Soviet Illegal Whaling: The Devil and the Details

In 1948, the U.S.S.R. began a global campaign of illegal whaling that lasted for three decades and, together with the poorly managed “legal” whaling of other nations, seriously depleted whale populations. Although the general story of this whaling has been told and the catch record largely corrected for the Southern Hemisphere, major gaps remain in the North Pacific. Furthermore, little attention has been paid to the details of this system or its economic context. Using interviews with former Soviet whalers and biologists as well as previously unavailable reports and other material in Russian, our objective is to describe how the Soviet whaling industry was structured and how it worked, from the largest scale of state industrial planning down to the daily details of the ways in which whales were caught and processed, and how data sent to the Bureau of International Whaling Statistics were falsified. Soviet whaling began with the factory ship Aleut in 1933, but by 1963 the industry had a truly global reach, with seven factory fleets (some very large). Catches were driven by a state planning system that set annual production targets. The system gave bonuses and honors only when these were met or exceeded, and it frequently increased the following year’s targets to match the previous year’s production; scientific estimates of the sustainability of the resource were largely ignored. Inevitably, this system led to whale populations being rapidly reduced. Furthermore, productivity was measured in gross output (weights of whales caught), regardless of whether carcasses were sound or rotten, or whether much of the animal was unutilized. Whaling fleets employed numerous people, including women (in one case as the captain of a catcher boat). Because of relatively high salaries and the potential for bonuses, positions in the whaling industry were much sought-after. Catching and processing of whales was highly mechanized and became increasingly efficient as the industry gained more experience. In a single day, the largest factory ships could process up to 200 small sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus; 100 humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae; or 30–35 pygmy blue whales, Balaenoptera musculus brevicauda. However, processing of many animals involved nothing more than stripping the carcass of blubber and then discarding the rest. Until 1952, the main product was whale oil; only later was baleen whale meat regularly utilized. Falsified data on catches were routinely submitted to the Bureau of International Whaling Statistics, but the true catch and biological data were preserved for research and administrative purposes. National inspectors were present at most times, but, with occasional exceptions, they worked primarily to assist fulfillment of plan targets and routinely ignored the illegal nature of many catches. In all, during 40 years of whaling in the Antarctic, the U.S.S.R. reported 185,778 whales taken but at least 338,336 were actually killed. Data for the North Pacific are currently incomplete, but from provisional data we estimate that at least 30,000 whales were killed illegally in this ocean. Overall, we judge that, worldwide, the U.S.S.R. killed approximately 180,000 whales illegally and caused a number of population crashes. Finally, we note that Soviet illegal catches continued after 1972 despite the presence of international observers on factory fleets.

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).

Harmful algal research and response: A human dimensions strategy

Harmful Algal Research and Response: A Human Dimensions Strategy (HARR-HD) justifies and guides a coordinated national commitment to human dimensions research critical to prevent and respond to impacts of harmful algal blooms (HABs). Beyond HABs, it serves as a framework for developing hu-man dimensions research as a cross-cutting priority of ecosystem science supporting coastal and ocean management, including hazard research and mitigation planning. Measuring and promoting commu-nity resilience to hazards require human dimensions research outcomes such as effective risk commu-nication strategies; assessment of community vulnerability; identification of susceptible populations; comprehensive assessment of environmental, sociocultural, and economic impacts; development of effective decision support tools; and improved coordination among agencies and stakeholders. HARR-HD charts a course for human dimensions research to achieve these and other priorities through co-ordinated implementation by the Joint Subcommittee on Ocean Science and Technology (JSOST) In-teragency Working Group on HABs, Hypoxia and Human Health (IWG-4H); national HAB funding programs; national research and response programs; and state research and monitoring programs. (PDF contains 72 pages)

