Offshore Migratory Corridors and Aerial Photogrammetric Body Length Comparisons of Southbound Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the Southern California Bight, 1988–1990

Through most of their annual migration, gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, remain within 10 km of shore, but in the Southern California Bight many individuals migrate much farther from shore. This paper summarizes aerial survey and photogrammetric efforts to determine body lengths and temporal and spatial distributions of migratory gray whales in the southern portion of the Southern California Bight. Aerial surveys were flown along 13 east–west transects between lat. 32°35′N and 33°30′N during the southbound gray whale migratory seasons of 1988–90 in the Southern California Bight. Photogrammetry was used to obtain body length estimates of animals during some of the surveys. A total of 1,878 whales in 675 groups were sighted along 25,440 km of transect distance flown and 217 body lengths were measured. Using position and heading data, three major migratory pathways or corridors in the southern portion of the bight are defined. Those migrating offshore were split almost evenly between two corridors along the west sides of Santa Catalina and San Clemente Islands. These corridors converge on the mainland coast between San Diego and the United States–Mexico border. No whales larger than 11.5 m were photographed within 30 km of the mainland coast, suggesting that smaller, and presumably younger, whales use the coastal migratory corridor through the California Bight.

Historical Catches of Humpback Whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the North Atlantic Ocean: Estimates of Landings and Removals

Whaling for humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the North At- lantic Ocean has occurred in various forms (e.g. for local subsistence, for oil to be sold commercially, using hand harpoons and deck-mounted cannons, using oar-driven open boats and modern powered catcher boats) from the early 1600’s to the present. Several previous attempts to estimate the total numbers of humpback whales removed were considered close to comprehensive, but some uncertainties remained. Moreover, the statistical uncertainty was not consistently presented with the previous estimates. Therefore, we have pursued several avenues of additional data collection and conducted further analyses to close outstanding data gaps and address remaining issues. Our new estimates of landings and total removals of humpback whales from the North Atlantic are 21,476 (SE=214) and 30,842 (SE=655), respectively. These results include statistical uncertainty, reflect new data and improved analysis methods, and take account of some fisheries for which estimates had not been made previously. The new estimates are not sufficiently different from previous ones to resolve the major inconsistencies and discrepancies encountered in efforts to determine the conservation status of humpback whale populations in the North Atlantic.

Commercial Whaling, Especially for Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, and Humpback Whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, at California and Baja California Shore Stations in the 19th Century (1854–1899)

Shore whaling along North America’s California and Baja California coasts during 1854–99 was ancillary to the offshore and alongshore American whale fishery, which had begun in the North Pacific in the early 1800’s and was flourishing by the 1840’s. From its inception at Monterey, Calif., in the mid 1850’s, the shore fishery, involving open boats deployed from land to catch and tow whales for processing, eventually spread from Monterey south to San Diego and Baja California and north to Crescent City near the California–Oregon border. It had declined to a relict industry by the 1880’s, although sporadic efforts continued into the early 20th century. The main target species were gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, and humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, with the valuable North Pacific right whale, Eubalaena japonica, also pursued opportunistically. Catch data are grossly incomplete for most stations; no logbooks were kept for these operations as they were for high-seas whaling voyages. Even when good information is available on catch levels, usually as number of whales landed or quantity of oil produced, it is rarely broken down by species. Therefore, we devised methods for extrapolation, interpolation, pro rationing, correction, and informed judgment to produce time series of catches. The resulting estimates of landings from 1854 to 1899 are 3,150 (SE = 112) gray whales and 1,637 (SE = 62) humpback whales. The numbers landed should be multiplied by 1.2 to account for hunting loss (i.e. whales harpooned or shot but not recovered and processed).

Nineteenth-century Ship-based Catches of Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the Eastern North Pacific

