Diets of Baird’s Beaked Whales, Berardius bairdii, in the Southern Sea Of Okhotsk and Off the Pacific Coast Of Honshu, Japan

Stomach contents were analyzed from 127 Baird’s beaked whales, Berardizls bairdii, taken in coastal waters of Japan. During late July-August of 1985- 1987, 1989, and 1991, 107 samples were collected from off the Pacific coast of Honshu. An additional 20 samples were collected from whales taken in the southern Sea of Okhotsk during late August-September of 1988 and 1989. Prey identification using fish otoliths and cephalopod beaks revealed the whales fed primarily on deep-water gadiform fishes and cephalopods in both regions. Prey species diversity and the percentage of cephalopods and fish differed between the two regions. Off the Pacific coast of Honshu the whales fed primarily on benthopelagic fishes (81.8%) and only 18.0% on cephalopods. Eight species of fish representing two families, the codlings (Moridae) and the grenadiers (Macrouridde), collectively made up 81.3% of the total. Thirty species of cephalopods representing 14 families made up 12.7%. In the southern Sea of Okhotsk, cephalopods accounted for 87.1% of stomach contents. The families Gonatidae and Cranchiidae were the predominant cephalopod prey, accounting for 86.7% of the diet. Gadiform fish accounted for only 12.9% of the diet. Longfin codling, Laernonma longipes, was the dominant fish prey in both regions. Depth distribution of the two commonly consumed fish off the Pacific coast of Honshu indicate the whales in this region fed primarily at depths ranging from 800 to 1,200 m.

Block & Bridle Annual 1959-1960

President Roger Wehrbein Vice President Ted Klug Secretary George B. O'Neal Treasurer Ralph Hazen Marshal Bud Reece Historian Tom Kraeger Co-Historian John Zauha Ag. Executive Representative Larry Williams Faculty Advisor Dr. E. B. Peo, Jr. George Ahlschwede Richard Hahn Henry Beel Ralph Hazen Gary Briggs Gary Heineman Leslie Cook Max Hauser Richard Eberspacher Buce Jameson Russ Edeal Leon Janovy William Ehresman Alan Jorgensen Rolland Eubanks John Joyner Mickey Evertson Marshall Jurgens Jesse Felker Ron Kahle Mylon Filkins Donald Kavan Richard Frahm Max Keasling Roger French Ronald Kennedy Angus Garey Ted Klug Ed Gates Herb Kraeger Gerald Gogan Tom Kraeger Gerald Goold Fernando Lagos Jay Graf Gerald Lamberson Lloyd Langemeier Ralph Langemeier Gerald Loseke Donald Meiergerd Lowell Minert John Oeltjen George B. O'Neal Don Ormesher Larry Ott Bud Reece Ron Sabatka Keith Smith Ronald Smith Donn Simonson Daryl Starr Galen Stevens Eugene Turdy Ernest Thayer Charles Thompson Jerry Thompson Eli Thomssen William Watkins Allen Trumble Robert Weber Lawrence Turner Dan Wehrbein Reginald Turner Roger Wehrbein Vance Uden Dick White Max Waldo Billy Williams Blair Williams Larry Williams D. Patrick Wright John Zauha

Catches of Humpback Whales in the Southern Ocean, 1947-1973

We review catches of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Southern Ocean during the period following World War II, with an emphasis on Areas IV, V and VI (the principal regions of illegal Soviet whaling on this species). Where possible, we summarize legal and illegal Soviet catches by year, Area and factory fleet, and also include information on takes by other nations. Soviet humpback catches between 1947 and 1973 totaled 48702 and break down as follows: 649 (Area I), 1412 (Area II), 921 (Area III), 8779 (Area IV), 22569 (Area V) and 7195 (Area VI), with 7177 catches not assignable to area. In all, at least 72542 humpback whales were killed by all operations (Soviet plus other nations) after World War 2 in Areas IV (27201), V (38146) and VI (7195). More than a third of these (25474 whales, of which 25192 came from Areas V and VI) were taken in just two seasons, 1959/60 and 1960/61. The impact of these takes, and of those from Area IV in the late 1950's, is evident in the sometimes dramatic declines in catches at shore stations in Australia, New Zealand and Norfolk Island. When compared to recent estimates of abundance, the large removals from Areas IV and V indicate that the populations in these regions remain well below pre-exploitation levels despite reported strong growth rates off eastern and western Australia. Populations in many areas of Oceania continue to be small, indicating that the catches from Area VI and eastern Area V had long-term impacts on recovery.

