Cook Inlet Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas: Status and Overview

Of the five populations of beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, in Alaska, the most isolated is the one in Cook Inlet (Hazard, 1988; Hill and DeMaster, 1998) (Fig. 1). The geographic and genetic segregation of this stock (O’Corry-Crowe et al., 1997), combined with the beluga’s tendency toward site fidelity in summer, makes this population especially vulnerable to impacts from large or persistent harvests.

Distribution of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, During June/July 1993–2000

Aerial surveys of belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet wre flown each year during June and/or July from 1993 to 2000. This project was designed to delineate distribution and collect aerial counts, elements critical to the managment of this small, isolated stock that was subjected to a persistent harvest by Native hunters. The surveys provided a thorough, annual coverage of the coastal areas of the inlet (1,300 km of shoreline) and included roughly 1,000 km of offshore transects annually. Coastal transects were flown 1.4 km from the waterline, thus surveying most of the area within 3 km of shore. These, along with offshore transects, provided annual systematic searches of 13-33% of the entire inlet. The largest concentration of belugas (151-288 whales by aerial count) was in the northern portion of upper Cook Inlet in the Susitna River Delta and/or in Knik Arm. Another concentration (17-49 whales) was consistently found between Chickaloon River and Point Possession. Smaller groups (generally <20 whales) were occasionally found in Turn-again Arm, Kachemak Bay, Redoubt Bay (Big River), and Trading Bay (McArthur River) prior to 1995 but not thereafter. Over the past three decades, summer distribution has shrunk such that sightings now only rarely occur in lower Cook Inlet and in offshore areas. In the 1990's, most (96-100%) of the sightings were concentrated in a few dense groups in shallow areas near river mouths in upper Cook Inlet.

Historic and Current Use of Lower Cook Inlet, Alaska, by Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas

Dedicated at-sea surveys for marine birds and mammals conducted in lower Cook Inlet in late July and early August from 1995–99 failed to locate any belugas, Delphinapterus leucas. Surveys covered a total of 6,249 linear km and were conducted in both nearshore and offshore habitats. Sightings included 791 individual marine mammals of 10 species. Both historical data and local knowledge indicate that belugas were regularly seen in summer in nearshore and offshore areas of lower Cook Inlet up until the early 1990’s. Diminished presence of belugas in lower Cook Inlet may be a direct function of reduced numbers but may also indicate changes in habitat quality that may inhibit recovery.

Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, Distribution and Survey Effort in the Gulf of Alaska

Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, distribution in the Gulf of Alaska and adjacent inside waters was examined through a review of surveys conducted as far back as 1936. Although beluga sightings have occurred on almost every marine mammal survey in northern Cook Inlet (over 20 surveys reported here), beluga sightings have been rare outside the inlet in the Gulf of Alaska. More than 150,000 km of dedicated survey effort in the Gulf of Alaska resulted in sightings of over 23,000 individual cetaceans, of which only 4 beluga sightings (5 individuals) occurred. In addition, nearly 100,000 individual cetaceans were reported in the Platforms of Opportunity database; yet, of these, only 5 sightings (39 individuals) were belugas. Furthermore, approximately 19 beluga sightings (>260 individuals), possibly including resightings, have been reported without information on effort or other cetacean sightings. Of the 28 sightings of belugas outside of Cook Inlet, 9 were near Kodiak Island, 10 were in or near Prince William Sound, 8 were in Yakutat Bay, and 1 anomalous sighting was well south of the Gulf. These sightings support archaeological and commercial harvest evidence indicating the only persistent group of belugas in the Gulf of Alaska occurs in Cook Inlet.

Abundance of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, 1994–2000

Annual abundance estimates of belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet were calculated from counts made by aerial observers and aerial video recordings. Whale group-size estimates were corrected for subsurface whales (availability bias) and whales that were at the surface but were missed (detection bias). Logistic regression was used to estimate the probability that entire groups were missed during the systematic surveys, and the results were used to calculate a correction to account for the whales in these missed groups (1.015, CV = 0.03 in 1994–98; 1.021, CV = 0.01 in 1999– 2000). Calculated abundances were 653 (CV = 0.43) in 1994, 491 (CV = 0.44) in 1995, 594 (CV = 0.28) in 1996, 440 (CV = 0.14) in 1997, 347 (CV = 0.29) in 1998, 367 (CV = 0.14) in 1999, and 435 (CV = 0.23, 95% CI=279–679) in 2000. For management purposes the current Nbest = 435 and Nmin = 360. These estimates replace preliminary estimates of 749 for 1994 and 357 for 1999. Monte Carlo simulations indicate a 47% probability that from June 1994 to June 1998 abundance of the Cook Inlet stock of belugas was depleted by 50%. The decline appears to have stopped in 1998.

Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, Group Sizes in Cook Inlet, Alaska, Based on Observer Counts and Aerial Video

Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, groups were videotaped concurrent to observer counts during annual NMFS aerial surveys of Cook Inlet, Alaska, from 1994 to 2000. The videotapes provided permanent records of whale groups that could be examined and compared to group size estimates ade by aerial observers.Examination of the video recordings resulted in 275 counts of 79 whale groups. The McLaren formula was used to account for whales missed while they were underwater (average correction factor 2.03; SD=0.64). A correction for whales missed due to video resolution was developed by using a second, paired video camera that magnified images relative to the standard video. This analysis showed that some whales were missed either because their image size fell below the resolution of hte standard video recording or because two whales surfaced so close to each other that their images appeared to be one large whale. The correction method that resulted depended on knowing the average whale image size in the videotapes. Image sizes were measured for 2,775 whales from 275 different passes over whale groups. Corrected group sizes were calcualted as the product of the original count from video, the correction factor for whales missed underwater, and the correction factor for whales missed due to video resolution (averaged 1.17; SD=0.06). A regression formula was developed to estimate group sizes from aerial observer counts; independent variables were the aerial counts and an interaction term relative to encounter rate (whales per second during the counting of a group), which were regressed against the respective group sizes as calculated from the videotapes. Significant effects of encounter rate, either positive or negative, were found for several observers. This formula was used to estimate group size when video was not available. The estimated group sizes were used in the annual abundance estimates.

Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, Habitat Associations in Cook Inlet, Alaska

A review of available information describing habitat associations for belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet was undertaken to complement population assessment surveys from 1993-2000. Available data for physical, biological, and anthropogenic factors in Cook Inlet are summarized followed by a provisional description of seasonal habitat associations. To summarize habitat preferences, the beluga summer distribution pattern was used to partition Cook Inlet into three regions. In general, belugas congregate in shallow, relatively warm, low-salinity water near major river outflows in upper Cook Inlet during summer (defined as their primary habitat), where prey availability is comparatively high and predator occurrence relatively low. In winter, belugas are seen in the central inlet, but sightings are fewer in number, and whales more dispersed compared to summer. Belugas are associated with a range of ice conditions in winter, from ice-free to 60% ice-covered water. Natural catastrophic events, such as fires, earthquakes, and volcanic eruptions, have had no reported effect on beluga habitat, although such events likely affect water quality and, potentially, prey availability. Similarly, although sewage effluent and discharges from industrial and military activities along Cook Inlet negatively affect water quality, analyses of organochlorines and heavy metal burdens indicate that Cook Inlet belugas are not assimilating contaminant loads greater than any other Alaska beluga stocks. Offshore oil and gas activities and vessel traffic are high in the central inlet compared with other Alaska waters, although belugas in Cook Inlet seem habituated to these anthropogenic factors. Anthropogenic factors that have the highest potential negative impacts on belugas include subsistence hunts (not discussed in this report), noise from transportation and offshore oil and gas extraction (ship transits and aircraft overflights), and water quality degradation (from urban runoff and sewage treatment facilities). Although significant impacts from anthropogenic factors other than hunting are not yet apparent, assessment of potential impacts from human activities, especially those that may effect prey availability, are needed.

Concentrations of Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCB’s), Chlorinated Pesticides, and Heavy Metals and Other Elements in Tissues of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, from Cook Inlet