The 19th century commercial ship-based fishery for gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, in the eastern North Pacific began in 1846 and continued until the mid 1870’s in southern areas and the 1880’s in the north. Henderson identified three periods in the southern part of the fishery: Initial, 1846–1854; Bonanza, 1855–1865; and Declining, 1866–1874. The largest catches were made by “lagoon whaling” in or immediately outside the whale population’s main wintering areas in Mexico—Magdalena Bay, Scammon’s Lagoon, and San Ignacio Lagoon. Large catches were also made by “coastal” or “alongshore” whaling where the whalers attacked animals as they migrated along the coast. Gray whales were also hunted to a limited extent on their feeding grounds in the Bering and Chukchi Seas in summer. Using all available sources, we identified 657 visits by whaling vessels to the Mexican whaling grounds during the gray whale breeding and calving seasons between 1846 and 1874. We then estimated the total number of such visits in which the whalers engaged in gray whaling. We also read logbooks from a sample of known visits to estimate catch per visit and the rate at which struck animals were lost. This resulted in an overall estimate of 5,269 gray whales (SE = 223.4) landed by the ship-based fleet (including both American and foreign vessels) in the Mexican whaling grounds from 1846 to 1874. Our “best” estimate of the number of gray whales removed from the eastern North Pacific (i.e. catch plus hunting loss) lies somewhere between 6,124 and 8,021, depending on assumptions about survival of struck-but-lost whales. Our estimates can be compared to those by Henderson (1984), who estimated that 5,542–5,507 gray whales were secured and processed by ship-based whalers between 1846 and 1874; Scammon (1874), who believed the total kill over the same period (of eastern gray whales by all whalers in all areas) did not exceed 10,800; and Best (1987), who estimated the total landed catch of gray whales (eastern and western) by American ship-based whalers at 2,665 or 3,013 (method-dependent) from 1850 to 1879. Our new estimates are not high enough to resolve apparent inconsistencies between the catch history and estimates of historical abundance based on genetic variability. We suggest several lines of further research that may help resolve these inconsistencies.

Catches of Humpback Whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, by the Soviet Union and Other Nations in the Southern Ocean, 1947–1973

From 1947 to 1973, the U.S.S.R. conducted a huge campaign of illegal whaling worldwide. We review Soviet catches of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in the Southern Ocean during this period, with an emphasis on the International Whaling Commission’s Antarctic Management Areas IV, V, and VI (the principal regions of illegal Soviet whaling on this species, south of Australia and western Oceania). Where possible, we summarize legal and illegal Soviet catches by year, Management Area, and factory fleet, and also include information on takes by other nations. Soviet humpback catches between 1947 and 1973 totaled 48,702 and break down as follows: 649 (Area I), 1,412 (Area II), 921 (Area III), 8,779 (Area IV), 22,569 (Area V), and 7,195 (Area VI), with 7,177 catches not currently assignable to area. In all, at least 72,542 humpback whales were killed by all operations (Soviet plus other nations) after World War II in Areas IV (27,201), V (38,146), and VI (7,195). More than one-third of these (25,474 whales, of which 25,192 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 at Norfolk Island. When compared to recent estimates of abundance and initial population size, 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.

The Geographic Distribution of Bowhead Whales, Balaena mysticetus, in the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas: Evidence from Whaleship Records, 1849–1914

We have extracted, digitized, and analyzed information about bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus, contained in records of whaling cruises that were undertaken in the Bering, Chukchi, and Beaufort Seas from 1849 to 1914. Our database consists of 65,000 days of observations which provide insights into whether this bowhead stock may comprise more than one population.

History of Whaling and Estimated Kill of Right Whales, Balaena glacialis, in the Northeastern United States, 1620–1924

