BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, 67(3): 937–947, 2000

TRANSPACIFIC MIGRATION OF A LOGGERHEAD
TURTLE MONITORED BY SATELLITE TELEMETRY
Wallace J. Nichols, Antonio Resendiz, Jeffrey A. Seminoff
and Beatrice Resendiz
ABSTRACTThe oceanic movements of a captive-raised adult loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta)
were monitored with satellite telemetry for 368 d from 10 August 1996 to 12 August
1997. During this time the turtle migrated across the Pacific Ocean, covering more than
11,500 km between Santa Rosaliita, Baja California, Mexico (28º40'N, 114º14'W), andSendai Bay, Japan (37º54'N, 140º56'E). The average speed during the migration was 1.3
km h−1 and the maximum recorded speed was 1.84 km h−1. Our findings are consistent
with the hypothesis that loggerheads feeding in the eastern Pacific eventually return tonest on western Pacific beaches, a relationship previously inferred from molecular genetic analysis and flipper tag returns. We conclude that loggerhead turtles are capable oftranspacific migrations and propose that the band of water between 25º and 30ºN, theSubtropical Frontal Zone, may be an important transpacific migratory corridor.

Juvenile loggerhead turtles, Caretta caretta, in the 20–85 cm straight carapace length(SCL) size range have been have been observed in the offshore waters along the Pacificcoast of California, USA and Baja California, Mexico (Pitman, 1990; Nichols, in press).
Bartlett (1989) suggested that these turtles might be of western Pacific origin, migrating
10,000 km and feeding on pelagic red crabs (Pleuroncodes planipes) along the Baja California coast. Subsequently, Baja California loggerhead turtles have been determinedthrough molecular genetic analysis (Bowen et al., 1995) and flipper tag returns (Uchida
and Teruya, 1988; Resendiz et al., 1998) to be primarily of Japanese origin (Table 1).
Pacific loggerheads appear to utilize the entire North Pacific during the course of development in a manner similar to Atlantic loggerheads’ use of the Atlantic Ocean (Bolten
et al., 1998). After a period of more than 10 yrs (Zug et al., 1995) in pelagic waters andforaging areas along the Baja California coast mature turtles evidently cross the entire
Pacific Ocean as they return to natal beaches, a journey of more than 12,000 km in eachdirection. Recent findings (Polovina et al., 2000) indicate that juvenile loggerheads in the
North Pacific move westward against weak (0.1–0.3 km h−1) eastward geostrophic currents, demonstrating that passive drift may not entirely explain the dispersal of loggerheads.
At each stage of this developmental migration loggerhead turtles face anthropogenic
hazards such as high seas longline fisheries (Wetherall, 1996) as well as coastal halibut
and shark fisheries in Mexico (Nichols, pers. observ.). Japanese (Uchida and Nishiwaki,
1982; Kamezaki, 1997) and Australian (Limpus and Couper, 1994) nesting populations
have experienced declines in recent decades and, as human populations have grown, fishing activities have increased in both pelagic and coastal habitats along with associatedincidental capture of sea turtles. It is likely that juvenile and subadult populations in theeastern Pacific Ocean have suffered similar declines, although no studies have addressed
this issue. Little biological information exists on Pacific loggerhead life history and movement patterns (National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
937

