.5 28 24.4 89 98

ten 3.9 30.6 25.4 84 101

Table 8-2 Monthly environmental averages for year

Month Rainfall (mm) Max Temp(6PM)

Min Temp(6AM)

Average Humidity (%) Average Canal Depth(cm)

Jan 6.3 28.6 22.5 82.1 110.4

Feb 3.8 28.8 22.6 83.4 87.2

March 3.2 30 23 79.8 89.1

Apr 4.8 30.1 24.3 82.5 93.2

May 3.5 30 24.5 83.4 90

Jun

July

Aug

Sept

Oct

Nov

Dec

46


47/53

9 English Language and Environmental Education

9.1 Introduction to English Teaching

Worldwide, comprehension of the English language is becoming increasingly important

as a means to further local livelihoods through the tourism industry. Costa Rica, and inparticular Tortuguero, hosts a growing number of international visitors each year. The

people living in this area rely heavily on the international community and the tourism

market. Acquisition of English language skills will therefore provide locals with better

access to the growing market.

9.2 Introduction to Environmental Education

In a continually developing village, such as San Francisco, environmental education can

help to raise awareness and sensitivity to the area that is depended upon of all aspects

of life, from housing and water through to employment. This education is most efficiently

integrated into the community when it is directed toward the children. In this way, the

children will grow up with a better knowledge and appreciation for their environment,

identify problems and help prevent new ones.

9.3 Aims

The overall aim of the teaching programme in San Francisco and surrounding area is toprovide a service of environmental education and English teaching in order to provide

the residents with the skills they need to protect their environment and improve their

employment opportunities.

The specific aims of the programme are 1) to provide local community training/capacity

building, 2) to help generate local community commitment to environment conservation

and sustainable development, 3) to provide language and cultural exchange 4) to

attempt to provide authentic opportunities for local students to practice listening and

speaking English with native speakers.

47


48/53

9.4 Methodology

9.4.1 Training

Teaching training was integrated into the weekly schedule within the ten weeks. All EMs

were briefed on the previous curriculum and material covered by past expeditions.Training was through pre-class organization sessions in which the teaching team would

create a lesson plan and prepare the various props needed. More training took place

after the class, with a casual review of what went well during the lesson and what

needed improvement. All Expedition Members received fundamental training in teaching

English as a foreign language utilizing the Introduction to TEFL course adapted by GVI

and presentations made by staff and interns. A staff member guided the EMs through

the lesson planning process and organization of a childrens English class, and a

childrens environmental science class and an intercambio (language exchange) classwith local guides at the local evergreen lodge.

9.4.2 Teaching

Childrens classes were held on Mondays at 14:30. Three expedition members met

before each class to plan the lesson, gather props and discuss how it was to be run.

Classes were based on a curriculum created by expedition members, which reviewed

and supplemented what had previously been taught. Generally, each class was divided

into smaller groups to give the children more individual attention when possible. Classes

lasted 45 minutes, then an activity pertaining to the topic taught and some general

conversation took place.

Due to a lack of Community Intern or fluent Spanish speaking staff member both Adult

and Environment Education classes were cancelled this phase.

In addition to its commitment to San Francisco, GVI also continued to work with the

locally run Canopy Tour connected to Evergreen Lodge. An Intercambio program, which

took place on Fridays from 16:00-17:00 allowed volunteers to learn Spanish from and

teach English to the guides. We also pursued our relationship with our neighbours at

Cabinas Vista al Mar, but intercambios were limited due to their work commitments.

48


49/53

9.5 Results

During Phase 082, eight English classes were taught to an average of seven children in

San Francisco. The topics covered were places and directions, animals, opposites, food,

body parts and clothes.

Intercambios took place six times with an average of four staff of Evergreen Canopy

Tours and once with two staff of our neighbouring Vista al Mar lodge.

Whilst formal classes were limited this phase due to lack of personnel we maintained

contact in the community with two Community Events. The first focused on rainforest

and the second on birds. The chosen model was to give an introductory lecture followed

by a series of activities. Approximately 35 children attended the events. During the first

event, an interactive presentation was given in Spanish and gained positive interaction

from the children. To further this, in the second event, in addition to an introductory talk

the children were made up to look like birds using face paints and beaks and help to

decorate a green Ibis collage out of litter.

Figure 9-1 Community Event focusing on awareness of birds and the environment

49


50/53

Figure 9-2 Community Event focusing on forests around the world and the importance of rainforests

50


51/53

10 References

Aranda, J.M. 2000. Huellas y otros rastros de los mamferos grandes y medianos de

Mxico. Instituto de Ecologa, A.C. Veracruz, Mxico.

Autar, L. 1994. Sea turtles attacked and killed by Jaguars in Suriname. Marine Turtle

Newsletter67: 11-12.

Bermdez, F. & Hernndez, C. 2003.

Bermdez, F. & Hernndez, C. 2004. Estudio de factibilidad para el desarrollo de

actividades ecotursticas en el Cerro de Tortuguero/ REBACO. Ministerio del Ambiente y

Energa. Sistema Nacional de reas de Conservacin. rea de Conservacin

Tortuguero.

