seaturtle.org : MTN : ARCHIVES : Sign In

Marine Turtle Newsletter 4:4, © 1977

Sale of Turtle Products Promoted in Hawaii

G. H. Balazs
Hawaii Institute of Marine Biology, P.0. Box 1346, Kanehoe, Hawaii 96744

The survival outlook of the Hawaiian Chelonia population was enhanced in 1974 with the adoption of a State regulation which prohibits commercial usage of turtles taken from local waters. Prior to this ban the tourist restaurant trade provided a strong cash incentive to kill an increasingly alarming number of green turtles. Although it is difficult to assess the extent of damage inflicted during the years of uncontrolled exploitation, there is little doubt that continuation of previous trends would have reduced the population to a nonviable level.

In spite of the present improved situation, conservation problems in Hawaii persist for both Hawaiian turtles, as well as turtles from populations distinct to other areas. Hawaii's regulation legally prohibits commercialization of Hawaiian turtles, but it does not stop commerce in turtle products derived from outside the State. This has resulted in the continued sale of such items as whole "stuffed" turtle curios from Southeast Asia, turtle leather purses from Europe, and canned turtle soup from New Jersey. Additionally, products from the commercial culture operation on Cayman Island are now being actively marketed under the exemption. In this latter case, the authorized Hawaii distributor for the Cayman companies has clearly embarked on a promotional campaign to popularize turtle products and expand markets. In a recent article (March, 1977, Pacific Business News) which outlines the marketing plan, the distributor is quoted as saying that "... the first step is to get people accustomed to eating turtle. In addition to lauding the supposed benefits of commercial culture, the article notes that a number of restaurants are now offering turtle meat from Cayman, and that immediate plans for market expansion include stocking Hawaii's grocery stores with three kinds of turtle soup (chowder, bisque and bouillon), and selling turtle filet over the counter.

Along with others, it is my conviction that any promotional campaign aimed at encouraging people to eat turtles is clearly unacceptable in terms of conservation. Such campaigns, which strive to bring turtle products into vogue, form the basis for one of several major objections frequently raised by opponents of commercial turtle culture. In addition, such promotional practices are contrary to the IUCN Principles and Recommendations on trade in sea turtles (see Marine Turtle Newsletter 1976, No.1). Serious unanswered questions exist as to the ability of mariculture operations to fill the newly created markets, or indeed to compete with the far less expensive products obtained from turtles taken either legally, or illegally, from natural populations. Also, the identification of processed products as to source, either natural or cultured, is virtually impossible for trained herpetologists, let alone for wildlife enforcement personnel. The likelihood of illegal substitution is therefore considerable, particularly in view of an incentive for increased profits.

The logical course of action is for readers of the Newsletter to vigorously oppose, in their respective areas, all commercial trade in sea turtle products that is not consistent with the IUCN Principles and Recommendations.