938

BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 67, NO. 3, 2000

1998) and sparse experimental evidence exists regarding these open ocean migrations
and the sensory mechanisms and cues used by the turtles to accomplish them (Lohmann
et al., 1999).
This study represents the first effort to document pelagic movements of north Pacificloggerheads from feeding grounds to nesting areas using satellite telemetry. Previous
telemetry studies of loggerhead turtles have documented post-reproductive movements(Stoneburner, 1982), pelagic movements (Polovina et al., 2000), home ranges (Renaud
and Carpenter, 1994), sea turtle navigational abilities (Papi et al., 1997) and homing behavior (Luschi, 1996). However, few studies of sea turtles have documented pre-nesting
movements from feeding grounds to breeding areas. Notably, Renaud and Landry (1996)
documented the movement of a Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii) from feeding grounds
in Louisiana, USA to its successful nesting in Rancho Nuevo, Mexico.
A unique opportunity to track the movements of an adult-sized loggerhead turtle—
which are rarely encountered along the Baja California coast—emerged in 1996. The
turtle had been raised in captivity and used in the initial genetic analysis of Baja California loggerheads (Bowen et al., 1995). Thus, due to the difficulty in obtaining wild adultloggerhead turtles in Baja California waters, we chose a captive-raised animal for thisstudy. Its mature size (Kamezaki and Matsui, 1997), genetic affinities with Japanese turtles,
and the existence of a previous tag return from Japanese waters of a captive-raised, Baja
California loggerhead (Resendiz et al., 1998) were the deciding factors in choosing thisparticular turtle for the study.
The objective of this study was to monitor the oceanic movement, using satellite telemetry, of a Pacific loggerhead turtle initially captured on feeding grounds along the Baja
California coast. Movement data were also examined with respect to oceanographic andmeteorological information in an effort to gain insight into the navigational cues thatguide adult sea turtles and to identify possible transpacific movement corridors. The results reported here are from a single telemetered turtle that was captive-raised for ten
years and released from the coast of Baja California, Mexico.
METHODS
A captive-raised adult loggerhead turtle (BLA099) was monitored following release at Santa
Rosaliita, Baja California, Mexico (28º40'N, 114º14'W). The turtle was first captured in October1986 by sport fishermen in Bahía de Los Angeles, Baja California, and maintained in captivity at
the Centro Regional de Investigaciónes Pesqueras, Sea Turtle Research Station (CRIP-STRS). At
the time of capture it had a straight carapace length (SCL) of 29.9 cm and weighed 4 kg. The turtle
was used in the study of captive growth rates and in the genetic analysis of Pacific loggerhead
stocks. Genetic studies concluded that this individual was of Japanese origin (Bowen et al., 1995).
At the time of release the turtle measured 83.4 cm (SCL) and weighed 95 kg. The tail measured 3.5
cm from the edge of the carapace to the tip.
A model ST-3 backpack transmitter manufactured by Telonics, Inc. (Mesa, Arizona, USA) was
programmed with a duty cycle of 6 h on, 6 h off. The transmitter was attached to the second vertebral scute (counting from the anterior end) of the turtle’s carapace using a modified version of theattachment technique described by Balazs et al. (1996). Specifically, we substituted a thin layer (<1cm) of tinted two-part marine epoxy (Marine-Tex; Montgomeryville, Pennsylvania, USA) for Silicone Elastomer. Epoxy was also used to create a small faring on the leading and trailing edges of
the transmitter to reduce drag (Watson and Granger, 1998). Release of the telemetered turtle occurred approximately 2 km offshore of Santa Rosaliita, Baja California, Mexico (28º40'N, 114º14'W),
on 10 August 1996, 10 yrs after initial capture.

NICHOLS ET AL.: TRANSPACIFIC LOGGERHEAD MIGRATION

939

Transmission data were received via the Argos/NOAA satellite-based location and data collection system, which interprets and classifies signal locations in categories called location classes. In
addition to the date and location, data included surface time for each 12-h period, average dive timefor each 12-h period, last dive time and temperature. These data will be presented elsewhere in
conjunction with additional loggerhead tracks. Only positions with a location class (LC) of 0,1, 2 or
3 were included in the analysis of distances traveled and swim speeds. Location classes of 1 orgreater have known error factors of less than 1000 m and accuracy increases with location class(LC = 2, accuracy within 350 m; LC = 3, within 150 m). Turtle locations were plotted using Generic
Mapping Tools (GMT) software. Distances and headings were calculated using variations of theGreat Circle Equation (Dunlap and Shufeldt, 1969). Each segment of the track, or distance traveled
between quality locations, is presented and swim speeds for these segments are calculated by dividing the distance traveled by the time between locations (Table 1). The straightness index, or the ratio
between the great circle distance (shortest line between the release location and the final location)and the calculated distance traveled was calculated using endpoints of the track. The turtle’s trajectory for the entire track was qualitatively compared to available surface current velocities derived
from annual mean TOPEX/Poseidon Satellite Altimeter and NOAA/NESDIS World Ocean Atlas
1998 data (Lagerloef et al., 1999).

RESULTS
Detailed open-ocean movements of the turtle were recorded for 368 d. During thisperiod Argos reported a total of 405 transmissions providing assessed locations. Of these
positions 32% provided location data of LC ≥ 0, 21% LC ≥ 1 and 8% LC ≥ 2. Using only
the most accurate data (LC ≥ 2) we calculated the total distance traveled to be 11,512 km
and the overall average swim speed for the entire track to be 1.30 km h−1. Even if we
assume the maximum error for each position (350 m), less than 25 km of distance isadded to the track. Including LC = 1 data increases average speed by less than 4%. Thus,
use of only the high quality (LC ≥ 2) positions may slightly underestimate average distances and swimming speeds (Table 2). Inclusion of lower accuracy data (LC = 0 or 1)
increases the estimated distances traveled, in this case by 8 and 3%, respectively. Average swimming speed for segments of the track between high quality positions more than
24 h apart range from 0.90 km h−1 (21.6 km d−1) to maximum levels of 1.84 km h−1 (44.2
km d−1) for the segment near 129ºW latitude and 1.79 km h−1 (43.0 km d−1) near 172ºE
latitude. It should be emphasized that these speeds do not represent maximum burst
speeds, rather an average speed between positions where LC ≥ 2. The net distance traveled, using only the endpoints of the great circle, is 9276 km. The overall distance traveled and mean swimming speed, for the entire track, calculated using only LC ≥ 2 positions, was 11,512 km and 1.30 km h−1 (31.2 km d−1), respectively, and increases as additional location classes are included (Table 2). The turtle’s average heading for the entire
track was 309.8° and the headings for each segment ranged between 180º and 330º (Fig.
1). The straightness index was 0.81 for LC ≥ 2, 0.78 for LC ≥ 1 and 0.74 for LC ≥ 0.
The final recorded location for the turtle was on 13 August 1997 near Isohama, Japan,
a small fishing port in northeastern Honshu (37º54.12'N, 140º55.98'E). The scarcity oflocations for the two weeks prior to this date, the sequence of four high quality positions
during the final eighteen hours of transmission (LC ≥ 2), and the direct movement towards Isohama during the final day of transmission suggest that the turtle may have beencaught by fishermen in waters northeast of Japan (39º49.26'N, 142º36.48'E). The final
256-km segment of the track should be considered cautiously. When this final segment ofBULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 67, NO. 3, 2000