Boza, M.A. & Mendoza, R. 1981. The National Parks of Costa Rica. Incafo, Madrid.

Carrillo, E., Morera, R. & Wong, G. 1994. Depredacin de tortuga lora (Lepidochelys

olivacea) y de tortuga verde (Chelonia mydas) por el jaguar (Panthera onca). Vida

Silvestre Neotropical3(1): 48-49.

Chinchilla, F.A. 1997. La dieta del jaguar (Panthera onca), el puma (Felis concolor) y el

manigordo (Felis pardalis) en el Parque Nacional Corcovado, Costa Rica. Revista de

Biologia Tropical45: 1223-1229.

Hirth, H. 1997. Synopsis of the biological data on the green turtle Chelonia mydas

(Linnaeus 1758). USFWS Biological Report97(1): 46-49.

IUCN. 2006. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. .

Accessed on 21 March 2008.

Karanth, K.U. & Nichols, J.D. 1998. Estimation of tiger densities in India using

photographic captures and recaptures. Ecology79(8): 2852-2862.

Karanth, K.U. & Nichols, J.D. 2000. Camera trapping big cats: some questions that

should be asked frequently. Unpublished document.

51


52/53

Karanth, K.U., Nichols, J.D., Kumar, N.S., Link, W.A., Hines, J.E., & Orians, G.H. 2004.

Tigers and their prey: Predicting carnivore densities from prey abundance. Proceedings

of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 101(14): 4854-

4858.

Koford, C.B. 1983. Felis onca. In: Janzen, D.H. (ed). Costa Rican Natural History. Pages

484-485. The University of Chicago Press. USA.

Miller, B. & Rabinowitz, A. 2002. Por qu conservar el jaguar? In: Medelln, R.A.,

Equina, C. Chetkiewicz, C.L., Crawshaw Jr, P.G., Rabinowitz, A., Redford, K.H.,

Robinson, J.G., Sanderson, E.W. & Taber, A.B. (eds). El jaguar en el nuevo milenio,

pages 303-315. Ediciones Cientficas Universitarias. Fondo de Cultura Econmica/

Universidad Nacional Autnoma de Mxico/ Wildlife Conservation Society. Mxico, D.F.

Mxico.

NatureServe Explorer. 2006. Online encyclopaedia of plants, animals, and ecosystems

[http://www.natureserve.org Accessed 30 November 2006].

Oritz, R.M., Plotkin, P.T, & Owens, D.W. 1997. Predation upon olive ridley sea turtles

(Lepidochelys olivacea) by the American Crocodile (Crocodylus acutus) at Playa

Nancite, Costa Rica. Chelonian Conservation and Biology2: 585-587.

Sanderson, E.W., Redford, K.H., Chetkiewicz, C.B., Medellin, R.A., Rabinowitz, R.A.,

Robinson, J.G. & Taber, A.B. 2002. Planning to save a species: the jaguar as a model.

Conservation Biology16(1): 1-15.

Salom-Prez, R. Carrillo, E., Senz, J.C. & Mora, J.M. 2007. Critical condition of the

jaguarPanthera oncapopulation in Corcovado National Park, Costa Rica. Oryx41(1):

51-56.

Seymour, K.L. 1989. Panthera onca. Mammalian Species, 340: 1-9.

Silver, S. 2004. Assessing jaguar abundance using remotely triggered cameras. Wildlife

Conservation Society. New York, USA.

52
http://www.natureserve.org/http://www.natureserve.org/


53/53

Silver, S.C., Ostro, L.E.T., Marsh, L.K., Maffei, L., Noss, A.J., Kelly, M.J., Wallace, R.B.,

Gmez, H., & Ayala, G. 2004. The use of camera traps for estimating jaguar Panthera

oncaabundance and density using capture/recapture analysis. Oryx38(2): 148-154.

Trong, S. 1997. Report on the 1997 Green Turtle Program at Tortuguero, Costa Rica.Unpublished report to the Caribbean Conservation Corporation.

Trong, S., Zanre, R., Singer, C., Pinion, T., Castro, J., Harrison, E., Ayala, D.,

Hinestroza, L., Polo, A., Quijada, A., Castillo, A., Ho, P. & Rankin, T. 1999. Report on

the 1998 Green Turtle Program at Tortuguero, Costa Rica. Unpublished report to the

Caribbean Conservation Corporation and the Ministry of Environment and Energy of

Costa Rica.

Trong, S. 2000. Predation of green (Chelonia mydas) and Leatherback (Dermochelys

coriacea) turtles by Jaguars (Panthera onca) at Tortuguero National Park, Costa Rica.

Chelonian Conservation Biology3(4): 751-753.

Van Oudenhoven, F.J.W. 2007. Of turtles and tactics. M.Sc. thesis, York University,

Ontario, Canada.

Weber, W. & Rabinowitz, A. 1996. A global perspective on large carnivore conservation.

Conservation Biology10(4): 1046-1054.

Phase 12 082 Science Report Final

Documents

Transcript of Phase 12 082 Science Report Final