Report on Marine Mammal Unusual Mortality Event UMESE0501Sp: Multispecies Mass Stranding of Pilot Whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus), Minke Whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata), and Dwarf Sperm Whales (Kogia sima) in North Carolina on 15-16 January 2005

On 15-16 January 2005, three offshore species of cetaceans (33 short-finned pilot whales, Globicephala macrorhynchus, one minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata, and two dwarf sperm whales, Kogia sima) stranded alive on the beaches of North Carolina. The pilot whales stranded near Oregon Inlet, the minke whale in northern North Carolina, and the dwarf sperm whales near Cape Hatteras. Live strandings of three species in one weekend was unique in North Carolina and qualified as an Unusual Mortality Event. Gross necropsies were conducted on 16-17 January 2005 on 27 pilot whales, two dwarf sperm whales, and the minke whale. Samples were collected for clinical pathology, parasitology, gross pathology, histopathology, microbiology and serology. There was variation in the number of animals sampled for each collection type, however, due to carcasses washing off the beach or degradation in carcass condition during the course of the response. Comprehensive histologic examination was conducted on 16 pilot whales, both dwarf sperm whales, and the minke whale. Limited organ or only head tissue suites were obtained from nine pilot whales. Histologic examination of tissues began in February 2005 and concluded in December 2005 when final sampling was concluded. Neither the pilot whales nor dwarf sperm whales were emaciated although none had recently ingested prey in their stomachs. The minke whale was emaciated; it was likely a dependent calf that became separated from the female. Most serum biochemistry abnormalities appear to have resulted from the stranding and indicated deteriorating condition from being on land for an extended period. Three pilot whales had clinical evidence of pre-existing systemic inflammation, which was supported by histopathologic findings. Although gross and histologic lesions involving all organ systems were noted, consistent lesions were not observed across species. Verminous pterygoid sinusitis and healed fishery interactions were seen in pilot whales but neither of these changes were causes of debilitation or death. In three pilot whales and one dwarf sperm whale there was evidence of clinically significant disease in postcranial tissues which led to chronic debilitation. Cardiovascular disease was present in one pilot whale and one dwarf sperm whale; musculoskeletal disease and intra-abdominal granulomas were present in two pilot whales. These lesions were possible, but not definitive, causal factors in the stranding. Remaining lesions were incidental or post-stranding. The minke whale and three of five tested pilot whales had positive morbillivirus titers (≥1:8 with one at >1:256), but there was no histologic evidence of active viral infection. Parasites (nematodes, cestodes, and trematodes) were collected from 26 pilot whales and two dwarf sperm whales. Sites of collection included stomach, nasal/pterygoid, peribullar sinuses, blubber, and abdominal cavity. Parasite species, locations and loads were within normal limits for free-ranging cetaceans and were not considered causative for the stranding event. Gas emboli lesions which were considered consistent with or diagnostic of sonarassociated strandings of beaked whales or small cetaceans were not found in the whales stranded as part of UMESE0501Sp. Twenty-five heads were examined with nine specific anatomic locations of interest: extramandibular fat, intramandibular fat, auditory meatus, peribullar acoustic fat, peribullar soft tissue, peribullar sinus, pterygoid sinus, melon, and brain. The common finding in all examined heads was verminous pterygoid sinusitis. Intramandibular adipose tissue reddening, typically adjacent to the vascular plexus, was observed in some individuals and could represent localized hemorrhage resulting from vascular rete rupture, hypostatic congestion, or erythrocyte rupture during the freeze/thaw cycle. One cetacean had peracute to acute subdural hemorrhage that likely occurred from thrashing on the beach post-stranding, although its occurrence prior to stranding cannot be excluded. Information provided to NMFS by the U.S. Navy indicated routine tactical mid-frequency sonar operations from individual surface vessels over relatively short durations and small spatial scales within the area and time period investigated. No marine mammals were detected by marine mammal observers on operational vessels; standard operating procedure for surface naval vessels operating mid-frequency sonar is the use of trained visual lookouts using high-powered binoculars. Sound propagation modeling using information provided to NMFS indicated that acoustic conditions in the vicinity likely depended heavily on position of the receivers (e.g., range, bearing, depth) relative to that of the sources. Absent explicit information on the location of animals meant that it was not possible to estimate received acoustic exposures from active sonar transmissions. Nonetheless, the event was associated in time and space with naval activity using mid-frequency active sonar. It also had a number of features in common (e.g., the “atypical” distribution of strandings involving multiple offshore species, all stranding alive, and without evidence of common infectious or other disease process) with other sonar-related cetacean mass stranding events. Given that this event was the only stranding of offshore species to occur within a 2-3 day period in the region on record (i.e., a very rare event), and given the occurrence of the event simultaneously in time and space with a naval exercise using active sonar, the association between the naval sonar activity and the location and timing of the event could be a causal rather than a coincidental relationship. However, evidence supporting a definitive association is lacking, and, in particular, there are differences in operational/environmental characteristics between this event and previous events where sonar has apparently played a role in marine mammal strandings. This does not preclude behavorial avoidance of noise exposure. No harmful algal blooms were present along the Atlantic coast south of the Chesapeake Bay during the months prior to the event. Environmental conditions, including strong winds, changes in upwelling- to downwelling-favorable conditions, and gently sloping bathymetry, were consistent with conditions which have been correlated with other mass strandings. In summary, we did not find commonality in gross and histologic lesions that would indicate a single cause for this stranding event. Three pilot whales and one dwarf sperm whale had debilitating conditions identified that could have contributed to stranding, one pilot whale had a debilitating condition (subdural hemorrhage) that could have been present prior to or resulting from stranding. While the pilot and dwarf sperm whale strandings may have had a common cause, the minke whale stranding was probably just coincidental. On the basis of examination of physical evidence in the affected whales, however, we cannot definitively conclude that there was or was not a causal link between anthropogenic sonar activity or environmental conditions (or a combination of these factors) and the strandings. Overall, the cause of UMESE0501Sp in North Carolina is not and likely will not be definitively known. (PDF contains 240 pages)