940

Table 1. Summary of distances and swimming speeds for the transpacific movement of aloggerhead turtle (Longitude: − = West; + = East).
Date

11.08.96
28.08.96
29.08.96
25.09.96
06.10.96
07.10.96
07.10.96
12.10.96
13.10.96
24.10.96
25.10.96
07.11.96
12.12.96
02.01.97
31.01.97
27.02.97
13.03.97
21.03.97
25.03.97
07.04.97
07.04.97
07.04.97
09.04.97
15.05.97
24.05.97
10.06.97
06.07.97
19.07.97
19.07.97
26.07.97
13.08.97
13.08.97
13.08.97
13.08.97
1

Time1

01:15:00
14:39:16
3:33:18
3:45:22
17:06:29
15:05:57
16:45:17
16:38:32
14:36:15
15:31:29
16:53:06
17:06:55
17:46:29
4:16:53
5:26:23
15:00:04
17:55:07
19:59:23
7:46:31
3:43:39
6:24:118:01:40
15:54:08
19:53:33
19:57:08
20:23:36
16:35:01
3:28:43
5:11:38
7:58:23
8:02:24
16:19:49
17:58:32
20:19:46

Relative LC2day

LatitudeLongitude

0.00
17.56
18.10
45.10
56.66
57.58
57.65
62.64
63.56
74.59
75.65
88.66
123.69144.13173.17200.57214.69222.78226.27239.10239.21
239.28241.61277.78286.78303.80329.64342.09342.16349.28367.28367.63367.70367.7928.66826.72626.76725.02824.99525.14325.13125.14625.13825.68425.64325.52825.15124.84024.09521.95123.45623.45724.13425.84125.82925.83026.08131.83833.22933.08039.71739.63339.63439.82137.92937.90237.90437.902−114.237−118.412−118.484−124.641−128.834−129.202−129.206−131.106−131.353−135.241−135.579−140.267−153.173−158.447−170.467−179.880
174.868172.692
171.417166.609166.608
166.605166.026
154.058
152.672148.745146.511144.631144.642142.608140.923140.933140.925140.933

3
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3

Distance Cumulative Mean
total
swimming
betweenlocations3 distance speed for
(km)
(km)
segment(km h−1)−−−
463.95463.951.10
8.47
472.430.66
644.99 1,117.42
1.00
1.52
422.23 1,539.65
40.53 1,580.18
1.84
1.39 1,581.57
0.84
191.14 1,772.71
1.59
24.86 1,797.57
1.13
394.91 2,192.48
1.49
34.16 2,226.63
1.35
470.00 2,696.63
1.51
1,296.30 3,992.94
1.54
1.09
532.25 4,525.18
1,218.13 5,743.32
1.75
991.46 6,734.77
1.51
563.71 7,298.48
1.66
221.81 7,520.29
1.14
149.88 7,670.17
1.79
520.03 8,190.20
1.69
0.50
1.34 8,191.54
0.32 8,191.86
0.20
64.22 8,256.08
1.15
1,326.59 9,582.68
1.53
201.86 9,784.54
0.93
365.68 10,150.22
0.90
764.01 10,914.24
1.23
0.54
161.06 11,075.29
0.95 11,076.24
0.55
175.06 11,251.30
1.03
255.82 11,507.12
0.59
3.13 11,510.25
0.38
0.74 11,510.98
0.45
0.74 11,511.72
0.31

Time is GMT
Location Class (LC) 2 is estimated at ±350 m, LC 3 is estimated at ±150 m
3
Distances were calculated using the Great Circle Equation (spherical earth model)
The final four reported locations should be interpreted cautiously, as the turtle may have been caught or thetransmitter removed.
2

