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].

Ringed and bearded seal densities in the eastern Chukchi Sea, 1999–2000

Aerial surveys were conducted in 1999 and 2000 to estimate the densities of ringed (Phoca hispida) and bearded (Erignathus barbatus) seals in the eastern Chukchi Sea. Survey lines were focused mainly on the coastal zone within 37 km of the shoreline, with additional lines flown 148–185 km offshore to assess how densities of seals changed as a function of distance from shore. Satellite-linked time-depth recorders were attached to ringed seals in both years to evaluate the time spent basking on the ice surface. Haulout patterns indicated that ringed seals transitioned to basking behavior in late May and early June, and that the largest proportion of seals (60–68%) was hauled out between 0830 and 1530 local solar time. Ringed seals were relatively common in nearshore fast ice and pack ice, with lower densities in offshore pack ice. The average density of ringed seals was 1.91 seals km-2 in 1999 (range 0.37– 16.32) and 1.62 seals km-2 in 2000 (range 0.42–19.4), with the highest densities of ringed seals found in coastal waters south of Kivalina and near Kotzebue Sound. The estimated abundance of ringed seals for the entire study area was similar in 1999 (252,488 seals, SE=47,204) and 2000 (208,857 seals, SE=25,502). Bearded seals were generally more common in offshore pack ice, with the exception of high bearded seal numbers observed near the shore south of Kivalina. Bearded seal densities were not adjusted for haulout behavior, and therefore, abundance was not estimated. Unadjusted average bearded seal density was 0.07 seals km-2 in 1999 (range 0.011–0.393) and 0.14 seals km-2 in 2000 (range 0.009– 0.652). Levels of primary productivity, benthic biomass, and fast ice distribution may influence the distributions of ringed and bearded seals in the Chukchi Sea. Information on movement and haulout behavior of ringed and bearded seals would be very useful for designing future surveys.

Hunting and social behaviour of leopard seals (Hydrurga leptonyx) at Seal Island, South Shetland Islands, Antarctica

The hunting behavior of leopard seals Hydrurga leptonyx was monitored opportunistically at Seal Island, South Shetland Islands, during the austral summers from 1986/87 to 1994/95. Leopard seals used several methods to catch Antarctic fur seal pups Arctocephalus gazella and chinstrap penguins Pygoscelis antarctica, and individuals showed different hunting styles and hunting success. One to two leopard seals per year were responsible for an average of 60% of observed captures of fur seal pups. Leopard seals preyed on penguins throughout the summer, but preyed on fur seal pups only between late December and mid-February. Hunting behavior differed significantly between different locations on the island; fur seals were hunted only at one colony, and penguins were hunted in several areas. The relative abundance of prey types, size of prey in relation to predator, and specialization of individual leopard seals to hunt fur seal prey probably influence individual prey preferences among leopard seals. On five occasions, two leopard seals were seen together on Seal Island. Possible interpretations of the relationship between the interacting leopard seals included a mother-offspring relationship, a consorting male-female pair, and an adult leopard seal followed by an unrelated juvenile. In two incidents at Seal Island, two leopard seals were observed interacting while hunting: one seal captured fur seal pups and appeared to release them to the other seal. Observations of leopard seals interacting during hunting sessions were difficult to confirm as co-operative hunting, but they strongly implied that the two seals were not agonistic toward one another. The hunting success of individual leopard seals pursuing penguins or fur seals is probably high enough for co-operative hunting not to become a common hunting strategy; however, it may occur infrequently when it increases the hunting productivity of the seals.

Taking account of dependent species in management of the Southern Ocean krill fishery: estimating crabeater seal abundance off east Antarctica