Workshop on marine mammal research & monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries, Wailea, Maui, Hawaii, 28 November 1999

The Second National Workshop on Marine Mammal Research and Monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries was held on 28 November 1999 in Maui, Hawaii. The workshop preceded the Thirteenth Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, and provided an opportunity to review and promote marine mammal research and monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries (NMS). The purpose of the workshop was to bring together researchers and sanctuary staff and to improve marine mammal research and monitoring throughout the sanctuaries. Discussion topics included: potential multi-sanctuary projects, sources of funding for multi-sanctuary projects, services and equipment for researchers through the sanctuaries, consolidating small levels of funding, help in funding and support for writing up data, publishing documents in Technical Memoranda, and letters of support. Representatives from the NMS national office and nine sanctuaries provided participants with overviews of marine mammal research within the sanctuaries. Presentations were also given by representatives from the National Marine Fisheries Service’s Permits and Health and Stranding programs. During the breakout working groups, there were several comments and suggestions consistent among each of the groups to improve marine mammal research. Each group emphasized the need to improve communication among researchers and to better share data. These suggestions included web-based information networks, advisory panels, and workshops. Regionally based research projects were also emphasized. In order to best study marine mammal populations, collaborative studies must take place throughout multiple sanctuaries. In order to achieve these large scale studies, funding and staffing must be directed towards these studies and distributed among each of the sanctuaries so that they may all be able to have the staffing, equipment, and vessels necessary to achieve a collaborative, ecosystem-based, regional marine mammal monitoring program. It will take several years to achieve all of the suggestions from the workshop, but thanks to the workshop participants, the National Marine Sanctuary Program has begun to direct marine mammal research and monitoring in order to achieve the goals of the workshop. This document provides a summary of the workshop with a focus on key points/main issues. We have included contact information intended to encourage continued collaboration among the individuals and organizations represented at the 1999 Marine Mammal Research and Monitoring in the National Marine Sanctuaries Workshop. (PDF contains 71 pages.)