NICHOLS ET AL.: TRANSPACIFIC LOGGERHEAD MIGRATION

941

Table 2. Comparison of total distance traveled and swimming speeds by a loggerhead turtle during
its transpacific migration over a period of 368 days.1
Locations1
LC ≥ 0LC ≥ 1LC ≥ 2
Great circle2

Positions(number)
131
84
34
2

Net distance(km)
12,483
11,883
11,512
9,276

Mean speed3(km h−1)
1.41
1.35
1.30
1.05

Maximum speed(km h−1)
3.94
2.39
1.84
-

A total of 405 locations were reported, 274 were unreliable (LC = A or B) and not used in this analysis.
Great circle distance calculated for the arc between Santa Rosaliita, Baja California, Mexico and Sendai, Japan.
3
Average speed was calculated by dividing the total distance by the total time.

1

2

the track is excluded, the total distance traveled is 11,251.3 km and the overall averageswim speed is 1.34 km h−1.
DISCUSSION
Pacific loggerhead hatchlings entering the waters off of their nesting beaches in Japan
may embark on a large-scale developmental migration that encompasses the entire northPacific Ocean. Carried northward by the Kuroshio Current and its extension (N. Kamezaki,
pers. comm.), many enter the pelagic environment where the turtles may remain until
they return to their natal beach at maturity. A large number of loggerhead turtles arrive
along the coast of the Baja California peninsula (Ramirez Cruz et al., 1991), apparently
transported by the cold, wide California Current from the north. Pelagic sightings ofthese animals and the rarity of their occurrence near shore suggest that some turtles may
skip the subadult benthic stage described by Musick and Limpus (1997).
Massive amounts of debris from the north and northwestern Pacific, including redwood trees, ships, Japanese fishing buoys and World War II artifacts, have accumulated
over the years along Baja California’s Pacific coast, particularly in the vicinity of Malarrimo
Beach, Bahía Sebastian Vizcaino (27˚55'N, 114˚25'W), an area known locally for juvenile and subadult loggerheads. The same forces that deposited this flotsam are likely
responsible for carrying the juvenile loggerheads to the region.

Figure 1. Track of transpacific movement of loggerhead turtle (07667) from Mexico to Japan,
during 1996–1997, monitored using satellite telemetry. All positions shown are LC ≥ 2. Meancurrent velocities for 11 August 1996 through10 August 1997 are derived from TOPEX/Poseidon
Satellite Altimeter and NOAA/NESDIS World Ocean Atlas 1998 data (Lagerloef et al., 1999).

942

BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 67, NO. 3, 2000

It is not clear how long loggerhead turtles remain in Baja California waters. However,
our results suggest that upon reaching maturity and reproductive condition loggerheads
are capable of migrating from Baja California to natal beaches in Japan. While the detailsof which endogenous or exogenous factors trigger migration to nesting areas are notclear, the life cycle and high lipid content (Aurioles-Gamboa and Balart, 1995) of theirmain food source, P. planipes, likely play an important role. Observations suggest thatloggerheads do not return to the eastern Pacific waters after reproducing, remaining on
western Pacific foraging grounds (Kamezaki et al., 1997). Few turtles larger than 85 cm(SCL) have been encountered in Baja California waters and according to fishermen mature males are rarely or never encountered (Nichols et al., in press).
These data provide the first details of a return migration across the Pacific Ocean.
However, because this turtle had been held in captivity at the foraging area for 10 yrs,
conclusions regarding the timing of such a migration must be cautiously extended.
SWIMMING SPEEDS OF MIGRATING TURTLES.—Calculated swimming speeds of migrating
sea turtles are prone to error due to assumptions of straight-line movement between markand recapture positions, satellite location error, and assistance or hindrance due to currents. This study provides a unique opportunity to calculate average swimming speeds
over extended periods with high accuracy due to (1) highly reliable data, (2) clear andconsistent straight-line movement of the animal being tracked, and (3) known currents forlarge sections of this ocean area.
Loggerhead turtles are certainly capable of obtaining bursts in swimming speeds far
greater than 1.84 km h−1, the maximum recorded here (Meylan, 1982a; Stoneburner, 1982).
However, this study demonstrates that they are able to maintain average speeds in excess
of 1.0 km h−1 over longer periods of time such as several weeks to months. The resolutionof the positions reported in this study is not sufficient to detect short bursts in swim
speed. Ten years in captivity would be expected to result in an animal’s inferior physicalcondition, yet swimming speeds are similar to those reported for wild loggerheads (Byles
and Dodd, 1989; Papi et al., 1997)
When the turtle’s track is compared to mean surface current data (Lagerloef et al.,1999) for the north Pacific during the tracking period (August 1996 to August 1997) it isapparent that at times the turtle swam against weak prevailing currents, which flow in a
ESE direction in some areas (Fig. 1). However, current speeds along the migration path
were typically less than 5 cm s−1 (0.18 km h−1) and seasonal means may differ from annual
means. The wide California Current would carry a turtle with a due westward orientation,
swimming at approximately 1.0 km h−1 (30 cm s−1) slightly southward as it pursued its
transpacific goal. At the western end of the track the strong Kuroshio Current apparently
carried the turtle excessively northward. It is clear from a comparison of this track withoceanographic data that this turtle was not simply transported passively across the ocean
on surface currents as its swimming speed greatly exceeds that of the 1996–1997 averagesurface currents.
MIGRATION PATH.—The turtle appears to have maintained a relatively constant swimming speed and heading for the entire track. All of the locations reported here occur inpelagic waters of depths greater than 3000 m, except for those near the Baja California
and Japanese coasts. The great circle connecting the endpoints of the track (i.e., the shortest distance path) would be further to the north than the track of this turtle. This shortest
distance passes through the eastward-flowing North Pacific Current (NPC) and thus taking that path would require swimming against prevailing currents. Further to the south,