Tissues from Cook Inlet beluga whales, Delphinapterus leucas, that were collected as part of the Alaska Marine Mammal Tissue Archival Project were analyzed for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB’s), chlorinated pesticides, and heavy metals and other elements. Concentrations of total PCB’s (ΣPCB’s), total DDT (ΣDDT), chlordane compounds, hexachlorobenzene (HCB), dieldrin, mirex, toxaphene, and hexachlorocyclohexane (HCH) measured in Cook Inlet beluga blubber were compared with those reported for belugas from two Arctic Alaska locations (Point Hope and Point Lay), Greenland, Arctic Canada, and the highly contaminated stock from the St. Lawrence estuary in eastern Canada. The Arctic and Cook Inlet belugas had much lower concentrations (ΣPCB’s and ΣDDT were an order of magnitude lower) than those found in animals from the St. Lawrence estuary. The Cook Inlet belugas had the lowest concentrations of all (ΣPCB’s aver-aged 1.49 ± 0.70 and 0.79 ± 0.56 mg/kg wet mass, and ΣDDT averaged 1.35 ± 0.73 and 0.59 ± 0.45 mg/kg in males and females, respectively). Concentrations in the blubber of the Cook Inlet males were significantly lower than those found in the males of the Arctic Alaska belugas (ΣPCB’s and ΣDDT were about half). The lower levels in the Cook Inlet animals might be due to differences in contaminant sources, food web differences, or different age distributions among the animals sampled. Cook Inlet males had higher mean and median concentrations than did females, a result attributable to the transfer of these compounds from mother to calf during pregnancy and during lactation. Liver concentrations of cadmium and mercury were lower in the Cook Inlet belugas (most cadmium values were <1 mg/kg and mercury values were 0.704–11.42 mg/kg wet mass), but copper levels were significantly higher in the Cook Inlet animals (3.97–123.8 mg/kg wet mass) than in Arctic Alaska animals and similar to those reported for belugas from Hudson Bay. Although total mercury levels were the lowest in the Cook Inlet population, methylmercury concentrations were similar among all three groups of the Alaska animals examined (0.34–2.11 mg/kg wet mass). As has been reported for the Point Hope and Point Lay belugas, hepatic concentrations of silver were re

Application of Suction-cup-attached VHF Transmitters to the Study of Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, Surfacing Behavior in Cook Inlet, Alaska

Suction-cup-attached VHF radio transmittes were deployed on belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, in 1994 and 1995 to characterize the whales' surfacing behavior. Data from video recordings were also used to characterize behavior of undisturbed whales and whales actively pursued for tagging. Statistics for dive intervals (time between the midpoints of contiguous surfacings) and surfacing intevals (time at the surface per surfacing) were estimated. Operations took place on the tidal delta of the Susitna and Little Susitna Rivers. During the 2-yr study, eight whales were successfully tagged, five tags remained attached for >60 min, and data from these were used in the analyses. Mean dive interval was 24.1 sec (interwhale SD=6.4 sec, n=5). The mean surfacing interval, as determined from the duration of signals received from the radio transmitters, was 1.8 sec (SD=0.3 sec, n=125) for one of the whales. Videotaped behaviors were categorized as "head-lifts" or "slow-rolls." Belugas were more likely to head-lift than to slow-roll during vessel approaches and tagging attempts when compared to undisturbed whales. In undisturbed groups, surfacing intervals determined from video records were significantly different between head-lifting (average = 1.02 sect, SD=0.38 sed, n=28) and slow-rolling whales (average = 2.45 sec, SD=0.37 sec, n=106). Undisturbed juveniles exhibited shorter slow-roll surfacing intervals (average = 2.25 sec, SD=0.32 sec, n=36) than adults (average = 2.55 sec, SD=0.36 sec, n=70). We did not observe strong reactions by the belugas to the suction-cup tags. This tagging method shows promise for obtaining surfacing data for durations of several days.

Development of Beluga, Delphinapterus leucas, Capture and Satellite Tagging Protocol in Cook Inlet, Alaska

Attempts to capture and place satellite tags on belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska were conducted during late spring and summer of 1995, 1997, and 1999. In 1995, capture attempts using a hoop net proved impractical in Cook Inlet. In 1997, capture efforts focused on driving belugas into nets. Although this method had been successful in the Canadian High Arctic, it failed in Cook Inlet due to the ability of the whales to detect and avoid nets in shallow and very turbid water. In 1999, belugas were successfully captured using a gillnet encirclement technique. A satellite tag was attached to a juvenile male, which subsequently provided the first documentation of this species’ movements within Cook Inlet during the summer months (31 May–17 September).