Marine Mammal Strandings in the United States: Proceedings of the Second Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop, Miami, Florida, December 3-5, 1987

Over a decade ago, in August 1977, the First Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop was convened in Athens, Georgia. That workshop, organized by j.R. Geraci and D.J. St. Aubin, not only considered biology and pathology of stranded marine mammals, but it also served as a springboard for the formation of regional marine mammal stranding networks in the United States. The ramifications have been extremely important to the field of marine mammalogy since, for some species, examination or rehabilitation of stranded specimens serves as virtually the only source of information on distribution, anatomy, physiology, reproduction, and pathology. The First Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop led to increased awareness of the marine mammals themselves, as well as the logistic and legal factors associated with effective handling of the animals. A number of individuals indicated that they felt that a Second Marine Mammal Stranding Workshop held prior to the Seventh Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals (Miami, Florida; December 1987) would be both timely and productive. Accordingly, we organized the workshop and scheduled it to occur on 3-5 December. Our goals for the workshop were several, including 1) providing descriptions of some research, especially new techniques, regarding stranded marine mammals; 2) providing a forum where scientists could interact and possibly initiate cooperative research activities; 3) presenting information regarding procedures used effectively to handle stranded animals; 4) assessing ways to standardize data and specimen collection, archiving, and retrieval; and 5) providing a forum for assessing accomplishments and status of regional stranding networks to date, as well as for making recommendations regarding future activities of the networks. Nearly 100 individuals representing Federal and State governments, academic institutions, the oceanarium industry, consulting groups, conservation organizations, and the private sector attended the workshop (see Workshop Participants, this volume). (PDF file contains 166 pages.)

Estimates of Marine Mammal, Sea Turtle, and Seabird Mortality in the California Drift Gillnet Fishery for Swordfish and Thresher Shark, 1996–2002

Estimates of incidental marine mammal, sea turtle, and seabird mortality in the California drift gillnet fishery for broadbill swordfish, Xiphias gladius, and common thresher shark, Alopias vulpinus, are summarized for the 7-year period, 1996 to 2002. Fishery observer coverage was 19% over the period (3,369 days observed/17,649 days fished). An experiment to test the effectiveness of acoustic pingers on reducing marine mammal entanglements in this fishery began in 1996 and resulted in statistically significant reductions in marine mammal bycatch. The most commonly entangled marine mammal species were the short-beaked common dolphin, Delphinus delphis; California sea lion, Zalophus californianus; and northern right whale dolphin, Lissodelphis borealis. Estimated mortality by species (CV and observed mortality in parentheses) from 1996 to 2002 is 861 (0.11, 133) short-beaked common dolphins; 553 (0.16, 103) California sea lions; 151 (0.25, 31) northern right whale dolphins; 150 (0.21, 27) northern elephant seals, Mirounga angustirostris; 54 (0.41, 10) long-beaked common dolphins, Delphinus capensis; 44 (0.53, 6) Dall’s porpoise, Phocoenoides dalli; 19 (0.60, 5) Risso’s dolphins, Grampus griseus; 11 (0.71, 2) gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus; 7 (0.83, 2) sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus; 7 (0.96, 1) short-finned pilot whales, Globicephala macrorhychus; 12 (1.06, 1) minke whales, Balaenoptera acutorostrata; 5 (1.05, 1) fin whales, Balaenoptera physalus; 11 (0.68, 2) unidentified pinnipeds; 33 (0.52, 4) leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea; 18 (0.57, 3) loggerhead turtles, Caretta caretta; 13 (0.73, 3) northern fulmars, Fulmarus glacialis; and 6 (0.86, 2) unidentified birds.