NICHOLS ET AL.: TRANSPACIFIC LOGGERHEAD MIGRATION

943

the turtle’s path passes through a convergence area of the Northern Equatorial Current(NEC) and the NPC likely to be relatively rich in plankton (Polovina and Moffit, 1995).
The turtle appears to have traveled along a constant westward trajectory, only being deflected to the south and north by currents near continental coastlines, in particular thestrong California and Kuroshio Currents.
Wetherall et al. (1993) report that turtles ranging from 10 cm to 90 cm (CCL), most ofwhich were immature, were taken in the north Pacific high-seas driftnet fisheries in anarea between longitudes 154ºW and 150ºE and latitudes 28ºN and 39ºN. Our surveys of
strandings and incidentally captured turtles suggest that the majority of loggerheads along
the Baja California coast are of immature size classes (45–70 cm). These findings combined with the current data suggest a general model: the northern Pacific gyre provides
eastbound dispersal for immature Japanese loggerhead turtles as they reach Baja California feeding areas and may aid in westbound homing of loggerhead turtles returning totheir natal beaches. It is likely that pelagic convergence zones also serve as forage habitat
and that the distribution of loggerheads is continuous across the Pacific (Polovina et. al,2000).
NAVIGATIONAL CUES.—These data provide further insights into the abilities of sea turtles
to make long oceanic migrations and possibly into their navigational ability in the open
sea during long range movement between feeding and nesting areas. The tracked turtle
swam in a consistently westward direction and the simplest explanation is that it moved
with surface currents. However, segments of the track are occasionally at 90–180º tomean annual surface current vectors, particularly during the initial segment near the coastof Baja California. It is therefore possible that this turtle followed some sort of directional
homing instinct and fixed on a single compass heading (west) during its movement towards Japan, its known natal area (Bowen et al., 1995). The guidance cues used during
the migration, however, are not known. Celestial navigation (use of moon and stars) seems
unlikely due to turtles’ poor eyesight above the surface of the water (Ehrenfeld and Koch,1967). Comparisons of the track to lunar phase and meteorological data indicate that the
turtle was able to maintain its westward trajectory under diverse conditions that included
cloudy or moonless nights, dusk, dawn, etc. Furthermore, anyone who has spent time on
the high sea will recognize the difficulties associated with using visual cues through apair of eyes positioned just above the sea surface. If celestial cues are used in sea turtle
navigation it seems that a variety of factors must be used in synchrony and that an ability
to maintain a heading in the absence of such cues remains a requirement.
The use of chemosensory cues seems unlikely as the turtle did not appear to display
wandering movements typical of gradient assessment (Dusenbery, 1992) and the distancefrom the release site to the source or destination is great. Furthermore, currents near theJapanese nesting beach run to the northeast, away from this turtle’s migratory path. Whilechemical cues may play a role in turtle homing this seems most likely at close range ofnesting beaches (Grassman and Owens, 1987) and probably not very useful in long-distance navigation.
Experience-based behavior seems equally unlikely as the turtle had been in captivity
for 10 yrs and the route taken from Japan to North America as a juvenile likely differsfrom the return route. Transpacific migration of loggerhead turtles may be an example of‘vector navigation’, a term used to describe the innate movement of a young animal from
natal to developmental areas (Able, 1996). If this is the case these turtles may be making
their first, and possibly only, circum-oceanic journeys.