Harvest History of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska

Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, represent a unique and isolated marine mammal population that has been hunted for a variety of purposes since prehistoric times. Archeological studies have shown that both Alutiiq Eskimos and Dena'ina Atabaskan Indians have long utilized many marine resources in Cook Inlet, including belugas. Over the past century, commercial whaling and sport hunting also occurred periodically in Cook Inlet prior to the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA). During the 1990's, the hunting mortality by Alaska Natives apparently increased to 40-70 whales per year, which led to the decling of this stock and its subsequent designation in 2000 as depleted under the MMPA. Concerns about the decline of the Cook Inlet stock resulted in a voluntary suspension of the subsistenc hunt by Alaska Natives in 1999. The difficulty in obtaining accurate estimates for the harvest of these whales is due to the inability to identify all of the hunters and, in turn, the size of the harvest. Attempts to reconstruct harvest records based on hunters' recollections and interviews from only a few households have been subject to a wide degree of speculation. To adequately monitor the beluga harvest, the National Marine Fisheries Service established marking and reporting regulations in October 1999. These rules require that Alaska Natives who hunt belugas in Cook Inlet must collect the lowere left jaw from harvested whales and complete a report that includes date and time of the harvest, coloration of the whale, harvest location, and method of harvest. The MMPA was amended in 2000 to require a cooperative agreement between the National Marine Fisheries Service and Alaska Native organizations before hunting could be resumed.

Traditional Knowledge of the Ecology of Belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska

The population of belugas, Delphinapterus leucas, in Cook Inlet, Alaska, is geographically isolated and appears to be declining. Conservation efforts require appropriate information about population levels and trends, feeding and behavior, reproduction, and natural and anthropogenic impacts. This study documents traditional ecological knowledge of the Alaska Native hunters of belugas in Cook Inlet to add information from this critical source. Traditional knowledge about belugas has been documented elsewhere by the author, and the same methods were used in Cook Inlet to systematically gather information concerning knowledge of the natural history of this beluga population and its habitat. The hunters’knowledge is largely consistent with what is known from previous research, and it extends the published descriptions of the ecology of beluga whales in Cook Inlet. Making this information available and involving the hunters to a greater extent in research and management are important contributions to the conservation of Cook Inlet beluga

Bowhead and white whale migration, distribution, and abundance in the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas, 1975-78

From September 1975 to September 1977 we conducted field research on bowhead, Balaena mysticetus, and white, Delphinapterus leucas, whales in the U.S. Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas. The objectives were to determine the general distribution and migration of these whales in spring and autumn and to estimate abundance. We also surveyed the literature beginning in June 1975 through March 1978 to augment our empirical results. (PDF contains 48 pages)

The status of shark and ray fishery resources in the Gulf of California: applied research to improve management and conservation

Seasonal surveys were conducted during 1998–1999 in Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora, and Sinaloa to determine the extent and activities of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in the Gulf of California. One hundred and forty–seven fishing sites, or camps, were documented, the majority of which (n = 83) were located in Baja California Sur. Among camps with adequate fisheries information, the great majority (85.7%) targeted elasmobranchs during some part of the year. Most small, demersal sharks and rays were landed in mixed species fisheries that also targeted demersal teleosts, but large sharks were usually targeted in directed drift gillnet or, to a lesser extent, surface longline fisheries. Artisanal fishermen were highly opportunistic, and temporally switched targets depending on the local productivity of teleost, invertebrate, and elasmobranch fishery resources. Major fisheries for small sharks (< 1.5 m, “cazón”) were documented in Baja California during spring, in Sonora during autumn–spring, and in Sinaloa during winter and spring. Triakid sharks (Mustelus spp.) dominated cazón landings in the northern states, whereas juvenile scalloped hammerheads (Sphyrna lewini) primarily supported the fishery in Sinaloa. Large sharks (> 1.5 m, “tiburón”) were minor components of artisanal elasmobranch fisheries in Sonora and Sinaloa, but were commonly targeted during summer and early autumn in Baja California and Baja California Sur. The pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus) and silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis) were most commonly landed in Baja California, whereas a diverse assemblage of pelagic and large coastal sharks was noted among Baja California Sur landings. Rays dominated summer landings in Baja California and Sinaloa, when elevated catch rates of the shovelnose guitarfish (Rhinobatos productus, 13.2 individuals/vessel/trip) and golden cownose ray (Rhinoptera steindachneri, 11.1 individuals/vesse/trip) primarily supported the respective fisheries. The Sonoran artisanal elasmobranch fishery was the most expansive recorded during this study, and rays (especially R. productus) dominated spring and summer landings in this state. Seasonal catch rates of small demersal sharks and rays were considerably greater in Sonora than in other surveyed states. Many tiburón populations (e.g., C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. obscurus, Galeocerdo cuvier) have likely been overfished, possibly shifting effort towards coastal populations of cazón and rays. Management recommendations, including conducting demographic analyses using available life history data, determining and protecting nursery areas, and enacting seasonal closures in areas of elasmobranch aggregation (e.g., reproduction, feeding), are proposed. Without effective, enforceable management to sustain or rebuild targeted elasmobranch populations in the Gulf of California, collapse of many fisheries is a likely outcome. (PDF contains 243 pages)