Strandings as indicators of marine mammal biodiversity and human interactions off the coast of North Carolina

The adjacency of 2 marine biogeographic regions off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina (NC), and the proximity of the Gulf Stream result in a high biodiversity of species from northern and southern provinces and from coastal and pelagic habitats. We examined spatiotemporal patterns of marine mammal strandings and evidence of human interaction for these strandings along NC shorelines and evaluated whether the spatiotemporal patterns and species diversity of the stranded animals reflected published records of populations in NC waters. During the period of 1997–2008, 1847 stranded animals were documented from 1777 reported events. These animals represented 9 families and 34 species that ranged from tropical delphinids to pagophilic seals. This biodiversity is higher than levels observed in other regions. Most strandings were of coastal bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) (56%), harbor porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) (14%), and harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) (4%). Overall, strandings of northern species peaked in spring. Bottlenose dolphin strandings peaked in spring and fall. Almost half of the strandings, including southern delphinids, occurred north of Cape Hatteras, on only 30% of NC’s coastline. Most stranded animals that were positive for human interaction showed evidence of having been entangled in fishing gear, particularly bottlenose dolphins, harbor porpoises, short-finned pilot whales (Globicephala macrorhynchus), harbor seals, and humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae). Spatiotemporal patterns of bottlenose dolphin strandings were similar to ocean gillnet fishing effort. Biodiversity of the animals stranded on the beaches reflected biodiversity in the waters off NC, albeit not always proportional to the relative abundance of species (e.g., Kogia species). Changes in the spatiotemporal patterns of strandings can serve as indicators of underlying changes due to anthropogenic or naturally occurring events in the source populations.

Protected species aerial survey data collection and analysis in waters underlying the R-5306A airspace: final report submitted to US Marine Corps, MCAS Cherry Point

To be in compliance with the Endangered Species Act and the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the United States Department of the Navy is required to assess the potential environmental impacts of conducting at-sea training operations on sea turtles and marine mammals. Limited recent and area-specific density data of sea turtles and dolphins exist for many of the Navy’s operations areas (OPAREAs), including the Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Cherry Point OPAREA, which encompasses portions of Core and Pamlico Sounds, North Carolina. Aerial surveys were conducted to document the seasonal distribution and estimated density of sea turtles and dolphins within Core Sound and portions of Pamlico Sound, and coastal waters extending one mile offshore. Sea Surface Temperature (SST) data for each survey were extracted from 1.4 km/pixel resolution Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer remote images. A total of 92 turtles and 1,625 dolphins were sighted during 41 aerial surveys, conducted from July 2004 to April 2006. In the spring (March – May; 7.9°C to 21.7°C mean SST), the majority of turtles sighted were along the coast, mainly from the northern Core Banks northward to Cape Hatteras. By the summer (June – Aug.; 25.2°C to 30.8°C mean SST), turtles were fairly evenly dispersed along the entire survey range of the coast and Pamlico Sound, with only a few sightings in Core Sound. In the autumn (Sept. – Nov.; 9.6°C to 29.6°C mean SST), the majority of turtles sighted were along the coast and in eastern Pamlico Sound; however, fewer turtles were observed along the coast than in the summer. No turtles were seen during the winter surveys (Dec. – Feb.; 7.6°C to 11.2°C mean SST). The estimated mean surface density of turtles was highest along the coast in the summer of 2005 (0.615 turtles/km², SE = 0.220). In Core and Pamlico Sounds the highest mean surface density occurred during the autumn of 2005 (0.016 turtles/km², SE = 0.009). The mean seasonal abundance estimates were always highest in the coastal region, except in the winter when turtles were not sighted in either region. For Pamlico Sound, surface densities were always greater in the eastern than western section. The range of mean temperatures at which turtles were sighted was 9.68°C to 30.82°C. The majority of turtles sighted were within water ≥ 11°C. Dolphins were observed within estuarine waters and along the coast year-round; however, there were some general seasonal movements. In particular, during the summer sightings decreased along the coast and dolphins were distributed throughout Core and Pamlico Sounds, while in the winter the majority of dolphins were located along the coast and in southeastern Pamlico Sound. Although relative numbers changed seasonally between these areas, the estimated mean surface density of dolphins was highest along the coast in the spring of 2006 (9.564 dolphins/km², SE = 5.571). In Core and Pamlico Sounds the highest mean surface density occurred during the autumn of 2004 (0.192 dolphins/km², SE = 0.066). The estimated mean surface density of dolphins was lowest along the coast in the summer of 2004 (0.461 dolphins/km², SE = 0.294). The estimated mean surface density of dolphins was lowest in Core and Pamlico Sounds in the summer of 2005 (0.024 dolphins/km², SE = 0.011). In Pamlico Sound, estimated surface densities were greater in the eastern section except in the autumn. Dolphins were sighted throughout the entire range of mean SST (7.60°C to 30.82°C), with a tendency towards fewer dolphins sighted as water temperatures increased. Based on the findings of this study, sea turtles are most likely to be encountered within the OPAREAs when SST is ≥ 11°C. Since sea turtle distributions are generally limited by water temperature, knowing the SST of a given area is a useful predictor of sea turtle presence. Since dolphins were observed within estuarine waters year-round and throughout the entire range of mean SST’s, they likely could be encountered in the OPAREAs any time of the year. Although our findings indicated the greatest number of dolphins to be present in the winter and the least in the summer, their movements also may be related to other factors such as the availability of prey. (PDF contains 28 pages)