Evolution of river dolphins

The world's river dolphins (Inia, Pontoporia, Lipotes and Platanista) are among the least known and most endangered of all cetaceans. The four extant genera inhabit geographically disjunct river systems and exhibit highly modified morphologies, leading many cetologists to regard river dolphins as an unnatural group. Numerous arrangements have been proposed for their phylogenetic relationships to one another and to other odontocete cetaceans. These alternative views strongly affect the biogeographical and evolu- tionary implications raised by the important, although limited, fossil record of river dolphins. We present a hypothesis of river dolphin relationships based on phylogenetic analysis of three mitochondrial genes for 29 cetacean species, concluding that the four genera represent three separate, ancient branches in odontocete evolution. Our molecular phylogeny corresponds well with the first fossil appearances of the primary lineages of modern odontocetes. Integrating relevant events in Tertiary palaeoceanography, we develop a scenario for river dolphin evolution during the globally high sea levels of the Middle Miocene. We suggest that ancestors of the four extant river dolphin lineages colonized the shallow epicontinental seas that inundated the Amazon, Parana, Yangtze and Indo-Gangetic river basins, subsequently remaining in these extensive waterways during their transition to freshwater with the Late Neogene trend of sea-level lowering.

Draft U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments: 2009

Under the 1994 amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) are required to publish Stock Assessment Reports for all stocks of marine mammals within U.S. waters, to review new information every year for strategic stocks and every three years for non-strategic stocks, and to update the stock assessment reports when significant new information becomes available. This report presents stock assessments for 13 Pacific marine mammal stocks under NMFS jurisdiction, including 8 “strategic” stocks and 5 “non-strategic” stocks (see summary table). A new stock assessment for humpback whales in American Samoa waters is included in the Pacific reports for the first time. New or revised abundance estimates are available for 9 stocks, including Eastern North Pacific blue whales, American Samoa humpback whales, five U.S. west coast harbor porpoise stocks, the Hawaiian monk seal, and southern resident killer whales. A change in the abundance estimate of Eastern North Pacific blue whales reflects a recommendation from the Pacific Scientific Review Group to utilize mark-recapture estimates for this population, which provide a better estimate of total population size than the average of recent line-transect and mark-recapture estimates. The ‘Northern Oregon/Washington Coast Stock’ harbor porpoise stock assessment includes a name change (‘Oregon’ is appended to ‘Northern Oregon’) to reflect recent stock boundary changes. Changes in abundance estimates for the two stocks of harbor porpoise that occur in Oregon waters are the result of these boundary changes, and do not reflect biological changes in the populations. Updated information on the three stocks of false killer whales in Hawaiian waters is also included in these reports. Information on the remaining 50 Pacific region stocks will be reprinted without revision in the final 2009 reports and currently appears in the 2008 reports (Carretta et al. 2009). Stock Assessments for Alaskan marine mammals are published by the National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML) in a separate report. Pacific region stock assessments include those studied by the Southwest Fisheries Science Center (SWFSC, La Jolla, California), the Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center (PIFSC, Honolulu, Hawaii), the National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML, Seattle, Washington), and the Northwest Fisheries Science Center (NWFSC, Seattle, WA). Northwest Fisheries Science Center staff prepared the report on the Eastern North Pacific Southern Resident killer whale. National Marine Mammal Laboratory staff prepared the Northern Oregon/Washington coast harbor porpoise stock assessment. Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center staff prepared the report on the Hawaiian monk seal. Southwest Fisheries Science Center staff prepared stock assessments for 9 stocks. The stock assessment for the American Samoa humpback whale was prepared by staff from the Center for Coastal Studies, Hawaiian Islands Humpback National Marine Sanctuary, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Southwest Fisheries Science Center. Draft versions of the stock assessment reports were reviewed by the Pacific Scientific Review Group at the November 2008, Maui meeting. The authors also wish to thank those who provided unpublished data, especially Robin Baird and Joseph Mobley, who provided valuable information on Hawaiian cetaceans. Any omissions or errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. This is a working document and individual stock assessment reports will be updated as new information on marine mammal stocks and fisheries becomes available. Background information and guidelines for preparing stock assessment reports are reviewed in Wade and Angliss (1997). The authors solicit any new information or comments which would improve future stock assessment reports. These Stock Assessment Reports summarize information from a wide range of sources and an extensive bibliography of all sources is given in each report. We strongly urge users of this document to refer to and cite original literature sources rather than citing this report or previous Stock Assessment Reports. If the original sources are not accessible, the citation should follow the format: [Original source], as cited in [this Stock Assessment Report citation].

