Biological Background on Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops spp.) in the 'Live-Capture' Trade and Specifically on the Indo-Pacific Bottlenose Dolphin, T. Aduncus

The most significant cetacean trade items until commercial whaling all but ceased in the 1990s (aside from scientific exchanges of tissues etc.) were meat and blubber from baleen whales for human consumption. Since then, live dolphins and 'small' whales for display (and to some extent for research, military use, and 'therapy') have become the most significant cetacean 'products' in international trade. Trade in live cetaceans is presently dominated by bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops spp.), beluga whales (Debhinapterns leucas) and to a lesser extent killer whales (Orcinus orca) (Fisher and Reeves 2005). In the past, most of the dolphins in trade were common bottlenose dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) originating in the United States, Mexico and the Black Sea, but since the 1980s the United States has essentially stopped its capture-for-export activities and in 2001Mexico implemented a moratorium on live-captures. The source countries for dolphins in trade are now geographically diverse, but Cuba and Japan are currently major source nations for common bottlenose dolphins. Russia is the only current source for belugas. Russia and Japan have become the main potential sources for killer whales since Iceland ceased exporting them in the 1980s or early 1990s.

The western gray whale: a review of past exploitation, current status and potential threats

Gray whales (Eschrichtius robustus) occur along the eastern and western coastlines of the North Pacific as two geographically isolated populations and have traditionally been divided into the eastern (California-Chukchi) and western (Korean-Okhotsk) populations. Recent molecular comparisons confirm, based on differences in haplotypic frequencies, that these populations are genetically separated at the population-level. Both populations were commercially hunted, but only the eastern gray whale has returned to near pre-exploitation numbers. In contrast, the western population remains highly depleted, shows no apparent signs of recovery and its future survival remains uncertain. Research off Sakhalin Island, Russia between 1995 and 1999 has produced important new information on the present day conservation status of western gray whales and provided the basis for the World Conservation Union (IUCN) to list the population as 'Critically Endangered in 2000. The information presented here, in combination with potential impacts from anthropogenic threats throughout the range of this population, raises strong concerns about the recovery and continued survival of the western gray whale.

Cetacean sightings around the Republic of the Maldives, April 1998

In April 1998, as part of a project to collect biopsy samples of putative pygmy blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus brevicauda) in the waters around the Republic of the Maldives, Indian Ocean, incidental sightings of cetaceans encountered were recorded. Using modified line-transect methods and handheld binoculars, a total of 267 sightings of 16 species of whales and dolphins were recorded during 20 at-sea days in the northeastern part of the atoll. Significant results include the following: (1) cetaceans were abundant and species diversity was high, including nearly every pantropical species of pelagic cetacean; (2) the spinner dolphin (Stenella longirostris) was by far the most common species encountered (56 sightings) and also had the largest mean school size ( = 50.3 individuals); (3) blue whales were rare; only four individuals were sighted; (4) a large concentration of Bryde’s whales (28 sightings in two days) was apparently feeding in nearshore waters; (5) this paper reports the first records for the Maldives of Cuvier’s beaked whale (Ziphius cavirostris), Blainville’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon densirostris) and the dwarf sperm whale (Kogia sima): the latter was particularly common (17 sightings); (6) the spotted dolphin (Stenella attenuata) was rare and almost always associated with yellowfin tuna (Thunnus albacares), spinner dolphin, or seabirds, as has been reported in the eastern Pacific and western Indian oceans.

The whaling issue: Conservation, confusion, and casuistry

Morishita’s “multiple analysis”of the whaling issue [Morishita J. Multiple analysis of the whaling issue: Understanding the dispute by a matrix. Marine Policy 2006;30:802–8] is essentially a restatement of the Government of Japan’s whaling policy, which confuses the issue through selective use of data, unsubstantiated facts, and the vilification of opposing perspectives. Here, we deconstruct the major problems with Morishita’s article and provide an alternative view of the whaling dispute. For many people in this debate, the issue is not that some whales are not abundant, but that the whaling industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself or to honestly assess the status of potentially exploitable populations. This suspicion has its origin in Japan’s poor use of science, its often implausible stock assessments, its insistence that culling is an appropriate way to manage marine mammal populations, and its relatively recent falsification of whaling and fisheries catch data combined with a refusal to accept true transparency in catch and market monitoring. Japanese policy on whaling cannot be viewed in isolation, but is part of a larger framework involving a perceived right to secure unlimited access to global marine resources. Whaling is inextricably tied to the international fisheries agreements on which Japan is strongly dependent; thus, concessions made at the IWC would have potentially serious ramifications in other fora.

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].

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.

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.