Characterization of North Carolina commercial fisheries with occasional interactions with marine mammals

In accordance with the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA, 16 U.S.c. et seq.), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is required to publish an annual List of Fisheries (LOF) which categorizes U.S. commercial fisheries based on their level of interaction with marine mammals. The objective of this document is to provide a characterization of the six 2001 MMPA Category II commercial fisheries (i.e., those with occasional interactions with marine mammals) in North Carolina (NC). This report outlines the history, fishing method and gear configurations (using the U.S. system of measurement), primary target species, temporal and spatial characteristics including trip and landing statistics, and monthly variations in species composition for each fishery for a five-year period (1995 - 1999). (PDF contains 63 pages)

Rescue, rehabilitation, and release of marine mammals: An analysis of current views and practices.

Stranded marine mammals have long attracted public attention. Those that wash up dead are, for all their value to science, seldom seen by the public as more than curiosities. Animals that are sick, injured, orphaned or abandoned ignite a different response. Generally, public sentiment supports any effort to rescue, treat and return them to sea. Institutions displaying marine mammals showed an early interest in live-stranded animals as a source of specimens -- in 1948, Marine Studios in St. Augustine, Florida, rescued a young short-finned pilot whale (Globicephala macrorhynchus), the first ever in captivity (Kritzler 1952). Eventually, the public as well as government agencies looked to these institutions for their recognized expertise in marine mammal care and medicine. More recently, facilities have been established for the sole purpose of rehabilitating marine mammals and preparing them for return to the wild. Four such institutions are the Marine Mammal Center (Sausalito, CA), the Research Institute for Nature Management (Pieterburen, The Netherlands), the RSPCA, Norfolk Wildlife Hospital (Norfolk, United Kingdom) and the Institute for Wildlife Biology of Christian-Albrects University (Kiel, Germany).(PDF contains 68 pages.)

Soviet-American Cooperative Research on Marine Mammals. Volume 1- Pinnipeds: Under Project V.6. Marine Mammals, of the US-USSR Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection

Some 25 to 30 yr ago, when we as students were beginning our respective careers and were developing for the first time our awareness of marine mammals in the waters separating western North America from eastern Asia, we had visions of eventually bridging the communication gap which existed between our two countries at that time. Each of us was anxious to obtain information on the distribution, biology, and ecological relations of "our" seals and walruses on "the other side," beyond our respective political boundari~s where we were not permitted to go to study them. We were concerned that the resource management practices on the other side of the Bering and Chukchi Seas, implemented in isolation, on a purely unilateral basis, might endanger the species which we had come to know and were striving to conserve. At once apparent to both of us was the need for free exchange of biological information between our two countries and, ultimately, joint management of our shared resources. In a small way, we and others made some initial efforts to generate that exchange by personal correspondence and through vocal interchange at the annual meetings of the North Pacific Fur Seal Commission. By the enabling Agreement on Cooperation in the Field of Environmental Protection, reached between our two countries in 1972, our earlier visions at last came true. Since that time, within the framework of the Marine Mammal Project under Area V of that Agreement, we and our colleagues have forged a strong bond of professional accord and respect, in an atmosphere of free intercommunication and mutual understanding. The strength and utility of this arrangement from the beginning of our joint research are reflected in the reports contained in this, the first compendium of our work. The need for a series of such a compendia became apparent to us in 1976, and its implementation was agreed on by the regular meeting of the Project in La Jolla, Calif., in January 1977. Obviously, the preparation and publication of this first volume has been excessively delayed, in part by continuing political distrust between our governments but mainly by increasing demands placed on the time of the contributors. In this period of growing environmental concern in both countries, we and our colleagues have been totally immersed in other tasks and have experienced great difficulty in drawing together the works presented here. Much of the support for doing so was provided by the State of Alaska, through funding for Organized Research at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks. For its ultimate completion in publishable form we wish to thank Helen Stockholm, Director of Publications, Institute of Marine Science, University of Alaska, and her staff, especially Ruth Hand, and the numerous referees narned herein who gave willingly oftheir time to review each ofthe manuscripts critically and to provide a high measure of professionalism to the final product. (PDF file contains 110 pages.)

Interactions between marine mammals and pelagic longline fishing gear in the U.S. Atlantic Ocean between 1992 and 2004

The U.S. East Coast pelagic longline fishery has a history of interactions with marine mammals, where animals are hooked and entangled in longline gear. Pilot whales (Globicephala spp.) and Risso’s dolphin (Grampus griseus) are the primary species that interact with longline gear. Logistic regression was used to assess the environmental and gear characteristics that influence interaction rates. Pilot whale inter-actions were correlated with warm water temperatures, proximity to the shelf break, mainline lengths greater than 20 nautical miles, and damage to swordfish catch. Similarly, Risso’s dolphin interactions were correlated with geographic location, proximity the shelf break, the length of the mainline, and bait type. The incidental bycatch of marine mammals is likely associated with depredation of the commercial catch and is increased by the overlap between marine mammal and target species habitats. Altering gear characteristics and fishery practices may mitigate incidental bycatch and reduce economic losses due to depredation.

The National Marine Fisheries Service’s National Bycatch Strategy

The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) launched its National Bycatch Strategy (NBS) in March 2003 in response to the continued fisheries management challenge posed by fisheries bycatch. NMFS has several strong mandates for fish and protected species bycatch reduction, including the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Marine Mammal Protection Act. Despite efforts to address bycatch during the 1990’s, NMFS was petitioned in 2002 to count, cap, and control bycatch. The NBS initiated as part of NMFS’s response to the petition for rulemaking contained six components: 1) assess bycatch progress, 2) develop an approach to standardized bycatch reporting methodology, 3) develop bycatch implementation plans, 4) undertake education and outreach, 5) develop new international approaches to bycatch, and 6) identify new funding requirements. The definition of bycatch for the purposes of the NBS proved to be a contentious issue for NMFS, but steady progress is being made by the agency and its partners to minimize bycatch to the extent practicable.