1. The crabeater seal Lobodon carcinophaga is considered to be a key species in the krill-based food web of the Southern Ocean. Reliable estimates of the abundance of this species are necessary to allow the development of multispecies, predator–prey models as a basis for management of the krill fishery in the Southern Ocean. 2. A survey of crabeater seal abundance was undertaken in 1500 000 km2 of pack-ice off east Antarctica between longitudes 64–150° E during the austral summer of 1999/2000. Sighting surveys, using double observer line transect methods, were conducted from an icebreaker and two helicopters to estimate the density of seals hauled out on the ice in survey strips. Satellite-linked dive recorders were deployed on a sample of seals to estimate the probability of seals being hauled out on the ice at the times of day when sighting surveys were conducted. Model-based inference, involving fitting a density surface, was used to infer densities in the entire survey region from estimates in the surveyed areas. 3. Crabeater seal abundance was estimated to be between 0.7 and 1.4 million animals (with 95% confidence), with the most likely estimate slightly less than 1 million. 4. Synthesis and applications. The estimation of crabeater seal abundance in Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) management areas off east Antarctic where krill biomass has also been estimated recently provides the data necessary to begin extending from single-species to multispecies management of the krill fishery. Incorporation of all major sources of uncertainty allows a precautionary interpretation of crabeater abundance and demand for krill in keeping with CCAMLR’s precautionary approach to management. While this study focuses on the crabeater seal and management of living resources in the Southern Ocean, it has also led to technical and theoretical developments in survey methodology that have widespread potential application in ecological and resource management studies, and will contribute to a more fundamental understanding of the structure and function of the Southern Ocean ecosystem.

Population Growth of Antarctic Fur Seals: Limitation by a Top Predator, The Leopard Seal?

Antarctic fur seals (Arctocephalus gazella) in the South Shetland Islands are recovering from 19th-century exploitation more slowly than the main population at South Georgia. To document demographic changes associated with the recovery in the South Shetlands, we monitored fur seal abundance and reproduction in the vicinity of Elephant Island during austral summers from 1986/1987 through 1994/1995. Total births, mean and variance of birth dates, and average daily mortality rates were estimated from daily live pup counts at North Cove (NC) and North Annex (NA) colonies on Seal Island. Sightings of leopard seals (Hydrurga leptonyx) and incidents of leopard seal predation on fur seal pups were recorded opportunistically during daily fur seal research at both sites. High mortality of fur seal pups, attributed to predation by leopard seals frequently observed at NC, caused pup numbers to decline rapidly between January and March (i.e., prior to weaning) each year and probably caused a long-term decline in the size of that colony. The NA colony, where leopard seals were never observed, increased in size during the study. Pup mortality from causes other than leopard seal predation appeared to be similar at the two sites. The number of pups counted at four locations in the Elephant Island vicinity increased slowly, at an annual rate of 3.8%, compared to rates as high as 11% at other locations in the South Shetland Islands. Several lines of circumstantial evidence are consistent with the hypothesis that leopard seal predators limit the growth of the fur seal population in the Elephant Island area and perhaps in the broader population in the South Shetland Islands. The sustained growth of this fur seal population over many decades rules out certain predator–prey models, allowing inference about the interaction between leopard seals and fur seals even though it is less thoroughly studied than predator–prey systems of terrestrial vertebrates of the northern hemisphere. Top-down forces should be included in hypotheses for future research on the factors shaping the recovery of the fur seal population in the South Shetland Islands.

Revision of Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae)

