Response of Nesting Sea Turtles to Barrier Island Dynamics Marcarer M. Lamovr' anp Raymonp R. Carry! "Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildife Research Unit, University of Florida, PO Box 110485, Building 810, Gainesville, Florida 32611 U Immmtamont@mindspring.com; CarthyR@wecwfedu) Ansreact ~ Although barrier island beaches provide important nesting habitat for sea turtles, they are constantly changing. To determine how nesting sea turtles have responded to this dynamic environment, we assessed: 1) wind, current, and tidal patterns and changes in beach profiles, 2) sea turtle nesting patterns, and 3) success of turtle nests deposited along 5 km of beach ‘on Cape San Blas, Florida, an extremely dynamic barrier beach in northwest Florida. From 1998 to 2000, nesting turtles were tagged, nests were monitored, and hatching success was determined. ‘Throughout this study, West beach lost ~ 5 m of sand while Kast beach gained ~ 4 m; however 61% of nests were deposited on West beach and 39% on East beach. Hatchling emergence success did not differ between beaches. Wind direction influenced current direction and sand movement and affected the number of nests deposited along East beach but not on West beach. Nearly all nests (98%) oviposited on both beaches were deposited during a rising tide. Although West beach is narrow and eroding, the steep slope may enable nesting turtles to expend less energy to reach higher nesting sites while still providi Key Worps. ~ Reptilia; Testudines; Chelo Female loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) nest every 1 to 3 years, and from 1 to 6 times within each reproductive season (Miller 1997). It has been suggested that female turtles return to their natal beach to nest, and that once a female has retumed to the region of her birth she will tend to renest in close proximity on subsequent nesting events within and between nesting seasons (Car and Hirth 1962; Carr and Carr 1972; Talbert et al. 1980; Williams-Wallis et al. 1983), Genetic and tagging studies support this theory (Carr 1975; Pritchard 1976; Bowen et al. 1992; Encalada ct al. 1996). Changes in the morphology of a nesting beach due to occan currents, winds, and tides may present challenges to wrtles attempting to retum to their natal nesting beach. Effects of these forces on nest site selection by loggerhead turtles are largely unknown, ‘When attempting to nest, loggerhead turtles must first select a beach, then emerge from the water, and finally deposit the clutch on that beach (Wood and Bjomdal 2000). Beach characteristics such as temperature, salinity, slope, moisture, width, and sand type have been shown to influence nest placement (lohannes and Rimmer 1984; Garmenstani et al. 2000; Wood and Bjorndal 2000). When optimal, these factors may allow turtles to expend less energy in locating nesting sites that will provide the greatest reproductive success. Along dynamic beaches, these factors are constantly changing, which may reduce a turtle’s ability to identify high-quality nesting sites Barrier island beaches typically undergo severe erosion and accretion throughout the year; however, these habitats are also often used by nesting loggerhead turtles. ig successful nests, Nesting on a rising tide and using offshore currents during the internesting period may assist this effort. lae; Caretta caretta; loggerhead; erosion; Gulf of Mexico: hatching success; site fidelity; currents; tides Along the eastem coast of the United States, loggerhead turtles nest on several barrier islands, including Topsail Island, North Carolina (Grant and Beasley 1998); Kiawals Island, South Carolina (Talbert et al. 1980); Little Cumberland Island, Georgia (Frazer 1983b); and Huteh- inson Island, Florida (Williams-Wallis et al. 1983). I= addition, barticr islands form almost half of the Gulf of Mexico shoreline, and loggerhead turtles commonly cs in this region (LaRoe 1976; LeBuff 1990). ‘The dynar habitat along these barrier islands may provide signifc challenges for nesting loggerhead turtles. Along the northem Gulf of Mexico the grea density of loggerhead turtle nesting occurs along 5 km ‘beach owned by the US Air Force on Cape San Blas, County, Florida, This barrier beach is located alone Florida panhandle and represents the southernmost of the St Joseph Peninsula (Fig. 1). From 1993 to 1997 area supported a mean of 48 loggerhead turtle nests) nests/km; Meylan et al, 1995; Lamont et al. 1997) other species of sea turtle has been documented nes this site Cape San Blas supports a significant group of turtles and genetic studies have indicated turtles from region represent a unique stock (Encalada et al. 1 However, this site also hosts extremely dynamic The eastem (south-facing) beach (hereafter referred East beach) of Cape San Blas undergoes ace ‘whereas the westem coast (hereafter referred 10 == beach) experiences some of the greatest erosion Florida. From June 1994 to September 1995 ‘mately 10m of sediment was eroded ftom Wessont ct al. 1997). Although West beach is less stable East beach, sea turtles using Cape San Blas tend to along the croding rather than the accreting beach. 1994 through 1997, at least 60% of nests deposited Cape San Blas were deposited on West beach (Lamont 1997). How the dynamics of this environment nesting activity of loggerhead turtles is un- To determine how nesting sea turtles have responded is dynamic environment, our goals were 10 1) assess of Cape San Blas, including wind, currents, and patterns and changes in beach profiles, 2) determine turtle nesting pattems, and 3) quantify hatching eeess of nests deposited along Cape San Blas. METHODS: Sea Turtle Surveys and Reproductive Success. — Daily morning surveys for sea turtle nests were conducted om 15 May through 15 September in 1998, 1999, and +2000. Nests were marked with 4 wooden stakes wrapped ith orange flagging, placed around the body pit, Starting 45 days of incubation, nests were visually examined ‘every moming for signs of hatching, One week after the fast hatchling emergence or after 90 days incubation, nest ‘excavations were conducted to evaluate success. In ‘addition, night surveys were conducted from approximate- ly 2100 to 0600 hours every night during the nesting season (15 May to 10 August). When a nesting turtle was located, we identified the species, measured curved cearapace length (CCL; from nuchal notch to the longest "projection of the pygal) and curved carapace width (CCW; ‘edge of carapace to edge of carapace in the widest region), and tagged each turtle with Inconel flipper tags (National Band and Tag Company, Newport, KY) placed in the Lanont ap Cantiy — Response of Nesting Sea Turtles 207 E1 Cons Sn Dla, located on the saute ip of te St Joseph Peninsula inthe Florida panhandle, pat of a dynamic baer fem that supports nesting sea turtles. This barier island system extends along the northern Gulf of SS experience extreme erosion and accretion, they support a significant group of nesting loggerhead turtles rico and although these trailing edge of both front flippers. The location of each nest was recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS). Nests deposited below mean high water were relocated landward or to a more stable location, For analysis, sea turtle nests deposited west of the cape spit (between mile markers 1.4 and 2.9) were categorized as being deposited on West beach and those deposited east of the cape spit (between mile markers 0.0 and 1.4) were, categorized as being deposited on East beach, For correlations with tidal height, we used time of the nesting. female's emergence or the time when a female was firs observed, rather than time of egg deposition. ‘Success was defined as the number of hatchlings that ‘emerged from the nest divided by the total number of eggs, deposited in the nest, and was termed hatchling emergence success following Johnson et al. (1996), These calcula tions included nests lost to erosion or depredation. Because we were comparing success among geographic regions we wanted to ensure that hatchling success reflected the area where the nest was deposited, therefore nests that were relocated were not included in calculations of hatchling emergence success. The total number of egys in the nest was assessed during nest excavation and was determined by adding the number of hatched eggs (all eggshells, representing greater than 50% of a whole egg), unhatched eggs, and piped eggs. To calculate the number of hatchlings that emerged from the nest, the number of ‘dead hatchlings found within the nest was subtracted from the total number of hatched eggs. Eggs that contained developed hatchlings that had not pipped or emerged from, the egg were considered unhatched eggs. ‘A Student test was used to test for significant ifferences in the number of nests deposited between locations (Zar 1984). A Student t-test or a nonparametric Mann-Whitney Sum Rank test was used t0 test for208 CHELONIAN ConseRvATION AND Biotocy, Volume 6, Number significant differences in hatchling emergence success and number of nests last to erosion between east and west beaches (Zar 1984). The nonparametric Mann-Whitney Sum Rank test was used when assumptions of normality (Kolmogorov-Smimov test) or equal variances (Levene median test) were not met (Zar 1984). All statistical analyses were performed using SigmaStat 2.0. Gandel Corporation 1995) unless otherwise noted. ‘The relatively small sample size of this study often made the use of nonparametric statistics necessary. Nonparametric statistics do not depend on the assumptions that the samples collected are from populations that have normal distributions and equal variances however non- parametric statistics are also generally not as powerful as, parametric statistics (Zar 1984). The nonparametric test used for analysis of these data was the Mann-Whitney Sum Rank Test. The Mann-Whitney Sum Rank is commonly considered one of the strongest nonparametric tests available (Zar 1984), This nonparametric test has been suggested 10 be 95% as powerful as its parametric counterparts, with power increasing when assumptions of the parumettic tesis are seriously violated (Zar 1984) Although this test may provide an accurate analysis of these particular data, the inherent weaknesses of nonpara- metric statistics must be considered when reviewing this study. Tides. — Tidal pattems off Cape San Blas were recorded using 2 Hydrolab DataSonde 3 data loggers that were placed 50-75 m offshore of east and west beaches. A pressure sensor within the data loggers measured tidal hhcight every 15 minutes to the nearest one-hundredth of a meter. Winds. — Wind pattems along Cape San Blas were assessed using data gathered by a National Weather Service C-Man station located on Cape San Blas (National ata Buoy Center, Stennis Space Center, Mississippi). For analysis, wind directions were divided into 8 categories of 45° each: north, northeast, east, southeast, south, south- west, west, and northwest. Currents. — During the 2000 summer season, buoys were deployed weekly at 4 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) R-monuments to determine nearshore current patterns and velocities. Two ‘monuments were located on East beach (R-123 and R-121) separated by 0.97 km, and 2 benchmarks were located on West beach (R-110 and R-107) separated by 0.65. km, Buoys consisted of frozen grapefruit which were launched from the water’s edge approximately 100 m into the Gulf of Mexico, using a modified slingshot attached to the rear of a 4-wheel drive pickup truck. The buoys were observed as long as possible by personnel onshore. Every 15 minutes, time, distance traveled, and wind speed and direction were recorded. Distance traveled was approxi- mated by measuring the straight-line distance onshore from one observation to the next To further estimate direction of sand transported by the longshore current (longshore drift), daily oveanograph- 2-207 ic observations following those of Schneider and Weggel (1982) were conducted at one FWCC benchmark on East, beach and one along West beach from April through August 2000, Data collected included wave period, direction, and type; breaker height; wind speed; ocean ccurrent speed and direction; foreshore slope; and width of the surf zone. These data were then used to calculate longshore drift using the equation of Walton (1980), which incorporates fluid density, acceleration of gravity, breaking, wave height, width of surf zone, mean longshore current velocity, distance of buoy used to determine current velocity from shore, and a friction factor (0.1). Current direction was divided into 2 categories: north or south, For analysis, current direction was labeled either 1 for north or =I for south, The relationship between current direction and wind direction was assessed using logistic regression in Minitab (Minitab Inc. 1996). The relationship between current direction and sea turtle nesting was examined by using a Mann-Whitney Rank Sum test. Topography. — Topographical measurements were taken along the West and East beaches of Cape San Blas biweekly during summer (15 May to I September) and ‘monthly throughout the remainder of the year. Transects, originated at the same 4 FWCC monuments that served as buoy launch sites, Along East beach, the transect at ‘monument R-123 ran at 154° for approximately 110 m and the one at R-121 ran at 143° for approximately 135 m. ‘Along West beach, the transect at monument R-110 ran at 234° for approximately 135 m, and the one at R-107 ran at 220° for approximately 55 m. Heights of the beach were recorded using a laser transit and were documented every 5 m along the transect, as far into the Gulf of Mexico as possible (~20 m). ‘The relationship between sand ‘movement and wind direction was assessed using logistic regression in Minitab (Minitab Inc. 1996). A linear trendline was fit to the shallowest and steepest profile for ach year and each benchmark in Microsoft Excel to estimate slope. The mean of the 2 slopes was calculated for an overall slope for each benchmark. The mean slopes of the 2 westem benchmarks were averaged to generate an overall mean for West beach, and of the 2 castein benchmarks for East beach. Comparing slopes of the beach, at various times allowed an assessment of crosion/ accretion pattems throughout this study. RESULTS Sea Turtle Surveys and Reproductive Success. — A ‘mean of 65 sea turtle nests were deposited on Cape San Blas in 1998, 1999, and 2000, and of those, a mean of 78.1% was observed at oviposition (Table 1). Of the 111 turtles that were tagged, 27 (24.3%) nested more than once; 8 loggetheads (7.2%) nested 3 or more times. One turtle tagged on Cape San Blas on 15 June 1998. was observed nesting on the eastem end of Gulf Islands National Seashore on Perdido Key, Florida, on 17 July 1998 (Mark Nicholas, Gulf Islands National Seashore,Lawonr ano Cantiy — Response of Nesting Sea Turtles, 209 Table 1. Data on loggerhead turtle nesting along 5-km of beach on Cape San Blas, Florida, during the summers of 1998, 1999, and 2000. Year ‘Nesting parameter 1998, 1999 2000 | Total number nests deposited 54 80 2 ‘No. of nests observed being deposited 30 co) 56 No. of tues tagged 4 43 2 ‘No. and % of turtles that nested more than once 4 (16.7%) 15 (3:34) 8 19.0%) ‘No.of turtles nested twice 3 1 5 ©. of turtles nested 3 times 1 2 1 of turtles nested 4 times ° 2 2 can distance between successive nests (km) 13 1.06 092 distance nests were deposited from survey boundary (km) 129 119 138 comm, July 19, 1998). These nests were oviposited 22 days apart, with an intemesting distance of appro tely 250 km, Of the 153 nesting events reconded during study, 94 (61.4%) nests were deposited on West beach 59 (38.6%) were deposited on East beach. Along West each, turtles nested almost equally during east (46.8%) cd west (53.1%) winds. On East beach, however, turtles ested more frequently during west winds (80.7%) than = 187.5, p = 0.004; Fig. 2) OF all nests deposited on Cape San Blas, hatchling ence success Was 33.5% in 1998, 54.1% in 1999, 0.01), however, due to small sample sizes and high variability Tides. — Tidal information was gathered off West beach for 54 days in 1998 and 9 days in 1999, and off East beach for 5 days in 2000, Tidal patterns collected from ‘water monitors off both beaches were nearly identical to those provided by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. The diumal tidal pattern observed off Cape San Blas was synchronous between West and East beaches. Comparison of tidal pattems and timing of sea turtle nesting for all 3 years revealed 98% (152) of turtles nested on a rising tide and 29% (3) on a falling tide, No turtles nested on a falling tide in 1998, 1 turtle did so in 1999, and 2 turtles nested while the tide ‘was falling in 2000. Winds, — Wind direction was recorded every day from May 1998 through August 2000. During the fall and ‘winter, the wind blew primarily from the north and east (north, northeast, east), whereas during the spring and 2, The relationship between wind direction, current direction, and loggerhead turile nesting along Cape San Blas, Florida, from 1998 through August 2000, as shown on an aerial photograph of Cape San Blas. Winds blowing from the east (a) resulted in a flowing current. Under these conditions, significantly fewer turtles nested along East beach than when winds blew from the b), Winds from the west caused easterly lowing currents and resulted in a larger number of nests deposited along East beach.Response of Nesting Sea Turtles to Barrier Island Dynamics Marcarer M. Lamovr' anp Raymonp R. Carry! "Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildife Research Unit, University of Florida, PO Box 110485, Building 810, Gainesville, Florida 32611 U Immmtamont@mindspring.com; CarthyR@wecwfedu) Ansreact ~ Although barrier island beaches provide important nesting habitat for sea turtles, they are constantly changing. To determine how nesting sea turtles have responded to this dynamic environment, we assessed: 1) wind, current, and tidal patterns and changes in beach profiles, 2) sea turtle nesting patterns, and 3) success of turtle nests deposited along 5 km of beach ‘on Cape San Blas, Florida, an extremely dynamic barrier beach in northwest Florida. From 1998 to 2000, nesting turtles were tagged, nests were monitored, and hatching success was determined. ‘Throughout this study, West beach lost ~ 5 m of sand while Kast beach gained ~ 4 m; however 61% of nests were deposited on West beach and 39% on East beach. Hatchling emergence success did not differ between beaches. Wind direction influenced current direction and sand movement and affected the number of nests deposited along East beach but not on West beach. Nearly all nests (98%) oviposited on both beaches were deposited during a rising tide. Although West beach is narrow and eroding, the steep slope may enable nesting turtles to expend less energy to reach higher nesting sites while still providi Key Worps. ~ Reptilia; Testudines; Chelo Female loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) nest every 1 to 3 years, and from 1 to 6 times within each reproductive season (Miller 1997). It has been suggested that female turtles return to their natal beach to nest, and that once a female has retumed to the region of her birth she will tend to renest in close proximity on subsequent nesting events within and between nesting seasons (Car and Hirth 1962; Carr and Carr 1972; Talbert et al. 1980; Williams-Wallis et al. 1983), Genetic and tagging studies support this theory (Carr 1975; Pritchard 1976; Bowen et al. 1992; Encalada ct al. 1996). Changes in the morphology of a nesting beach due to occan currents, winds, and tides may present challenges to wrtles attempting to retum to their natal nesting beach. Effects of these forces on nest site selection by loggerhead turtles are largely unknown, ‘When attempting to nest, loggerhead turtles must first select a beach, then emerge from the water, and finally deposit the clutch on that beach (Wood and Bjomdal 2000). Beach characteristics such as temperature, salinity, slope, moisture, width, and sand type have been shown to influence nest placement (lohannes and Rimmer 1984; Garmenstani et al. 2000; Wood and Bjorndal 2000). When optimal, these factors may allow turtles to expend less energy in locating nesting sites that will provide the greatest reproductive success. Along dynamic beaches, these factors are constantly changing, which may reduce a turtle’s ability to identify high-quality nesting sites Barrier island beaches typically undergo severe erosion and accretion throughout the year; however, these habitats are also often used by nesting loggerhead turtles. ig successful nests, Nesting on a rising tide and using offshore currents during the internesting period may assist this effort. lae; Caretta caretta; loggerhead; erosion; Gulf of Mexico: hatching success; site fidelity; currents; tides Along the eastem coast of the United States, loggerhead turtles nest on several barrier islands, including Topsail Island, North Carolina (Grant and Beasley 1998); Kiawals Island, South Carolina (Talbert et al. 1980); Little Cumberland Island, Georgia (Frazer 1983b); and Huteh- inson Island, Florida (Williams-Wallis et al. 1983). I= addition, barticr islands form almost half of the Gulf of Mexico shoreline, and loggerhead turtles commonly cs in this region (LaRoe 1976; LeBuff 1990). ‘The dynar habitat along these barrier islands may provide signifc challenges for nesting loggerhead turtles. Along the northem Gulf of Mexico the grea density of loggerhead turtle nesting occurs along 5 km ‘beach owned by the US Air Force on Cape San Blas, County, Florida, This barrier beach is located alone Florida panhandle and represents the southernmost of the St Joseph Peninsula (Fig. 1). From 1993 to 1997 area supported a mean of 48 loggerhead turtle nests) nests/km; Meylan et al, 1995; Lamont et al. 1997) other species of sea turtle has been documented nes this site Cape San Blas supports a significant group of turtles and genetic studies have indicated turtles from region represent a unique stock (Encalada et al. 1 However, this site also hosts extremely dynamic The eastem (south-facing) beach (hereafter referred East beach) of Cape San Blas undergoes ace ‘whereas the westem coast (hereafter referred 10 == beach) experiences some of the greatest erosion Florida. From June 1994 to September 1995 ‘mately 10m of sediment was eroded ftom Wessont ct al. 1997). Although West beach is less stable East beach, sea turtles using Cape San Blas tend to along the croding rather than the accreting beach. 1994 through 1997, at least 60% of nests deposited Cape San Blas were deposited on West beach (Lamont 1997). How the dynamics of this environment nesting activity of loggerhead turtles is un- To determine how nesting sea turtles have responded is dynamic environment, our goals were 10 1) assess of Cape San Blas, including wind, currents, and patterns and changes in beach profiles, 2) determine turtle nesting pattems, and 3) quantify hatching eeess of nests deposited along Cape San Blas. METHODS: Sea Turtle Surveys and Reproductive Success. — Daily morning surveys for sea turtle nests were conducted om 15 May through 15 September in 1998, 1999, and +2000. Nests were marked with 4 wooden stakes wrapped ith orange flagging, placed around the body pit, Starting 45 days of incubation, nests were visually examined ‘every moming for signs of hatching, One week after the fast hatchling emergence or after 90 days incubation, nest ‘excavations were conducted to evaluate success. In ‘addition, night surveys were conducted from approximate- ly 2100 to 0600 hours every night during the nesting season (15 May to 10 August). When a nesting turtle was located, we identified the species, measured curved cearapace length (CCL; from nuchal notch to the longest "projection of the pygal) and curved carapace width (CCW; ‘edge of carapace to edge of carapace in the widest region), and tagged each turtle with Inconel flipper tags (National Band and Tag Company, Newport, KY) placed in the Lanont ap Cantiy — Response of Nesting Sea Turtles 207 E1 Cons Sn Dla, located on the saute ip of te St Joseph Peninsula inthe Florida panhandle, pat of a dynamic baer fem that supports nesting sea turtles. This barier island system extends along the northern Gulf of SS experience extreme erosion and accretion, they support a significant group of nesting loggerhead turtles rico and although these trailing edge of both front flippers. The location of each nest was recorded using a Global Positioning System (GPS). Nests deposited below mean high water were relocated landward or to a more stable location, For analysis, sea turtle nests deposited west of the cape spit (between mile markers 1.4 and 2.9) were categorized as being deposited on West beach and those deposited east of the cape spit (between mile markers 0.0 and 1.4) were, categorized as being deposited on East beach, For correlations with tidal height, we used time of the nesting. female's emergence or the time when a female was firs observed, rather than time of egg deposition. ‘Success was defined as the number of hatchlings that ‘emerged from the nest divided by the total number of eggs, deposited in the nest, and was termed hatchling emergence success following Johnson et al. (1996), These calcula tions included nests lost to erosion or depredation. Because we were comparing success among geographic regions we wanted to ensure that hatchling success reflected the area where the nest was deposited, therefore nests that were relocated were not included in calculations of hatchling emergence success. The total number of egys in the nest was assessed during nest excavation and was determined by adding the number of hatched eggs (all eggshells, representing greater than 50% of a whole egg), unhatched eggs, and piped eggs. To calculate the number of hatchlings that emerged from the nest, the number of ‘dead hatchlings found within the nest was subtracted from the total number of hatched eggs. Eggs that contained developed hatchlings that had not pipped or emerged from, the egg were considered unhatched eggs. ‘A Student test was used to test for significant ifferences in the number of nests deposited between locations (Zar 1984). A Student t-test or a nonparametric Mann-Whitney Sum Rank test was used t0 test for208 CHELONIAN ConseRvATION AND Biotocy, Volume 6, Number significant differences in hatchling emergence success and number of nests last to erosion between east and west beaches (Zar 1984). The nonparametric Mann-Whitney Sum Rank test was used when assumptions of normality (Kolmogorov-Smimov test) or equal variances (Levene median test) were not met (Zar 1984). All statistical analyses were performed using SigmaStat 2.0. Gandel Corporation 1995) unless otherwise noted. ‘The relatively small sample size of this study often made the use of nonparametric statistics necessary. Nonparametric statistics do not depend on the assumptions that the samples collected are from populations that have normal distributions and equal variances however non- parametric statistics are also generally not as powerful as, parametric statistics (Zar 1984). The nonparametric test used for analysis of these data was the Mann-Whitney Sum Rank Test. The Mann-Whitney Sum Rank is commonly considered one of the strongest nonparametric tests available (Zar 1984), This nonparametric test has been suggested 10 be 95% as powerful as its parametric counterparts, with power increasing when assumptions of the parumettic tesis are seriously violated (Zar 1984) Although this test may provide an accurate analysis of these particular data, the inherent weaknesses of nonpara- metric statistics must be considered when reviewing this study. Tides. — Tidal pattems off Cape San Blas were recorded using 2 Hydrolab DataSonde 3 data loggers that were placed 50-75 m offshore of east and west beaches. A pressure sensor within the data loggers measured tidal hhcight every 15 minutes to the nearest one-hundredth of a meter. Winds. — Wind pattems along Cape San Blas were assessed using data gathered by a National Weather Service C-Man station located on Cape San Blas (National ata Buoy Center, Stennis Space Center, Mississippi). For analysis, wind directions were divided into 8 categories of 45° each: north, northeast, east, southeast, south, south- west, west, and northwest. Currents. — During the 2000 summer season, buoys were deployed weekly at 4 Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWCC) R-monuments to determine nearshore current patterns and velocities. Two ‘monuments were located on East beach (R-123 and R-121) separated by 0.97 km, and 2 benchmarks were located on West beach (R-110 and R-107) separated by 0.65. km, Buoys consisted of frozen grapefruit which were launched from the water’s edge approximately 100 m into the Gulf of Mexico, using a modified slingshot attached to the rear of a 4-wheel drive pickup truck. The buoys were observed as long as possible by personnel onshore. Every 15 minutes, time, distance traveled, and wind speed and direction were recorded. Distance traveled was approxi- mated by measuring the straight-line distance onshore from one observation to the next To further estimate direction of sand transported by the longshore current (longshore drift), daily oveanograph- 2-207 ic observations following those of Schneider and Weggel (1982) were conducted at one FWCC benchmark on East, beach and one along West beach from April through August 2000, Data collected included wave period, direction, and type; breaker height; wind speed; ocean ccurrent speed and direction; foreshore slope; and width of the surf zone. These data were then used to calculate longshore drift using the equation of Walton (1980), which incorporates fluid density, acceleration of gravity, breaking, wave height, width of surf zone, mean longshore current velocity, distance of buoy used to determine current velocity from shore, and a friction factor (0.1). Current direction was divided into 2 categories: north or south, For analysis, current direction was labeled either 1 for north or =I for south, The relationship between current direction and wind direction was assessed using logistic regression in Minitab (Minitab Inc. 1996). The relationship between current direction and sea turtle nesting was examined by using a Mann-Whitney Rank Sum test. Topography. — Topographical measurements were taken along the West and East beaches of Cape San Blas biweekly during summer (15 May to I September) and ‘monthly throughout the remainder of the year. Transects, originated at the same 4 FWCC monuments that served as buoy launch sites, Along East beach, the transect at ‘monument R-123 ran at 154° for approximately 110 m and the one at R-121 ran at 143° for approximately 135 m. ‘Along West beach, the transect at monument R-110 ran at 234° for approximately 135 m, and the one at R-107 ran at 220° for approximately 55 m. Heights of the beach were recorded using a laser transit and were documented every 5 m along the transect, as far into the Gulf of Mexico as possible (~20 m). ‘The relationship between sand ‘movement and wind direction was assessed using logistic regression in Minitab (Minitab Inc. 1996). A linear trendline was fit to the shallowest and steepest profile for ach year and each benchmark in Microsoft Excel to estimate slope. The mean of the 2 slopes was calculated for an overall slope for each benchmark. The mean slopes of the 2 westem benchmarks were averaged to generate an overall mean for West beach, and of the 2 castein benchmarks for East beach. Comparing slopes of the beach, at various times allowed an assessment of crosion/ accretion pattems throughout this study. RESULTS Sea Turtle Surveys and Reproductive Success. — A ‘mean of 65 sea turtle nests were deposited on Cape San Blas in 1998, 1999, and 2000, and of those, a mean of 78.1% was observed at oviposition (Table 1). Of the 111 turtles that were tagged, 27 (24.3%) nested more than once; 8 loggetheads (7.2%) nested 3 or more times. One turtle tagged on Cape San Blas on 15 June 1998. was observed nesting on the eastem end of Gulf Islands National Seashore on Perdido Key, Florida, on 17 July 1998 (Mark Nicholas, Gulf Islands National Seashore,Lawonr ano Cantiy — Response of Nesting Sea Turtles, 209 Table 1. Data on loggerhead turtle nesting along 5-km of beach on Cape San Blas, Florida, during the summers of 1998, 1999, and 2000. Year ‘Nesting parameter 1998, 1999 2000 | Total number nests deposited 54 80 2 ‘No. of nests observed being deposited 30 co) 56 No. of tues tagged 4 43 2 ‘No. and % of turtles that nested more than once 4 (16.7%) 15 (3:34) 8 19.0%) ‘No.of turtles nested twice 3 1 5 ©. of turtles nested 3 times 1 2 1 of turtles nested 4 times ° 2 2 can distance between successive nests (km) 13 1.06 092 distance nests were deposited from survey boundary (km) 129 119 138 comm, July 19, 1998). These nests were oviposited 22 days apart, with an intemesting distance of appro tely 250 km, Of the 153 nesting events reconded during study, 94 (61.4%) nests were deposited on West beach 59 (38.6%) were deposited on East beach. Along West each, turtles nested almost equally during east (46.8%) cd west (53.1%) winds. On East beach, however, turtles ested more frequently during west winds (80.7%) than = 187.5, p = 0.004; Fig. 2) OF all nests deposited on Cape San Blas, hatchling ence success Was 33.5% in 1998, 54.1% in 1999, 0.01), however, due to small sample sizes and high variability Tides. — Tidal information was gathered off West beach for 54 days in 1998 and 9 days in 1999, and off East beach for 5 days in 2000, Tidal patterns collected from ‘water monitors off both beaches were nearly identical to those provided by the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration. The diumal tidal pattern observed off Cape San Blas was synchronous between West and East beaches. Comparison of tidal pattems and timing of sea turtle nesting for all 3 years revealed 98% (152) of turtles nested on a rising tide and 29% (3) on a falling tide, No turtles nested on a falling tide in 1998, 1 turtle did so in 1999, and 2 turtles nested while the tide ‘was falling in 2000. Winds, — Wind direction was recorded every day from May 1998 through August 2000. During the fall and ‘winter, the wind blew primarily from the north and east (north, northeast, east), whereas during the spring and 2, The relationship between wind direction, current direction, and loggerhead turile nesting along Cape San Blas, Florida, from 1998 through August 2000, as shown on an aerial photograph of Cape San Blas. Winds blowing from the east (a) resulted in a flowing current. Under these conditions, significantly fewer turtles nested along East beach than when winds blew from the b), Winds from the west caused easterly lowing currents and resulted in a larger number of nests deposited along East beach.