Review of the Evidence Used In The Description Of Currently Recognized Cetacean Subspecies

We reviewed the subspecies listed by Rice (1998) and those described since (a total of 49, in 19 species), assessing them against the criteria recommended by the recent Workshop on Shortcomings of Cetacean Taxonomy in Relation to Needs of Conservation and Management (Reeves et al., 2004). The workshop suggested that the subspecies concept can be construed to cover two types of entities: a) lineages diverging but not quite far along the continuum of divergence (still having significant gene flow with another lineage or lineages) to be judged as species, and b) lineages that may well be species but for which not enough evidence is yet available to justify their designation as such. As a criterion for support of a subspecies, the workshop suggested as a guideline that there be at least one good line of either morphological or appropriate genetic evidence. "Appropriate" was not defined; the recommendation was that that be left up to the taxonomist authors of subspecies and to their professional peers. A further recommendation was that evidence on distribution, behavior and ecology should be considered not as primary but as supporting evidence, as there was not agreement at the workshop that such characters are necessarily stable (in the case of distribution) or inherent (behavior and ecology).

U.S. Pacific Marine Mammal Stock Assessments

Under the 1994 amendments to the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) were required to produce stock assessment reports for all marine mammal stocks in waters within the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. This document contains the stock assessment reports for the U.S. Pacific marine mammal stocks under NMFS jurisdiction. Marine mammal species which are under the management jurisdiction of the USFWS are not included in this report. A separate report containing background, guidelines for preparation, and .a summary of all stock assessment reports is available from the NMFS Office of Protected Resources. This report was prepared by staff of the Southwest Fisheries Science Center, NMFS and the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, NMFS. The information presented here was compiled primarily from published sources, but additional unpublished information was included where it contributed to the assessments. The authors wish to thanks the members of the Pacific Scientific Review Group for their valuable contributions and constructive criticism: Hannah Bernard, Robin Brown, Mark Fraker, Doyle Hanan, John Heyning, Steve Jeffries, Katherine Ralls, Michael Scott, and Terry Wright. Their comments greatly improved the quality of these reports, We also thanks the Marine Mammal Commission, The Humane Society of the United States, The Marine Mammal Center, The Center for Marine Conservation, and Friends of the Sea Otter for their careful reviews and thoughtful comments. Special thanks to Paul Wade of the Office of Protected Resources for his exhaustive review and comments, which greatly enhanced the consistency and technical quality of the reports. Any ommissions or errors are the sole responsibility of the authors. This is a working document and individual stock assessment reports will be updated as new information becomes available and as changes to marine mammal stocks and fisheries occur; therefore, each stock assessment report is intended to be a stand alone document. The authors solicit any new information or comments which would improve future stock assessment reports. This is Southwest Fisheries Science Center Technical Memorandum NOAA-TM-NMFS-SWFSC- 219, July 1995. 111

Japan’s whaling plan under scrutiny

Eighteen years after initiating scientific whaling in Antarctic waters, Japan presented a new and more ambitious program to the International Whaling Commission (IWC); the proposal was made in early June during the IWC’s annual meeting in Ulsan, Korea. Japan now wishes to more than double its annual catch of Antarctic minke whales (from about 440 to 935), and to expand lethal sampling to include an additional yearly take of 50 humpback and 50 fin whales. Unlike catches for commercial whaling, scientific catches are unregulated. Since 1987, Japan has taken some 6,800 minke whales from Antarctic waters, despite ongoing criticism of the relevance and direction of Japan’s research. The IWC was set up to regulate commercial whaling and to conserve whale populations, under the authority of the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. Following a well-documented failure of management that led to the collapse of most global whale populations, the IWC set a zero quota for commercial whaling (the moratorium). This was made effective from 1986. Norway, the former Soviet Union and Japan initially objected to the moratorium, but Japan withdrew its objection and ceased commercial whaling in 1988.

Recovery Plan for The Blue Whale (Balaenoptera musculus)

Recovery plans identify reasonable actions which are believed to be required to recover and/or protect endangered species. Plans are prepared by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and sometimes with the assistance of recovery teams, contractors, State agencies, and others. This plan was prepared by Randall R. Reeves, Phillip J. Clapham, Robert L. Brownell, Jr., and Gregory K. Silber for NMFS. Recovery plans do not necessarily represent the views nor the official positions or approvals of any individuals or agencies, other than those of NMFS, and they represent the views of NMFS only after they have been approved by the Assistant Administrator for Fisheries. Objectives will only be attained and funds expended contingent upon appropriations, priorities, and other budgetary constraints. Approved recovery plans are subject to modification as dictated by new findings, changes in species status, and the completion of recovery tasks described in the plan.