A comprehensive revision of the Subfamily Parandrinae (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae) from the Hawaiian, Australasian, Oriental, and Japanese regions is presented. Seven (7) new genera are described: Komiyandra, Melanesiandra, Papuandra, Storeyandra, Hawaiiandra, Caledonandra, and Malukandra. All known, indigenous species from these regions are assigned to new genera resulting in the following new combinations: Komiyandra janus (Bates, 1875), K. shibatai (Hayashi, 1963), K. formosana (Miwa and Mitono, 1939), K. lanyuana (Hayashi, 1981), Melanesiandra striatifrons (Fairmaire, 1879), M. solomonensis (Arigony, 1983), Caledonandra austrocaledonica (Montrouzier, 1861), C. passandroides (Thomson, 1867), Hawaiiandra puncticeps (Sharp, 1878), Malukandra heterostyla (Lameere, 1902), Storeyandra frenchi (Blackburn, 1895), and Papuandra araucariae (Gressitt, 1959). Thirty-one (31) new species are described: Komiyandra javana, K. nayani, K. ohbayashii, K. luzonica, K. philippinensis, K. mindanao, K. mehli, K. vivesi, K. lombokia, K. sulawesiana, K. irianjayana, K. menieri, K. sangihe, K. mindoro, K. niisatoi, K. drumonti, K. cabigasi, K. koni, K. johkii, K. poggii, K. uenoi, Melanesiandra bougainvillensis, M. birai, Papuandra gressitti, P. weigeli, P. queenslandensis, P. norfolkensis, P. rothschildi, P. oberthueri, Malukandra jayawijayana and M. hornabrooki. A lectotype is designated for Parandra janus Bates, 1875. Komiyandra janus (Bates, 1875) is excluded from nearly all previously reported locations, even one location given in the original description, and is now only known from Sulawesi. A paralectotype of Parandra janus Bates, 1875, is designated as a paratype for Komiyandra menieri, new species. Komiyandra formosana is excluded from the Japanese (Ryukyu Is.) fauna. Parandra vitiensis Nonfried, 1894, is again placed in synonymy with P. striatifrons Fairmaire (now Melanesiandra striatifrons). A neotype is designated for Parandra austrocaledonica Montrouzier, 1861. A lectotype is designated for Parandra janus Bates, 1875. The lectotype of Parandra gabonica Thomson, 1858, designated by Quentin and Villiers (1975) is considered invalid. Papuandra araucariae (Gressitt, 1959) is excluded from the fauna of Norfolk Island. The African species Stenandra kolbei (Lameere, 1903) is reported for the first time from Asia (N. Vietnam). Keys are presented to separate worldwide genera of Parandrini and all species within the study regions. Illustrations are provided for all species including many special characters to differentiate genera and species.

Implantation of Subcutaneous Radio Transmitters in the Harbor Seal (Phoca vitulina)

Radio telemetry has become a standard tool for studying the behavior, physiology, life history traits, and population dynamics of marine mammals. Radio transmitters typically are attached to the hind flippers of pinnipeds or glued to the fur using marine epoxy or other cyanocrylare adhesives (Fedak et al. 1983, Bengtson 1993, Jeffries et al. 1993). Longterm data acquisition is difficult, however, because radio-flipper transmitters commonly tear from the webbing of the flipper and instruments that are glued to the fur are shed during the seasonal molt.

Invasive Litter, Not an Invasive Insectivore, Determines Invertebrate Communities in Hawaiian Forests

In Hawaii, invasive plants have the ability to alter litter-based food chains because they often have litter traits that differ from native species. Additionally, abundant invasive predators, especially those representing new trophic levels, can reduce prey. The relative importance of these two processes on the litter invertebrate community in Hawaii is important, because they could affect the large number of endemic and endangered invertebrates. We determined the relative importance of litter resources, represented by leaf litter of two trees, an invasive nitrogen-fixer, Falcataria moluccana, and a native tree, Metrosideros polymorpha, and predation of an invasive terrestrial frog, Eleutherodactylus coqui, on leaf litter invertebrate abundance and composition. Principle component analysis revealed that F. moluccana litter creates an invertebrate community that greatly differs from that found in M. polymorpha litter. We found that F. moluccana increased the abundance of non-native fragmenters (Amphipoda and Isopoda) by 400% and non-native predaceous ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) by 200%. E. coqui had less effect on the litter invertebrate community; it reduced microbivores by 40% in F. moluccana and non-native ants by 30% across litter types. E. coqui stomach contents were similar in abundance and composition in both litter treatments, despite dramatic differences in the invertebrate community. Additionally, our results suggest that invertebrate community differences between litter types did not cascade to influence E. coqui growth or survivorship. In conclusion, it appears that an invasive nitrogen-fixing tree species has a greater influence on litter invertebrate community abundance and composition than the invasive predator, E. coqui.