Panama City Fisheries Resources Office: FY 2006 Annual Report

HIGHLIGHTS FOR FY 2006 1. Captured and tagged 475 Gulf sturgeons in five Florida rivers and one bay. 2. Documented Gulf sturgeon marine movement and habitat use in the Gulf of Mexico. 3. Assisted the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) with the collection of Gulf sturgeon, implantation of acoustic tags, and monitoring of fish in a study to examine movement patterns and habitat use in Pensacola and Choctawhatchee bays post-Hurricane Ivan. 4. Provided technical assistance to Jon “Bo” Sawyer in completing a study – Summer Resting Areas of the Gulf Sturgeon in the Conecuh/Escambia River System, Alabama-Florida – for acquiring a Degree of Master of Science at Troy University, Alabama. 5. Coordinated tagging and data collection with NOAA observers aboard trawlers while collecting Gulf sturgeon during dredging operations in the coastal Gulf of Mexico. 6. Hosted the 7th Annual Gulf Sturgeon Workshop. 7. Implemented Gulf Striped Bass Restoration Plan by coordinating the 23rd Annual Morone Workshop, leading the technical committee, transporting broodfish, coordinating the stocking on the Apalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint (ACF) river system, and evaluating post-stocking success. 8. Continued updating and managing the Freshwater Mussel Survey Database, a Geographic Information System (GIS) database, for over 800 unique sites in the Northeast Gulf (NEG) drainages in Alabama (AL), Georgia (GA), and Florida (FL). 9. Formed a recovery implementation team for listed mussels in the ACF river basin and oversaw grant cooperative agreements for 14 listed and candidate freshwater mussels in the NEG watersheds. 10. Initiated a project in the Apalachicola River to relocate mussels stranded as a result of drought conditions, and calculate river flows at which mussels would be exposed. 11. Initiated a project in Sawhatchee Creek, Georgia to determine the status of threatened and endangered (T&E) freshwater mussels and target restoration projects, population assessments, and potential population augmentation to lead toward recovery of the listed species. 12. Initiated a study to determine the age and growth of the endangered fat threeridge mussel (Amblema neislerii). 13. Provided technical assistance to the Panama City Ecological Services office for a biological opinion on the operations of Jim Woodruff Lock and Dam and its effects on the listed species and designated and proposed critical habitat in the Apalachicola River, Florida. 14. Assisted with a multi-State, inter-agency team to develop a management plan to restore the Alabama shad in the ACF river system. 15. Conducted fishery surveys on Tyndall AFB, Florida and Ft. Benning, Georgia and completed a report with recommendations for future recreational fishery needs. 16. Provided fishery technical assistance to four National Wildlife Refuges (NWR) (i.e., Okefenokee NWR, Banks Lake NWR, St. Vincent NWR, and St. Marks NWR). 17. Initiated an Aquatic Resources and Recreation Fishing Survey on Department of Defense facilities located in Region 4. 18. Identified 130 road-stream crossings on Eglin AFB for rehabilitation and elimination of sediment imputs. 19. Continued the Aquatics Monitoring Program at Eglin AFB to assess techniques that determine current status and sustainability of aquatic habitat and develop a measure to determine quality or degradation of habitat. 20. Assisted Eglin AFB Natural Resource managers in revising the installation’s Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan (INRMP) and its associated component plans. 21. Coordinated recovery efforts for the endangered Okaloosa darter including population/life history surveys, stream restoration, and outreach activities. 22. Initiated a comprehensive status review of the Okaloosa darter with analyses performed to assess available habitat, preferred habitats, range expansions/reductions/fragmentations, population size, and probability of extinction. 23. Assisted the Gulf Coastal Plain Ecosystem Partnership and the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) under a Memorandum of Agreement to develop conservation strategies, implement monitoring and assessment programs, and secure funds for aquatic management programs in six watersheds in northwest Florida and southeast Alabama. 24. Entered into a cooperative agreement with the U.S. Air Force to encourage the conservation and rehabilitation of natural resources at Hurlburt Field, Florida. 25. Multiple outreach projects were completed to detail aquatic resources’ conservation needs and opportunities; including National Fishing Week, Earth Day, several festivals, and school outreach.