Cetaceans of Southeast Alaska: Distribution and Seasonal Occurrence

Aim To assess the distribution, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends of cetaceans. Location The study area included all major inland waters of Southeast Alaska. Methods Between 1991 and 2007, cetacean surveys were conducted by observers who kept a constant watch when the vessel was underway and recorded all cetaceans encountered. For each species, we examined distributional patterns, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends. Analysis of variance (anova F) was used to test for differences in group sizes between multiple means, and Student’s t-test was used to detect differences between pairwise means. Cetacean seasonal occurrence and annual trends were investigated using a generalized linear model framework. Results Humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) were seen throughout the region, with numbers lowest in spring and highest in the fall. Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) and minke whale (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) distributions were more restricted than that reported for humpback whales, and the low number of sightings precluded evaluating seasonal trends. Three killer whale (Orcinus orca) eco-types were documented with distributions occurring throughout inland waters. Seasonal patterns were not detected or could not be evaluated for resident and offshore killer whales, respectively; however, the transient eco-type was more abundant in the summer. Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) were distributed throughout the region, with more sightings in spring and summer than in fall. Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena) distribution was clumped, with concentrations occurring in the Icy Strait/Glacier Bay and Wrangell areas and with no evidence of seasonality. Pacific white-sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus obliquidens) were observed only occasionally, with more sightings in the spring. For most species, group size varied on both an annual and seasonal basis. Main conclusions Seven cetacean species occupy the inland waters of Southeast Alaska, with distribution, group size, seasonal occurrence and annual trends varying by species. Future studies that compare spatial and temporal patterns with other features (e.g. oceanography, prey resources) may help in identifying the key factors that support the high density and biodiversity of cetaceans found in this region. An increased understanding of the region’s marine ecology is an essential step towards ensuring the long-term conservation of cetaceans in Southeast Alaska.

Determining spatial and temporal scales for management: lessons from whaling

Selection of the appropriate management unit is critical to the conservation of animal populations. Defining such units depends upon knowledge of population structure and upon the timescale being considered. Here, we examine the trajectory of eleven subpopulations of five species of baleen whales to investigate temporal and spatial scales in management. These subpopulations were all extirpated by commercial whaling, and no recovery or repopulation has occurred since. In these cases, time elapsed since commercial extinction ranges from four decades to almost four centuries. We propose that these subpopulations did not recover either because cultural memory of the habitat has been lost, because widespread whaling among adjacent stocks eliminated these as sources for repopulation, and/or because segregation following exploitation produced the abandonment of certain areas. Spatial scales associated with the extirpated subpopulations are frequently smaller than those typically employed in management. Overall, the evidence indicates that: (1) the time frame for management should be at most decadal in scope (i.e., <100 yr) and based on both genetic and nongenetic evidence of population substructure, and (2) at least some stocks should be defined on a smaller spatial scale than they currently are.

Killer Whale Predation on Belugas in Cook Inlet, Alaska: Implications for a Depleted Population

Killer whale predation on belugas in Cook Inlet, Alaska, has become a concern since the decline of these belugas was documented during the 1990s. Accordingly, killer whale sightings were compiled from systematic surveys, observer databases, and anecdotal accounts. Killer whales have been relatively common in lower Cook Inlet (at least 100 sightings from 1975 to 2002), but in the upper Inlet, north of Kalgin Island, sightings were infrequent (18 in 27 yr), especially prior to the 1990s. Beach cast beluga carcasses with teeth marks and missing flesh also provided evidence of killer whale predation. Most observed killer whale/beluga interactions were in the upper Inlet. During 11 of 15 observed interactions, belugas were obviously injured or killed, either through direct attacks or indirectly as a result of stranding. Assuming at least one beluga mortality occurred during the other four encounters, we can account for 21 belugas killed between 1985 and 2002. This would suggest a minimum estimate of roughly l/yr and does not include at least three instances where beluga calves accompanied an adult that was attacked.

Seasonal Variation in Reception of Fin Whale Calls at Five Geographic Areas in the North Pacific

In late August 1991 scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Marine Mammal Laboratory (NMML) and Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory (PMEL) began a pilot study to investigate the capability of hydrophones from the US. Navy’s fixed array system to detect large whales in the North Pacific by passive reception of their calls. PMEL had previously established a direct data link from five bottom-mounted arrays of the Navy SOSUS (Sound Surveillance System), via the Naval Oceanographic Processing Facility (NOPF) at Whidbey Island, Washington, to study low-level seafloor seismicity (Fox et al. 1994). PMEL subsequently provided NMML tapes of SOSUS hydrophone data from which whale calls were analyzed. As in an analogous study conducted in the North Atlantic (Nishimura and Conlon 1994, Clark 1995, Mellinger and Clark 1995), calls attributable to whales were received at each SOSUS site at rates that varied seasonally (Anonymous 1996).