A GIS analysis of coastal development and trends in bottlenose dolphin strandings in Charleston, SC: implications for coastal marine spatial planning

Bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) inhabit estuarine waters near Charleston, South Carolina (SC) feeding, nursing and socializing. While in these waters, dolphins are exposed to multiple direct and indirect threats such as anthropogenic impacts (egs. harassment with boat traffic and entanglements in fishing gear) and environmental degradation. Bottlenose dolphins are protected under the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972. Over the years, the percentage of strandings in the estuaries has increased in South Carolina and, specifically, recent stranding data shows an increase in strandings occurring in Charleston, SC near areas of residential development. During the same timeframe, Charleston experienced a shift in human population towards the coastline. These two trends, rise in estuarine dolphin strandings and shift in human population, have raised questions on whether the increase in strandings is a result of more detectable strandings being reported, or a true increase in stranding events. Using GIS, the trends in strandings were compared to residential growth, boat permits, fishing permits, and dock permits in Charleston County from 1994-2009. A simple linear regression analysis was performed to determine if there were any significant relationships between strandings, boat permits, commercial fishing permits, and crabpot permits. The results of this analysis show the stranding trend moves toward Charleston Harbor and adjacent rivers over time which suggests the increase in strandings is related to the strandings becoming more detectable. The statistical analysis shows that the factors that cause human interaction strandings such as boats, commercial fishing, and crabpot line entanglements are not significantly related to strandings further supporting the hypothesis that the increase in strandings are due to increased observations on the water as human coastal population increases and are not a natural phenomenon. This study has local and potentially regional marine spatial planning implications to protect coastal natural resources, such as the bottlenose dolphin, while balancing coastal development.

Development, validation, and utilization of a competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of antibodies against Brucella species in marine mammals

A competitive enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (cELISA) was developed by using a whole-cell antigen from a marine Brucella sp. isolated from a harbor seal (Phoca vitulina). The assay was designed to screen sera from multiple marine mammal species for the presence of antibodies against marine-origin Brucella. Based on comparisons with culture-confirmed cases, specificity and sensitivity for cetacean samples tested were 73% and 100%, respectively. For pinniped samples, specificity and sensitivity values were 77% and 67%, respectively. Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi; n = 28) and bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus; n = 48) serum samples were tested, and the results were compared with several other assays designed to detect Brucella abortus antibodies. The comparison testing revealed the marine-origin cELISA to be more sensitive than the B. abortus tests by the detection of additional positive serum samples. The newly developed cELISA is an effective serologic method for detection of the presence of antibodies against marine-origin Brucella sp. in marine mammals.

Distribution and abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and other marine mammals off the northern Washington coast

We examined the summer distribution of marine mammals off the northern Washington coast based on six ship transect surveys conducted between 1995 and 2002, primarily from the NOAA ship McArthur. Additionally, small boat surveys were conducted in the same region between 1989 and 2002 to gather photographic identification data on humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and killer whales (Orcinus orca) to examine movements and population structure. In the six years of ship survey effort, 706 sightings of 15 marine mammal species were made. Humpback whales were the most common large cetacean species and were seen every year and a total of 232 sightings of 402 animals were recorded during ship surveys. Highest numbers were observed in 2002, when there were 79 sightings of 139 whales. Line-transect estimates for humpback whales indicated that about 100 humpback whales inhabited these waters each year between 1995 and 2000; in 2002, however, the estimate was 562 (CV= 0.21) whales. A total of 191 unique individuals were identified photographically and mark recapture estimates also indicated that the number of animals increased from under 100 to over 200 from 1995 to 2002. There was only limited interchange of humpback whales between this area and feeding areas off Oregon and California. Killer whales were also seen on every ship survey and represented all known ecotypes of the Pacific Northwest, including southern and northern residents, transients, and offshore-type killer whales. Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) were the most frequently sighted small cetacean; abundance was estimated at 181−291 individuals, except for 2002 when we observed dramatically higher numbers (876, CV= 0.30). Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) and elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) were the most common pinnipeds observed. There were clear habitat differences related to distance offshore and water depth for different species.