THE MONK PARAKEET IN NEW YORK

Attention was focused on the Monk Parakeet (Myiopsitta monachus) in New York State in 1971 when the first successful breeding record was documented for the state although Monk Parakeets had been noticed in New York and New Jersey since 1968 (Bull, 1971). Since 1971 awareness of the bird’s potential for becoming an established species in New York has spread through several segments of the state’s populace. This awareness has been created primarily through two articles in the magazine published by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), The Conservationist (Trimm, 1972) (Trimm, 1973); several articles in popular magazines, Parade, Yankee, Sports Afield; journals, American Birds and Kingbird; county cooperative extension bulletins and newsletters; and in numerous newspapers throughout the Northeast. The Monk Parakeet is about 12 inches long (Mourning Dove size), weighs about 90 grams, and is native to Argentina and other temperate regions of South America. The bird is pale green with a soft gray forehead and breast, some blue on the flight feathers and a flesh-colored bill. They are gregarious throughout the year. The Monk Parakeet differs from other members of the parrot family in that it builds large communal nests of sticks. Each pair of parakeets has its own private compartment with a downward-pointing tunnel entrance from the inner unlined compartment. The nest is used as sleeping quarters year round and live twigs cut by the bird are continually added to the structure (Bump, 1971). A brief review of the bird’s history in New York shows that the bird remained a mere curiosity until 1972. At that time, because the population seemed to be increasing and because information gleaned from the literature and from those with first-hand experience with the bird in its native haunts of South America indicated that the bird posed a serious potential agricultural problem, several prominent individuals, birding and conservation societies, and state and federal agencies took the position that the bird should be retrieved or removed from the wild.

HAWAIIAN SUGAR CANE RAT CONTROL METHODS AND PROBLEMS

The problem of rats in our Hawaiian sugar cane fields has been with us for a long time. Early records tell of heavy damage at various times on all the islands where sugar cane is grown. Many methods were tried to control these rats. Trapping was once used as a control measure, a bounty was used for a time, gangs of dogs were trained to catch the rats as the cane was harvested. Many kinds of baits and poisons were used. All of these methods were of some value as long as labor was cheap. Our present day problem started when the labor costs started up and the sugar industry shifted to long cropping. Until World War II cane was an annual crop. After the war it was shifted to a two year crop, three years in some places. Depending on variety, location, and soil we raise 90 to 130 tons of sugar cane per acre, which produces 7 to 15 tons of sugar per acre for a two year crop. This sugar brings about $135 dollars per ton. This tonnage of cane is a thick tangle of vegetation. The cane grows erect for almost a year, as it continues to grow it bends over at the base. This allows the stalk to rest on the ground or on other stalks of cane as it continues to grow. These stalks form a tangled mat of stalks and dead leaves that may be two feet thick at the time of harvest. At the same time the leafy growing portion of the stalk will be sticking up out of the mat of cane ten feet in the air. Some of these individual stalks may be 30 feet long and still growing at the time of harvest. All this makes it very hard to get through a cane field as it is one long, prolonged stumble over and through the cane. It is in this mat of cane that our three species of rats live. Two species are familiar to most people in the pest control field. Rattus norvegicus and Rattus rattus. In the latter species we include both the black rat and the alexandrine rats, their habits seem to be the same in Hawaii. Our third rat is the Polynesian rat, Rattus exlans, locally called the Hawaiian rat. This is a small rat, the average length head to tip of tail is nine inches and the average body weight is 65 grams. It has dark brownish fur like the alexandrine rats, and a grey belly. It is found in Indonesia, on most of the islands of Oceania and in New Zealand. All three rats live in our cane fields and the brushy and forested portions of our islands. The norway and alexandrine rats are found in and around the villages and farms, the Polynesian rat is only found in the fields and waste areas. The actual amount of damage done by rats is small, but destruction they cause is large. The rats gnaw through the rind of the cane stalk and eat the soft juicy and sweet tissues inside. They will hollow out one to several nodes per stalk attacked. The effect to the cane stalk is like ringing a tree. After this attack the stalk above the chewed portion usually dies, and sometimes the lower portion too. If the rat does not eat through the stalk the cane stalk could go on living and producing sugar at a reduced rate. Generally an injured stalk does not last long. Disease and souring organisms get in the injury and kill the stalk. And if this isn't enough, some insects are attracted to the injured stalk and will sometimes bore in and kill it. An injured stalk of cane doesn't have much of a chance. A rat may only gnaw out six inches of a 30 foot stalk and the whole stalk will die. If the rat only destroyed what he ate we could ignore them but they cause the death of too much cane. This dead, dying, and souring cane cause several direct and indirect tosses. First we lose the sugar that the cane would have produced. We harvest all of our cane mechanically so we haul the dead and souring cane to the mill where we have to grind it with our good cane and the bad cane reduces the purity of the sugar juices we squeeze from the cane. Rats reduce our income and run up our overhead.