On Burning Sea Turtles Alive

<a href="Audubon/Louisiana Marine Mammal">Audubon/Louisiana Marine Mammal</a> via Flickr.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Like many, I was shocked and dismayed earlier this week when a video surfaced alleging that sea turtles were being burned alive during BP recovery efforts. In the video, captain Mike Ellis (who’s working with BP) talks about how shrimp boats are using booms to consolidate pools of crude and oil-slimed matter and then setting it on fire for an in-situ burn. According to Ellis, the pools of crude were not being checked for wildlife before being lit, meaning sea turtles caught in the slicks were likely being burned alive.

It’s been difficult to find any hard evidence that turtles were indeed burned alive. There haven’t been reports of charred shells or eye-witness accounts of seeing actual turtles on fire. That said, the Los Angeles Times yesterday corroborated part of Ellis’s account: 

“But the burn operations have proved particularly excruciating for the turtle researchers, who have been trolling the same lines of oil and seaweed as the boom boats, hoping to pull turtles out of the sargassum before they are burned alive… Yet in one case, the crew had to fall back and watch as skimmers gathered up a long line of sargassum that hadn’t yet been searched–and which they believe was full of turtles that might have been saved.”

Petty Officer Crystal Kneen from the Deepwater Horizon Joint Information Center in Houma, Louisiana, said that she didn’t know of any turtles harmed by the burn. That may be true but Dr. Chris Pincetich, a biologist with the Sea Turtle Restoration Project,* says he knows and has spoken to Captain Ellis personally and the deaths of these turtles is extremely likely. In addition, this NOAA guide called Oil and Sea Turtles: Biology, Planning, and Response (PDF) states that although in-situ burns are not preferable, they could be better than the alternative of letting the oil remain: “Obviously, in-situ burning would be an unlikely choice where sea turtles aggregate–although in such an area, the impacts of prolonged or heavy exposure to untreated surface oil would be evaluated against the risks.” The guide also states that although burning removes far more oil than could be contained manually, it also sometimes leaves behind residue that congeals and is eaten by wildlife.

Ellis said most of the turtles he’d seen were juvenile Kemp’s Ridleys, a critically-endangered species, and both Pincetich and Audubon representative Sarah Burnette have said that account is definitely accurate: There’s been a recent increase in Kemp’s Ridleys, especially juveniles, seen in Louisiana rescue facilities. According to Burnette, most of the 70 turtles received by Audubon were visibly oiled and quite small, “about the size of salad plates.” Scientists have debated why so many Kemp’s Ridleys have turned up, and juveniles in particular. Pincetich points out that firstly, there are simply a lot of juvenile Kemp’s. Conservation efforts in the late 1980s boosted the number of Kemp’s from around 1,000 to around 8,000 before the spill, so the Kemp’s baby boom is still in full swing. Secondly, Kemp’s are shallow swimmers, staying within around 160 feet of the surface, and the oil. And finally, the turtles must migrate through the Gulf to get to Mexican breeding grounds and younger turtles may not have the street smarts of those who managed to survive previous oil spills.

Audubon’s Burnette said the baby turtles being rehabed by her organization are “doing great, and we can take more.” Likely, Audubon will take in more turtles… once the temporary suspension of rescue efforts has been lifted. UC Davis’s Dr. Mike Ziccardi announced that turtle rescues in the Gulf have been suspended for a few days so that crews can rest up, boats can be re-supplied, and rescue teams can “more fully develop a comprehensive plan which will have greater results as this spill continues to unfold.” Dr. Pincetich is waiting impatiently for the suspension to be lifted. “There are a dozen turtle rehab organizations waiting to get in sea mode,” he says. “They’ve got donations, a laundry list of helpers, so why are we waiting? We can help.”

 

*Full disclosure: Mother Jones publisher Steve Katz sits on the Sea Turtle Restoration Project board.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate