Leatherback turtles are facing growing pressure from industrial fishing across the Atlantic high seas, where no fully or highly protected areas currently exist. A new Greenpeace International report says a connected network of ocean sanctuaries could protect key migration routes and reduce the species’ exposure to deadly fishing gear.
The report was published as the 17th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity begins in Armenia on 19 October 2026. The conference is expected to provide the first formal assessment of progress towards the global biodiversity commitments agreed in 2022, including the goal of protecting 30 per cent of the world’s ocean by 2030.
Why leatherback turtles are at risk
Leatherback turtles are among the world’s most threatened marine vertebrates. The species has been listed as vulnerable on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List since 2013, while populations have declined rapidly in several regions.
The turtles travel across vast stretches of ocean during their lives, making protection of individual nesting beaches insufficient on its own. Their migration routes take them through areas where commercial fishing activity is intense, increasing the risk of entanglement in nets and other gear.
The Atlantic high seas are particularly important because they form part of the species’ migratory range. Yet the report says these international waters currently lack areas where industrial fishing is fully excluded. That leaves leatherback turtles exposed even when they move beyond national maritime boundaries.
How ocean sanctuaries could protect migration routes
Greenpeace’s “Well Connected” report identifies 17 locations that it says should receive full protection under the Global Ocean Treaty. The proposed network would combine existing marine protected areas, locations already being considered by governments and additional sites identified as important for conservation.
Together, the proposed sanctuaries would cover more than 31 per cent of the Atlantic high seas. According to the report, they could shield more than 35 per cent of the danger zones faced by leatherback turtles because of industrial fishing and reduce their risk of mortality.
The approach is based on connected protection rather than isolated reserves. Migratory animals such as turtles and whales cross large areas of ocean, so a collection of strategically positioned sanctuaries could protect them at different points along their journeys.
- Fully protected areas would restrict industrial fishing within designated zones.
- Sites would be selected to overlap with important migration and feeding routes.
- Existing marine protected areas could be strengthened where current safeguards are insufficient.
- A network could also benefit other migratory marine species facing fishing and shipping risks.
Global ocean protection is moving too slowly
The international target to protect 30 per cent of the ocean by 2030 is widely regarded as a minimum benchmark for supporting marine recovery. However, the Greenpeace report estimates that, at the current rate of progress, it could take 265 years to reach that level of protection.
The figure highlights the difference between governments’ biodiversity commitments and the pace at which protections are being created or implemented. Marine protected areas do not always prohibit the activities causing the greatest harm, meaning an area may be legally designated but provide limited protection in practice.
For leatherback turtles, the distinction is crucial. Protection that does not address commercial fishing gear or other major threats may not prevent deaths along migration routes. Conservation groups are therefore calling for stronger measures in areas where the species is most exposed.
What the biodiversity conference could mean
The biodiversity conference in Armenia is a major opportunity for governments to review progress towards the targets agreed in 2022. Discussions are expected to focus on whether national and international action is sufficient to halt biodiversity loss and protect marine ecosystems.
The proposed Atlantic network is not itself a final international decision. Establishing sanctuaries on the high seas would require cooperation between countries and implementation through the relevant international framework, including the Global Ocean Treaty. Governments would also need to agree on the boundaries, protection measures and monitoring arrangements for individual sites.
That process can be complex because high-seas areas fall outside the exclusive jurisdiction of a single country. Fishing organisations, shipping interests, conservation groups and governments may all be involved in discussions about how protections should operate.
Why connected marine protection matters
Leatherback turtles spend much of their lives far from land, where threats are difficult to monitor and enforce. A coordinated network could make conservation more effective by focusing protection on the places where animals gather, feed or pass through regularly.
Such sanctuaries could also support wider marine ecosystem recovery. Reducing industrial fishing pressure in selected areas may help protect prey species and improve the resilience of ocean habitats. Limiting risks from fishing and shipping could benefit whales, seabirds and other migratory animals that use the same waters.
However, protected areas would need effective enforcement. Rules on paper cannot safeguard wildlife unless fishing activity is monitored, illegal operations are addressed and participating states cooperate across international waters.
What happens next
The biodiversity negotiations will provide an early test of how governments intend to close the gap between global commitments and practical action. The Greenpeace proposal gives delegates a specific framework to consider: a connected group of fully protected sites covering critical sections of the Atlantic high seas.
Whether the proposal advances will depend on political agreement, scientific assessments and the procedures established under international ocean law. The report does not create new sanctuaries, but it adds to calls for governments to move faster on marine conservation.
Conclusion
The decline of leatherback turtles shows why ocean conservation cannot stop at coastlines or national waters. A connected system of fully protected Atlantic sanctuaries could reduce the threat from industrial fishing along important migration routes, but governments must turn the 30 per cent protection target into enforceable action. The key test now is whether the biodiversity conference can accelerate progress from international promises to practical ocean protection.