944

BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 67, NO. 3, 2000

This track is consistent with the hypothesis that adult turtles utilize a magnetic map
sense and have a capacity for true navigation that allows them to maintain headings towards homing locations despite current drift or displacement (Papi and Luschi, 1996).
The nature of this ‘map sense’ has not been determined. Hatchling loggerheads have theability to detect magnetic inclination angle (Lohmann and Lohmann, 1994) and field
intensity (Lohmann and Lohmann, 1996), two geomagnetic features that vary across theearth’s surface and might be used to approximate geographic position (Lohmann et al.,1999). Such a system seems to be the most reasonable explanation of transpacific navigation abilities of loggerhead turtles, although a variety of additional cues and interacting
mechanisms may also be used at various stages of the movement.
CONSERVATION IMPLICATIONS.—The area traveled by this turtle overlaps with several commercial fisheries utilizing gill nets, drift nets and longlines, known sources of loggerheadmortality (Yatsu, 1990; Wetherall et al., 1993; National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1998; Nichols et al., in press). Especially along the coast of
Baja California, fisheries-related mortality data are few, illegal poaching difficult to quantify and post-capture survival rates are largely unknown. Research should be expanded inorder to estimate the impact of these activities on loggerhead populations. The results cansubstantiate mitigation needs such as modification of fishing practices and if this turtle’s
path represents a heavily used corridor, the area could be better protected through theestablishment of international open-ocean reserves (Morreale et al., 1996).
The relationship between feeding and developmental areas along the Baja California
coast and the loggerhead populations nesting in southern Japan has been firmly established. Therefore, efforts to reduce incidental catch of loggerheads in Mexican coastal
fisheries, particularly those in the large subadult size classes, will produce measurable
conservation and population recovery rewards on Japanese nesting beaches (Heppell,1998). Similarly, conservation efforts in Japan should result in increasing numbers ofjuvenile loggerheads on Baja California feeding grounds.
The data obtained from the single year-long transpacific movement of an individual
turtle contribute to our sparse knowledge of the pelagic migratory phase of sea turtle life
history and specifically to the Baja California population of loggerhead turtles. These
results demonstrate the ecological link between two seemingly disparate loggerhead populations in Japan and Baja California, and emphasize the need for continuing research andmultilateral marine conservation efforts. Future telemetry studies of juvenile, wild-caught
turtles on the Baja California feeding grounds are recommended.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We thank the late G. Bartlett and R. Snodgrass for their wisdom and undying inspiration. We also
thank R. Byles, O. Pedrin, USFWS, SEMARNAP, Instituto Nacional de la Pesca, Earthwatch Institute, One World Work Force, Turtle Trax and the Wallace Research Foundation for their support ofthis project. The fishermen of Bahía de los Angeles and Santa Rosaliita, M. Arce and his daughter
Adelita, A. Galvan and D. C. Nichols assisted us in the field. To W. Harrison we extend an extra
share of appreciation for his patience and tutoring. Our gratitude to A. Abreu, K. Lohmann, B.
Godley, J. Frazier, C. Schwalbe, and D. Thomson and three anonymous reviewers for constructive
comments that greatly improved the manuscript.

