Seasonal home ranges and fidelity to breeding sites among ringed seals

Population structure and patterns of habitat use among ringed seals (Phoca hispida) are poorly known, in part because seasonal movements have not been adequately documented. We monitored the movements of 98 ringed seals in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas between 1990 and 2006 using three forms of telemetry. In the winter—spring period (when the seals were occupying shorefast ice), we used radio and ultra-sonic tags to track movements above and below the ice, respectively. We used satellite-linked transmitters in summer and fall (when the seals ranged away from their winter sites) to track at-sea movements. In the shorefast ice habitat, the home ranges of 27 adult males ranged from\1 to 13.9 km2 (median = 0.628) while the home ranges of 28 adult females ranged from \1 to 27.9 km2 (median = 0.652). The 3-dimensional volumes used by 9 seals tracked acoustically under the ice averaged 0.07 (SD = 0.04) km3 for subadults and adult males and 0.13 (SD = 0.04) km3 for adult females. Three of the radio-tracked seals and 9 tracked by satellite ranged up to 1,800 km from their winter/spring home ranges in summer but returned to the same small (1–2 km2) sites during the ice-bound months in the following year. The restricted movements of ringed seals during the ice-bound season— including the breeding season—limits their foraging activities for most of the year and may minimize gene flow within the species.

Results from the April 2009 Gulf of Alaska Line Transect Survey (GOALS) in the Navy Training Exercise Area

Little is known about the present-day occurrence of cetaceans found in offshore waters in the Gulf of Alaska; however, whaling records and a few recent surveys have shown this area to be important habitat. The U.S. Navy maintains a maritime training area in the central Gulf of Alaska, east of Kodiak Island, and has requested additional information on marine mammal presence and use of this area. To describe the occurrence and distribution of marine mammals in and around the U.S. Navy training area, a line transect visual and acoustic survey was conducted 10-20 April 2009 from the NOAA ship Oscar Dyson. The primary survey area encompassed nearshore and offshore pelagic waters of the central Gulf of Alaska. Survey lines were designed to provide equal coverage of the nearshore and offshore habitat.

Energy Restriction During Breeding Gilt Development: An Economic Analysis

Swine production has increasingly become a lowmargin business. As costs of production have increased, producers are continuing to increase efficiency in both market pig production and gilt development. Restricting energy during gilt development reduces feeding costs and can enhance some productivity measures, but can also negatively impact other areas of production. Thus, the net economic returns from a restricted energy gilt development program are unclear. This study utilized gilt development and market pig production data for two genetic lines of hogs, LWxLR (a cross between industry Large White and Landrace) and L45X (a Nebraska line selected 23 generations for increased litter size) from Johnson and Miller and Johnson et al., to estimate the returns to finishing market hogs using conventional and restricted energy gilt development programs.

Tiered Pricing and Cost Functions: Are Equity, Cost Recovery and Economic Efficiency Compatible Goals?

Suppliers of water and energy are frequently natural monopolies, with their pricing regulated by governmental agencies. Pricing schemes are evaluated by the efficiency of the resource allocation they lead to, the capacity of the utilities to capture their costs and the distributional effects of the policies, in particular, impacts on the poor. One pricing approach has been average cost pricing, which guarantees cost recovery and allows utilities to provide their product at relatively low prices. However, average cost pricing leads to economically inefficient consumption levels, when sources of water and energy are limited and increasing the supply is costly. An alternative approach is increasing block rates (hereafter, IBR or tiered pricing), where individuals pay a low rate for an initial consumption block and a higher rate as they increase use beyond that block. An example of IBR is shown in Figure 1 (on next page), which shows a rate structure for residential water use. With the rates in Figure 1, a household would be charged $0.46 and $0.71 per hundred gallons for consumption below and above 21,000 gallons per month, respectively.