Marine Vertebrates and Low Frequency Sound: Technical Report for LFA EIS

Over the past 50 years, economic and technological developments have dramatically increased the human contribution to ambient noise in the ocean. The dominant frequencies of most human-made noise in the ocean is in the low-frequency range (defined as sound energy below 1000Hz), and low-frequency sound (LFS) may travel great distances in the ocean due to the unique propagation characteristics of the deep ocean (Munk et al. 1989). For example, in the Northern Hemisphere oceans low-frequency ambient noise levels have increased by as much as 10 dB during the period from 1950 to 1975 (Urick 1986; review by NRC 1994). Shipping is the overwhelmingly dominant source of low-frequency manmade noise in the ocean, but other sources of manmade LFS including sounds from oil and gas industrial development and production activities (seismic exploration, construction work, drilling, production platforms), and scientific research (e.g., acoustic tomography and thermography, underwater communication). The SURTASS LFA system is an additional source of human-produced LFS in the ocean, contributing sound energy in the 100-500 Hz band. When considering a document that addresses the potential effects of a low-frequency sound source on the marine environment, it is important to focus upon those species that are the most likely to be affected. Important criteria are: 1) the physics of sound as it relates to biological organisms; 2) the nature of the exposure (i.e. duration, frequency, and intensity); and 3) the geographic region in which the sound source will be operated (which, when considered with the distribution of the organisms will determine which species will be exposed). The goal in this section of the LFA/EIS is to examine the status, distribution, abundance, reproduction, foraging behavior, vocal behavior, and known impacts of human activity of those species may be impacted by LFA operations. To focus our efforts, we have examined species that may be physically affected and are found in the region where the LFA source will be operated. The large-scale geographic location of species in relation to the sound source can be determined from the distribution of each species. However, the physical ability for the organism to be impacted depends upon the nature of the sound source (i.e. explosive, impulsive, or non-impulsive); and the acoustic properties of the medium (i.e. seawater) and the organism. Non-impulsive sound is comprised of the movement of particles in a medium. Motion is imparted by a vibrating object (diaphragm of a speaker, vocal chords, etc.). Due to the proximity of the particles in the medium, this motion is transmitted from particle to particle in waves away from the sound source. Because the particle motion is along the same axis as the propagating wave, the waves are longitudinal. Particles move away from then back towards the vibrating source, creating areas of compression (high pressure) and areas of rarefaction (low pressure). As the motion is transferred from one particle to the next, the sound propagates away from the sound source. Wavelength is the distance from one pressure peak to the next. Frequency is the number of waves passing per unit time (Hz). Sound velocity (not to be confused with particle velocity) is the impedance is loosely equivalent to the resistance of a medium to the passage of sound waves (technically it is the ratio of acoustic pressure to particle velocity). A high impedance means that acoustic particle velocity is small for a given pressure (low impedance the opposite). When a sound strikes a boundary between media of different impedances, both reflection and refraction, and a transfer of energy can occur. The intensity of the reflection is a function of the intensity of the sound wave and the impedances of the two media. Two key factors in determining the potential for damage due to a sound source are the intensity of the sound wave and the impedance difference between the two media (impedance mis-match). The bodies of the vast majority of organisms in the ocean (particularly phytoplankton and zooplankton) have similar sound impedence values to that of seawater. As a result, the potential for sound damage is low; organisms are effectively transparent to the sound – it passes through them without transferring damage-causing energy. Due to the considerations above, we have undertaken a detailed analysis of species which met the following criteria: 1) Is the species capable of being physically affected by LFS? Are acoustic impedence mis-matches large enough to enable LFS to have a physical affect or allow the species to sense LFS? 2) Does the proposed SURTASS LFA geographical sphere of acoustic influence overlap the distribution of the species? Species that did not meet the above criteria were excluded from consideration. For example, phytoplankton and zooplankton species lack acoustic impedance mis-matches at low frequencies to expect them to be physically affected SURTASS LFA. Vertebrates are the organisms that fit these criteria and we have accordingly focused our analysis of the affected environment on these vertebrate groups in the world’s oceans: fishes, reptiles, seabirds, pinnipeds, cetaceans, pinnipeds, mustelids, sirenians (Table 1).