NICHOLS ET AL.: TRANSPACIFIC LOGGERHEAD MIGRATION

945

LITERATURE CITED
Able, K. P. 1996. Large-scale navigation. J. Exp. Biol. 199: 1–2.
Aurioles-Gamboa, D. and E. F. Balart. 1995. La langostilla: Biología, ecología y aprovechamiento.
Centro de Investigaciónes Biologicas del Noroeste, S.C., La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico.
Bartlett, G. 1989. Juvenile Caretta off Pacific coast of Baja California. Noticias Caguamas 2: 1–8.
Bolten, A. B., K. A. Bjorndal, H. R. Martins, T. Dellinger, M. J. Biscoito, S. E. Encalada and B. W.
Bowen. 1998. Transatlantic developmental migrations of loggerhead sea turtles demonstrated
by mtDNA sequence analysis. Ecol. Appl. 8: 1–7.
Bowen, B. W. 1995. Tracking marine turtles with genetic markers. BioScience 45: 528–534.
__________, F. A. Abreu-Grobois, G. H. Balazs, N. Kamezaki, C. J. Limpus and R. J. Ferl. 1995.
Trans-Pacific migrations of the loggerhead sea turtle demonstrated with mitochondrial DNA
markers. Proc. Nat’l. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 92: 3731–3734.
Brower, L. P. and S. B. Malcolm. 1991. Animal migrations: endangered phenomena. Amer. Zool.
31:265-276.
Byles, R. A. and C. K. Dodd. 1989. Satellite biotelemetry of a Loggerhead sea turtle (Caretta
caretta) from the East Coast of Florida. Pages 215–217 in S. A. Eckert, K. L. Eckert and T. H.
Richardson, Compilers. Proc. 9th Ann. Workshop on Sea Turtle Conservation and Biology.
NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-232.
Dunlap, G. D. and H. H. Shufeldt. 1969. Dutton’s navigation and piloting. United States Naval
Institute, Annalpolis, Maryland.
Dusenbery, D. B. 1992. Sensory ecology. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York.
Ehrenfeld, D. W. and A. L. Koch. 1967. Visual accommodation in the green turtle. Science 155:827–828.
Grassman, M. and D. Owens. 1987. Chemosensory imprinting in juvenile green sea turtles, Chelonia mydas. Anim. Behav. 35: 929–931.
Heppell, S. S. 1998. Application of life-history theory and population analysis to turtle conservation. Copeia 1998: 367–375.
Kamezaki, N. 1997. Effects of global warming on sea turtles. Pages 254–272 in A. Domoto and K.
Iwakuni,eds. Threats of global warming to biological diversity. Tsukiji Shokan, Japan.
___________ and M. Matsui. 1997. A review of biological studies on sea turtles in Japan. Jpn. J.
Herpetol. 17: 16–32.
___________, I. Miyawaki, H. Suganuma, K. Omuta, Y. Nakajima, K. Goto, K. Sato, Y. Matsuzawa,
M. Samejima, M. Ishii and T. Iwamoto. 1997. Post-nesting migration of Japanese loggerhead
turtle, Caretta caretta. Wildl. Conserv. Jpn. 3: 29–29.
Lagerloef, G. S. E., G. T. Mitchum, R. B. Lukas and P. P. Niiler. 1999. Tropical Pacific surface
currents estimated from altimeter, wind and drifter data. J. Geophys. Res. 104(10C): 23: 313–
326.
Limpus, C. J. and P. Couper. 1994. Loggerheads: a species in decline. Wildl. Aust. 30: 11–13.
Lohmann, K. J. and C. M. F. Lohmann. 1994. Detection of magnetic inclination angle by sea turtles:
a possible mechanism for determining latitude. J. Expt. Biol. 194: 23–32.
____________ and ______________. 1996. Detection of magnetic field intensity by sea turtles.
Nature 380: 59–61.
_____________, J. T. Hester and C. M. F. Lohmann. 1999. Long-distance navigation in sea turtles.
Ethol. Ecol. Evol. 11: 1–23.
Luschi, P. 1996. Long distance migration and homing after displacement in the green turtle (Chelonia mydas): a satellite tracking study. J. Comp. Physiol. Anat. 178: 447–452.
Meylan, A. 1982. Behavioral ecology of the west Caribbean green turtle (Chelonia mydas) in theinternesting habitat. Pages 67–80 in K. A. Bjorndal, ed. Biology and conservation of sea turtles.
Smithson. Inst. Press, Washington, D.C.
Morreale, S. J., E. A. Standora, J. R. Spotila and F. V. Paladino. 1996. Migration corridor for sea
turtles. Nature 384: 319–320.