Whaling error

You published recently (Nature 374, 587; 1995) a report headed "Error re-opens 'scientific' whaling debate". The error in question, however, relates to commercial whaling, not to scientific whaling. Although Norway cites science as a basis for the way in which it sets its own quota. scientific whaling means something quite different. namely killing whales for research purposes. Any member of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) has the right to conduct a research catch under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. 1946. The IWC has reviewed new research or scientific whaling programs for Japan and Norway since the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling began in 1986. In every case, the IWC advised Japan and Norway to reconsider the lethal aspects of their research programs. Last year, however, Norway started a commercial hunt in combination with its scientific catch, despite the IWC moratorium.

Whaling dispute continues

Apparently alarmed that an advertisement in Nature referencing the study of Baker and Palumbi (Science 265, 1538; 1994) might lend undeserved credence to the notion that illegal whale products find their way into Japanese markets, Milton Freeman (Nature 376, 11; 1995) reiterates the arguments of the Fisheries Agency of Japan (FAJ) that the study is fundamentally flawed. As Freeman's letter contains several serious errors, we feel obliged to comment.

A whale of a new species

Although four new species of whale have been identified since 1937, the absence of new ones for the past 28 years might be taken to mean that they had finally all been dis- covered. Not so - a new species of beaked whale, Mesoplodonperuvianus, is described by J. C. Reyes and colleagues in the latest issue of Marine Mammal Science.

Proposed Updates to the List of Recognised Species of Cetaceans

Addition of three species to the list is recommended based on recent literature. (Orcaella brevirostris) has been split into the Irrawaddy dolphin (O. brevirostris) and the Australian snubfin dolphin (O. heinsohni). Sotalia fluviatilis has been split into the riverine tucuxi (S. fluviatilis) and the marine "costero" (S. guianensis). Evidence to support both of these splits is convincing, and we recommend that they be recognized in the list. The existence of the Bryde's-whale-like species described in 2003 as Balaenoptera omurai has been confirmed with additional genetic (nuclear) data. While the species clearly exists, the nomenclature is still unsettled because the genetic identity of the holotype specimen of Balaenoptera edeni has not yet been determined. However, the name B. omurai is gaining wide usage in application to the new species, and we propose that it be used provisionally by the Scientific Committee pending the genetic identification of the B. edeni holotype. We recommend that India be urged to facilitate the identification. We recommend continued use of the name Balaenoptera edeni provisionally for both the "ordinary" large form and the small coastal form, recognizing that further genetic and morphological research may justify recognition of two species: B. brydei and B. edeni. We also recommend that any new specimen be referred to B. omurai only after its mtDNA has been sequenced and found to support the identification.

Skin lesions on blue whales off southern Chile: Possible conservation implications?

We report on three types of skin lesions in a population of blue whales, Balaenoptera musculus, off the northwestern coast of Isla Grande de Chiloe, Chile. These lesions were: (1) cookie-cutter shark, Isistius brasilensis, bites, (2) vesicular or blister lesions, and (3) a tattoo-like skin disease. The presence of these lesions was determined by the examining photos collected in 2006 and 2007 for a blue whale photo-identification project. We examined 289 photographs of 68 individuals for lesions. The cookie-cutter shark lesions are common on these blue whales and similar to those reported from other species of cetaceans. Skin peeling or shedding was observed on some whales and is believed to be a normal condition. Based on the photographs examined to date the vesicular lesions are more common than the tattoo-like lesions. The tattoo-like skin lesions was observed just on a single whale in 2007. The blister lesions were common on whales in both 2006 and 2007. The presence of blister lesions in both years may indicate that this “disease” will be present in the population for a long time. It is unknown if these lesions contribute to mortality of blue whales frequenting Chilean waters, but the tattoo-like skin lesions if shown to be a pox virus could cause neonatal and calf mortality. Additional investigations are needed that, as a minimum, must include the histological and genetic examination of the two types of disease from live or dead whales, especially the tattoo-like skin lesions. Until this work is undertaken, it will be impossible to determine if these lesions pose a conservation risk to the blue whales off Chile.

Whale Meat in the Japanese Diet

Junghans (Letters, 4 Apr., p. 6) points out several errors in Beary’s letter (14 December 1979, p. 1260) regarding the high concentrations of mercury in whale meat eaten by the Japanese. We would like to call attention to some additional errors in Beary’s letter.