This study, part of a broader investigation of the history of exploitation of right whales, Balaena glacialis, in the western North Atlantic, emphasizes U.S. shore whaling from Maine to Delaware (from lat. 45°N to 38°30'N) in the period 1620–1924. Our broader study of the entire catch history is intended to provide an empirical basis for assessing past distribution and abundance of this whale population. Shore whaling may have begun at Cape Cod, Mass., in the 1620’s or 1630’s; it was certainly underway there by 1668. Right whale catches in New England waters peaked before 1725, and shore whaling at Cape Cod, Martha’s Vineyard, and Nantucket continued to decline through the rest of the 18th century. Right whales continued to be taken opportunistically in Massachusetts, however, until the early 20th century. They were hunted in Narragansett Bay, R.I., as early as 1662, and desultory whaling continued in Rhode Island until at least 1828. Shore whaling in Connecticut may have begun in the middle 1600’s, continuing there until at least 1718. Long Island shore whaling spanned the period 1650–1924. From its Dutch origins in the 1630’s, a persistent shore whaling enterprise developed in Delaware Bay and along the New Jersey shore. Although this activity was most profi table in New Jersey in the early 1700’s, it continued there until at least the 1820’s. Whaling in all areas of the northeastern United States was seasonal, with most catches in the winter and spring. Historically, right whales appear to have been essentially absent from coastal waters south of Maine during the summer and autumn. Based on documented references to specific whale kills, about 750–950 right whales were taken between Maine and Delaware, from 1620 to 1924. Using production statistics in British customs records, the estimated total secured catch of right whales in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania between 1696 and 1734 was 3,839 whales based on oil and 2,049 based on baleen. After adjusting these totals for hunting loss (loss-rate correction factor = 1.2), we estimate that 4,607 (oil) or 2,459 (baleen) right whales were removed from the stock in this region during the 38-year period 1696–1734. A cumulative catch estimate of the stock’s size in 1724 is 1,100–1,200. Although recent evidence of occurrence and movements suggests that right whales continue to use their traditional migratory corridor along the U.S. east coast, the catch history indicates that this stock was much larger in the 1600’s and early 1700’s than it is today. Right whale hunting in the eastern United States ended by the early 1900’s, and the species has been protected throughout the North Atlantic since the mid 1930’s. Among the possible reasons for the relatively slow stock recovery are: the very small number of whales that survived the whaling era to become founders, a decline in environmental carrying capacity, and, especially in recent decades, mortality from ship strikes and entanglement in fishing gear.

The Great Whales: History and Status of Six Species Listed as Endangered Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973

In the history of whaling from prehistoric to modern times, the large whales, sometimes called the “great whales,” were hunted most heavily owing in part to their corresponding value in oil, meat, and baleen. Regional populations of North Atlantic right whales, Eubalaena glacialis glacialis, were already decimated by 1700, and the North Atlantic gray whale, Eschrichtius robustus, was hunted to extinction by the early 1700’s (Mitchell and Mead1).

Food habits of Sowerby's beaked whales (Mesoplodon bidens) taken in the pelagic drift gillnet fishery of the western North Atlantic

We describe the food habits of the Sowerby’s beaked whale (Mesoplodon bidens) from observations of 10 individuals taken as bycatch in the pelagic drift gillnet fishery for Swordfish (Xiphias gladius) in the western North Atlantic and 1 stranded individual from Kennebunk, Maine. The stomachs of 8 bycaught whales were intact and contained prey. The diet of these 8 whales was dominated by meso- and benthopelagic fishes that composed 98.5% of the prey items found in their stomachs and cephalopods that accounted for only 1.5% of the number of prey. Otoliths and jaws representing at least 31 fish taxa from 15 families were present in the stomach contents. Fishes, primarily from the families Moridae (37.9% of prey), Myctophidae (22.9%), Macrouridae (11.2%), and Phycidae (7.2%), were present in all 8 stomachs. Most prey were from 5 fish taxa: Shortbeard Codling (Laemonema barbatulum) accounted for 35.3% of otoliths, Cocco’s Lanternfish (Lobianchia gemellarii) contributed 12.9%, Marlin-spike (Nezumia bairdii) composed 10.8%, lanternfishes (Lampanyctus spp.) accounted for 8.4%; and Longfin Hake (Phycis chesteri) contributed 6.7%. The mean number of otoliths per stomach was 1196 (range: 327–3452). Most of the fish prey found in the stomachs was quite small, ranging in length from 4.0 to 27.7 cm. We conclude that the Sowerby’s beaked whales that we examined in this study fed on large numbers of relatively small meso- and benthopelagic fishes that are abundant along the slope and shelf break of the western North Atlantic.

Distribution and abundance of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and other marine mammals off the northern Washington coast

We examined the summer distribution of marine mammals off the northern Washington coast based on six ship transect surveys conducted between 1995 and 2002, primarily from the NOAA ship McArthur. Additionally, small boat surveys were conducted in the same region between 1989 and 2002 to gather photographic identification data on humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and killer whales (Orcinus orca) to examine movements and population structure. In the six years of ship survey effort, 706 sightings of 15 marine mammal species were made. Humpback whales were the most common large cetacean species and were seen every year and a total of 232 sightings of 402 animals were recorded during ship surveys. Highest numbers were observed in 2002, when there were 79 sightings of 139 whales. Line-transect estimates for humpback whales indicated that about 100 humpback whales inhabited these waters each year between 1995 and 2000; in 2002, however, the estimate was 562 (CV= 0.21) whales. A total of 191 unique individuals were identified photographically and mark recapture estimates also indicated that the number of animals increased from under 100 to over 200 from 1995 to 2002. There was only limited interchange of humpback whales between this area and feeding areas off Oregon and California. Killer whales were also seen on every ship survey and represented all known ecotypes of the Pacific Northwest, including southern and northern residents, transients, and offshore-type killer whales. Dall’s porpoise (Phocoenoides dalli) were the most frequently sighted small cetacean; abundance was estimated at 181−291 individuals, except for 2002 when we observed dramatically higher numbers (876, CV= 0.30). Northern fur seals (Callorhinus ursinus) and elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) were the most common pinnipeds observed. There were clear habitat differences related to distance offshore and water depth for different species.