Climate change adaptation and planning: An example from Kailua Beach, Oahu, Hawaii

The University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program (UHSG) in partnership with the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) is developing a beach and dune management plan for Kailua Beach on the eastern shoreline of Oahu. The objective of the plan is to develop a comprehensive beach management and land use development plan for Kailua Beach that reflects the state of scientific understanding of beach processes in Kailua Bay and abutting shoreline areas and is intended to provide long-term recommendations to adapting to climate change including potential coastal hazards such as sea level rise. The development of the plan has lead to wider recognition of the significance of projected sea level rise to the region and provides the rational behind some of the land use conservation strategies. The plan takes on a critical light given global predictions for continued, possibly accelerated, sea-level rise and the ongoing focus of intense development along the Hawaiian shoreline. Hawaii’s coastal resource managers are faced with the daunting prospect of managing the effects of erosion while simultaneously monitoring and regulating high-risk coastal development that often impacts the shoreline. The beach and dune preservation plan is the first step in a more comprehensive effort prepare for and adapt to sea level rise and ensure the preservation of the beach and dune ecosystem for the benefit of present and future generations. The Kailua Beach and Dune Management plan is intended to be the first in a series of regional plans in Hawaii to address climate change adaptation through land use planning. (PDF contains 3 pages)

The marine protected area planning process in Washington state: Recommendations for increased effectiveness

In Washington State, the Department of Natural Resources (WA DNR) is responsible for managing state-owned aquatic lands. Aquatic reserves are one of many Marine Protected Area (MPA) designations in WA State that aim to protect sensitive aquatic and ecological habitat. We analyzed the designation and early planning processes of WA State aquatic reserves, identified gaps in the processes, and recommend action to improve the WA State aquatic reserve early planning approach. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Marine spatial planning approaches at the state level: Similarities and differences between MSP efforts across the country

Competing uses, sensitive and valuable marine resources, and overlapping jurisdictions complicate management decision making in the marine environment. States are developing marine spatial planning capacity to help make better decisions, particularly as demand for ocean space and resources is growing because of emerging human uses (renewable energy, aquaculture) and traditional human uses (commercial fishing, commerce). This paper offers perspectives on marine spatial planning efforts being carried out in four states across the US, and demonstrates similarities and differences between them. The approach to marine spatial planning in each state is discussed with specific attention given to issues such as what is driving the effort, data availability, maturity of the effort, and level of resources devoted to it. Highlighting the similarities and differences illustrates state and region specific challenges and the approaches being used to meet them. (PDF contains 4 pages)

Assessment of some physico-chemical parameters of River Ogun (Abeokuta, Ogun State, southwestern Nigeria) in comparison with national and international standards

This study assessed the physico-chemical quality of River Ogun, Abeokuta, Ogun state, Southwestern Nigeria. Four locations were chosen spatially along the water course to reflect a consideration of all possible human activities that are capable of changing the quality of river water. The water samples were collected monthly for seven consecutive months (December 2011 – June 2012) at the four sampling stations. pH, air temperature (℃), water temperature (℃), conductivity (µs/cm) and total dissolved solids (mg/L) were conducted in-situ with the use of HANNA Combo pH and EC multi meter Hi 98129 and Mercury-in-glass thermometer while dissolved oxygen (mg/L), nitrate (mg/L), phosphate (mg/L), alkalinity (mg/L) and hardness (mg/L) were determined ex-situ using standard methods. Results showed that dissolved oxygen, hydrogen ion concentration, total hardness and nitrate were above the maximum permissible limit of National Administration for Food, Drugs and Control (NAFDAC), Standard Organization of Nigeria (SON), Federal Environmental Protection Agency (FEPA), United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), European Union (EU) and World Health Organization (WHO) for drinking water during certain months of the study period. Results also showed that water temperature and conductivity were within the permissible limits of all the standards excluding FEPA. However, total dissolved solids and alkalinity were within the permissible limits of all the standards. Adejuwon and Adelakun, (2012) also reported similar findings on Rivers Lala, Yobo and Agodo in Ewekoro local government area of Ogun state, Nigeria. Since most of the parameters measured were above the maximum permissible limits of the national and international standards, it can be concluded that the water is unfit for domestic uses, drinking and aquacultural purposes and therefore needs to be treated if it is to be used at all. The low dissolved oxygen values for the first four months was too low i.e. < 5 mg/L. This is most likely as a result of the amount of effluents discharged into the river. To prevent mass extinction of aquatic organisms due to anoxic conditions, proper regulations should be implemented to reduce the organic load the river receives.