El estado actual de los tiburones y rayas sujectos a explotación comercial en el Golfo de California: una investigación aplicada al mejoramiento de su manejo pesquero y conservación

Se realizaron prospecciones estacionales durante 1998–1999 en Baja California, Baja California Sur, Sonora y Sinaloa para determinar la dimensión y las actividades de las pesquerías artesanales de elasmobranquios dentro del Golfo de California. Ciento cuarenta y siete campamentos o sitios pesqueros fueron documentados, la mayoría de los cuales (n= 83) fueron localizados en Baja California Sur. Entre los campamentos con información pesquera adecuada, la gran mayoría (85.7%) pescaron elasmobranquios en algún momento del año. La mayoría de los pequeños tiburones y rayas demersales fueron capturados en pesquerías multiespecíficas, las cuales también tienen como objetivo teleósteos, pero los grandes tiburones fueron capturados generalmente por pesquerías de redes agalleras a la deriva dirigidas a ellos, o en menor grado, por pesquerías de palangre de superficie. Los pescadores artesanales presentaron un comportamiento altamente oportunístico y temporalmente cambiaban de especie objetivo dependiendo de la productividad de los recursos pesqueros locales de especies de escama, invertebrados y elasmobranquios. Las mayores pesquerías de pequeños tiburones (≤1.5 m, “cazón”) se documentaron en Baja California, Sonora, y Sinaloa durante la primavera y adicionalmente durante otoño e invierno en Sonora. Los tiburones del genero Mustelus (Mustelus spp) dominaron los desembarques de cazón en los estados norteños, mientras que los tiburones martillo juveniles (Sphyrna lewini) sostuvieron la pesquería en Sinaloa. Los grandes tiburones (> 1.5 m, “tiburón”) fueron componente menor de las pesquerías artesanales de elasmobranquios en Sonora y Sinaloa, pero comúnmente fueron capturados en verano y principios de otoño en Baja California y Baja California Sur. El tiburón zorro pelágico (Alopias pelagicus) y el tiburón piloto (Carcharhinus falciformis) fueron comúnmente desembarcados en Baja California, mientras que un diverso ensamble de tiburones pelágicos y grandes costeros fueron observados en los desembarques de Baja California Sur. Las rayas dominaron los desembarques en verano en Baja California y Sinaloa, sostenidas principalmente por elevadas tasas de captura de la guitarra común (Rhinobatos productus, 13.2 individuos/embarcación/viaje) y del tecolote (Rhinoptera steindachneri, 11.1 individuos/embarcación/viaje). La pesquería de rayas de Sonora fue la más extensamente documentada durante este estudio y las rayas (especialmente R. productus) dominaron los desembarques en primavera y verano en este estado. Las tasas de captura estacionales de pequeños tiburones demersales y rayas fueron considerablemente mayores en Sonora que en los otros estados prospectados. Numerosas poblaciones de tiburón (p. ej. C. leucas, C. limbatus, C. obscurus, Galeocerdo cuvier) han sido probablemente sobreexplotados, lo que posiblemente este causando un cambio en el esfuerzo hacia las poblaciones de cazón y rayas costeros. Se proponen recomendaciones de manejo, incluyendo conducir análisis demográficos empleando la información de historias de vida disponible, localizando y protegiendo áreas de crianza e implementando temporadas de veda estacional en las áreas de mayor concentración de elasmobranquios (p. ej. alimentación, reproducción). Sin un manejo pesquero efectivo, vigilado, para sostener o reconstruir las poblaciones de elasmobranquios sujetas a explotación comercial dentro del Golfo de California, el colapso de las pesquerías es un evento probable. (PDF contains 261 pages)