946

BULLETIN OF MARINE SCIENCE, VOL. 67, NO. 3, 2000

Musick, J. A. and C.J. Limpus. 1997. Habitat utilization and migration in juvenile sea turtles. Pages
137–163 in P. L. Lutz and J.A. Musick, eds. The biology of sea turtles. CRC Press, Inc., Boca
Raton, Florida.
National Marine Fisheries Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 1998. Recovery plan for
U.S. Pacific populations of the loggerhead turtle (Caretta caretta). National Marine FisheriesService, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Nichols, W.J., A. Resendiz and C. Mayoral-Russeau. (in press). Biology and conservation of loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) in Baja California, Mexico. Proc. 19th Ann. Symp. Sea Turtle
Biol. and Conserv. 3–5 March, 1999. South Padre Island, Texas.
Papi, F. and P. Luschi. 1996. Pinpointing “Isla Meta”: The case of sea turtles and albatrosses. J. Exp.
Biol. 199: 65–71.
______, P. Luschi, E. Crosio and G. R. Hughes. 1997. Satellite tracking experiments on the navigational ability and migratory behavior of the loggerhead turtle Caretta caretta. Mar. Biol. 129:
215–220.
Pitman, R. L. 1990. Pelagic distribution and biology of sea turtles in the eastern tropical Pacific.
Pages 143–148 in T. H. Richardson, J. I. Richardson, M. Donnelly, Comps. Proc. 10th Ann.
Workshop Sea Turtle Biol. and Conserv.. NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-SEFC-278.
Polovina, J. J. and R. Moffit. 1995. Spatial and temporal distribution of the phyllosoma of the spiny
lobster, Panulirus marginatus, in the northwestern Hawaiian Islands. Bull. Mar. Sci. 56: 406–
417.
__________, D. R. Kobayashi, D. M. Parker, M. P. Seki and G. H. Balazs. 2000. Turtles on the edge:
movement of loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) along oceanic fronts, spanning longline fishing grounds in the central North Pacific, 1997–1998. Fish. Oceanogr. 9: 71–82.
Ramirez Cruz, J. C., I. P. Ramirez and D. V. Flores. 1991. Distribución y abundancia de la tortuga
perica, Caretta caretta, Linnaeus (1758), en la costa occidental de Baja California Sur, México.
Archelon 1: 1–4.
Renaud, M. L. and J. A. Carpenter. 1994. Movements and submergence patterns of loggerhead
turtles (Caretta caretta) in the Gulf of Mexico determined through satellite telemetry. Bull.
Mar. Sci. 55: 1–15.
____________ and A. M. Landry. 1996. Kemp’s ridley sea turtle (Lepidochelys kempii) tracked bysatellite telemetry from Louisiana to nesting beach at Rancho Nuevo, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
Chelon. Conserv. Biol. 2: 108–109.
Resendiz, A., B. Resendiz, W. J. Nichols, J. A. Seminoff and N. Kamezaki. 1998. First confirmed
east-west transpacific movement of loggerhead sea turtle, Caretta caretta, released in Baja
California, Mexico. Pacif. Sci. 52: 151–153.
Stoneburner, D. L. 1982. Satellite telemetry of loggerhead sea turtle movement in the Georgia
Bight. Copeia 1982: 400–408.
Uchida, I., and M. Nishiwaki. 1982. Sea turtles in the waters adjacent to Japan. Pages 317–319 in
K. A. Bjorndal, ed. Biology and conservation of sea turtles. Smithson. Inst. Press, Washington,
D.C.
Uchida, S. and Teruya, H. 1988. Transpacific migration of a tagged loggerhead, Caretta caretta andtag-return results of loggerheads released from Okinawa Island, Japan. Pages 169–182 in I.
Uchida, ed. Proc. Int’l. Sea Turtle Symp., Hiwasa, Japan, 30 July–1 August 1988.
Villanueva, D. 1991. La tortuga perica Caretta caretta gigas (Deraniyagala, 1939) en la costa delPacifico de Baja California Sur, México. Departamento de Biologia Marina. Univ. Autonoma
de Baja California Sur, La Paz, BCS, México. Unpubl. Thesis. 68 p.
Watson, K. P. and R. A. Granger. 1998. Hydrodynamic effect of a satellite transmitter on a juvenile
green turtle (Chelonia mydas). J. Exp. Biol. 201: 2497–2505.
Wetherall, J. A., G. H. Balazs, R. A. Tonkunaga and M. Y. Y. Yong. 1993. Bycatch of marine turtles
in north Pacific high-seas driftnet fisheries and impacts on the stocks. In: Ito, J., W. Shaw and R.
L. Burger, eds. INPFC Symp. Biology, Distribution, and Stock Assessment of Species Caught

NICHOLS ET AL.: TRANSPACIFIC LOGGERHEAD MIGRATION

947

in the High Seas Driftnet Fisheries in the North Pacific Ocean. Int’l. No. Pacif. Fish. Comm.
Bull., Vancouver, Canada. 53(3): 519-538.
______________. 1996. Assessing impacts of Hawaiian longline fishing on Japanese loggerheads
and Malaysian leatherbacks: some exploratory studies using TURTSIM. Pages 57–75 in A. B.
Bolten, J. A. Wetherall, G. H. Balazs, S. G. Pooley, comps. Status of marine turtles in the Pacific
Ocean relevant to incidental take in the Hawaii-based pelagic longline fishery. NOAA Tech.
Memo. NMFS-SWFSC-230.
Whiting, S. D. and J. D. Miller. 1998. Short term foraging ranges of adult green turtles (Chelonia
mydas). J. Herpetol. 32: 330–337.
Yatsu, A. 1990. A review of the Japanese squid driftnet fishery. IWC Symp. Mortality of Cetaceans
in Passive Fishing Nets and Traps, La Jolla, California. 55 p.
Zug, G. R., G. H. Balazs and J. A. Wetherall. 1995. Growth in juvenile loggerhead sea turtles(Caretta caretta) in the North Pacific pelagic habitat. Copeia 1995: 484–487.
DATE SUBMITTED: June 11, 1999.

DATE ACCEPTED: February 17, 2000.

ADDRESSES: (W.J.N.) Department of Herpetology, California Academy of Sciences, Golden Gate Park,San Francisco, California. (A.R., B.R.) Instituto Nacional de la Pesca, El Sauzal de Rodriguez, Ensenada,
Baja California, Mexico. (J.A.S.) Wildlife Ecology, School of Renewable Natural Resources, Universityof Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, 85721. CORRESPONDING AUTHOR: (W.J.N.) Department of Herpetology,
California Academy of Sciences, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco, California, 94118-4599.
CORRESPONENCE ADDRESS: c/o Wildcoast, Post Office Box 752, Brookdale, California, 95007. E-mail:<wallacejnichols@earthlink.net>