Predation of tuna longline catches in the Indian Ocean, by killer-whales and sharks

Since the inception of the tuna long line fishery in the Indian Ocean in 1952, an annual average of 10% of the number of tunas and spear fishes caught continues to be damaged by sharks. In spite of the fact that this method of fishing for tunas is also resulting in the exploitation of a significant quantity of the tuna-preying sharks, the extent of the damage by these predators continues to be fairly constant. Quite often the damaged tunas are acceptable to the market, especially for canning. On the other hand report of damage caused by killer-whales, occasional at the beginning of the fishery in the Indian Ocean, has been increasing in frequency each year and since 1960 tuna fishermen have been desperately calling for ways and means of reducing the damage caused by these mammals. Unlike sharks killer-whales do not get hooked on the tuna long line; and tunas damaged by killer-whales are almost always unfit even for canning. The problem of predation by killer-whales exists not only in the whole of the Indian Ocean including the Timor and Banda Seas but also in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, especially in the seas around New Guinea, Samoa, Caroline and Marshal Islands. The seriousness of this problem of predation was highlighted at the annual tuna research conference held in Kochi, Japan, in February 1963, and steps were taken to devote considerable attention to this problem.

The hearing gene Prestin unites echolocating bats and whales

This work was supported by a grant from Key Disciplines of Zoology in Sowthwest Forestry University (XKX200903).

Retroposon analysis of major cetacean lineages: The monophyly of toothed whales and the paraphyly of river dolphins

SINE (short interspersed element) insertion analysis elucidates contentious aspects in the phylogeny of toothed whales and dolphins (Odontoceti), especially river dolphins. Here, we characterize 25 informative SINEs inserted into unique genomic loci during evolution of odontocetes to construct a cladogram. and determine a total of 2.8 kb per taxon of the flanking sequences of these SINE loci to estimate divergence times among lineages. We demonstrate that: (i) Odontocetes are monophyletic; (ii) Ganges River dolphins, beaked whales, and ocean dolphins diverged (in this order) after sperm whales; (iii) three other river dolphin taxa, namely the Amazon, La Plata, and Yangtze river dolphins, form a monophyletic group with Yangtze River dolphins being the most basal; and (iv) the rapid radiation of extant cetacean lineages occurred some 28-33 million years B.P., in strong accord with the fossil record. The combination of SINE and flanking sequence analysis suggests a topology and set of divergence times for odontocete relationships, offering alternative explanations for several long-standing problems in cetacean evolution.

Large bio-geographical shifts in the north-eastern Atlantic Ocean: From the subpolar gyre, via plankton, to blue whiting and pilot whales

Pronounced changes in fauna, extending from the English Channel in the south to the Barents Sea in the north-east and off Greenland in the north-west, have occurred in the late 1920s, the late 1960s and again in the late 1990s. We attribute these events to exchanges of subarctic and subtropical water masses in the north-eastern North Atlantic Ocean, associated with changes in the strength and extent of the subpolar gyre. These exchanges lead to variations in the influence exerted by the subarctic or Lusitanian biomes on the intermediate faunistic zone in the north-eastern Atlantic. This strong and persistent bottom-up bio-physical link is demonstrated using a numerical ocean general circulation model and data on four trophically connected levels in the food chain – phytoplankton, zooplankton, blue whiting, and pilot whales. The plankton data give a unique basin-scale depiction of these changes, and a long pilot whale record from the Faroe Islands offers an exceptional temporal perspective over three centuries. Recent advances in simulating the dynamics of the subpolar gyre suggests a potential for predicting the distribution of the main faunistic zones in the north-eastern Atlantic a few years into the future, which might facilitate a more rational management of the commercially important fisheries in this region.