Contrasting abundance and residency patterns of two sympatric populations of transient killer whales (Orcinus orca) in the northern Gulf of Alaska

Two sympatric populations of “transient” (mammal-eating) killer whales were photo-identified over 27 years (1984–2010) in Prince William Sound and Kenai Fjords, coastal waters of the northern Gulf of Alaska (GOA). A total of 88 individuals were identified during 203 encounters with “AT1” transients (22 individuals) and 91 encounters with “GOA” transients (66 individuals). The median number of individuals identified annually was similar for both populations (AT1=7; GOA=8), but mark-recapture estimates showed the AT1 whales to have much higher fidelity to the study area, whereas the GOA whales had a higher exchange of individuals. Apparent survival estimates were generally high for both populations, but there was a significant reduction in the survival of AT1 transients after the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, with an abrupt decline in estimated abundance from a high of 22 in 1989 to a low of seven whales at the end of 2010. There was no detectable decline in GOA population abundance or survival over the same period, but abundance ranged from just 6 to 18 whales annually. Resighting data from adjacent coastal waters and movement tracks from satellite tags further indicated that the GOA whales are part of a larger population with a more extensive range, whereas AT1 whales are resident to the study area.

Medida da seção de choque difrativa simples dσ/d|t| a √s = 8 TeV no experimento CMS

A análise descrita nesta dissertação tem como objetivo a medida da seção de choque difrativa dσ/d|t| à energia no sistema do centro de massa de √s = 8 TeV. Os eventos usados para obter a seção de choque difrativa foram selecionados para processos de difração simples com um próton espalhado na região frontal e na região cinemática de 0,03 <|t| < 1,0 GeV e 0,03 < ξ < 0.1, usando os dados em comum obtidos em 2012 dos detectores CMS e TOTEM, o qual permite ter uma perspectiva mais detalhada do processo difrativo, devido à aceitação completa que oferece a combinação dos detectores. Os dados foram corrigidos devido à aceitação e eficiência do detector. A partir de uma parametrização exponencial da forma Ae ^Bt, o valor da inclinação do processo em que o próton espalhado é detectado em ambas as direções positiva da CMS é de B= -6,403 1,241 GeV- .

Spatial and temporal distribution of North Atlantic right whales (Eubalaena glacialis) in Cape Cod Bay, and implications for management

Cape Cod Bay (Massachusetts) is the only known winter and early spring feeding area for concentrations of the endangered North Atlantic right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) population. During January–May, 1998–2002, 167 aerial surveys were conducted (66,466 km of total survey effort), providing a complete representation of the spatiotemporal distribution of right whales in the bay during winter and spring. A total of 1553 right whales were sighted; some of these sightings were multiple sightings of the same individuals. Right whale distribution and relative abundance patterns were quantified as sightings per unit of effort (SPUE) and partitioned into 103 23-km2 cells and 12 2-week periods. Significant interannual variations in mean SPUE and timing of SPUE maxima were likely due to physically forced changes in available food resources. The area of greatest SPUE expanded and contracted during the season but its center remained in the eastern bay. Most cells with SPUE>0 were inside the federal critical habitat (CH) and this finding gave evidence of the need for management measures within CH boundaries to reduce anthropogenic mortality from vessel strikes and entanglement. There was significant within-season SPUE variability: low in December−January, increasing to a maximum in late February−early April, and declining to zero in May; and these results provide support for management measures from 1 January

Movements and spawning of white marlin (Tetrapturus albidus) and blue marlin (Makaira nigricans) off Punta Cana, Dominican Republic

With a focus on white marlin (Tetrapturus albidus), a concurrent electronic tagging and larval sampling effort was conducted in the vicinity of Mona Passage (off southeast Hispaniola), Dominican Republic, during April and May 2003. Objectives were 1) to characterize the horizontal and vertical movement of adults captured from the area by using pop-up satellite archival tags (PSATs); and 2) by means of larval sampling, to investigate whether fish were reproducing. Trolling from a sportfishing vessel yielded eight adult white marlin and one blue marlin (Makaira nigricans); PSAT tags were deployed on all but one of these individuals. The exception was a female white marlin that was unsuitable for tagging because of injury; the reproductive state of its ovaries was examined histologically. Seven of the PSATs reported data summaries for water depth, temperature, and light levels measured every minute for periods ranging from 28 to 40 days. Displacement of marlin from the location of release to the point of tag pop-up ranged from 3l.6 to 267.7 nautical miles (nmi) and a mean displacement was 3.4 nmi per day for white marlin. White and blue marlin mean daily displacements appeared constrained compared to the results of other marlin PSAT tagging studies. White marlin ovarian sections contained postovulatory follicles and final maturation-stage oocytes, which indicated recent and imminent spawning. Neuston tows (n=23) yielded 18 istiophorid larvae: eight were white marlin, four were blue marlin, and six could not be identified to species. We speculate that the constrained movement patterns of adults may be linked to reproductive activity for both marlin species, and, if true, these movement patterns may have several implications for management. Protection of the potentially important white marlin spawning ground near Mona Passage seems warranted, at least until further studies can be conducted on the temporal and spatial extent of reproduction and associated adult movement.

Forty Years of Winter: Cetaceans Observed During the Southbound Migration of Gray Whales, Eschrichtius robustus, Near Granite Canyon, Central California

From December to February in most years from 1967 to 2007, observers counted gray whales, Eschrichtius robustus, from shore sites south of Carmel in central California. In addition to gray whales, other cetacean species were also recorded. These observations were summarized and compared among survey platforms and to ocean conditions. Eleven cetacean species were identified including eight odontocete species (killer whale, Orcinus orca; Pacific white-sided dolphin, Lagenorhynchus obliquidens; common dolphin, Delphinus spp.; bottlenose dolphin, Tursiops truncatus, northern right whale dolphin, Lissodelphis borealis; Risso’s dolphin, Grampus griseus; Dall’s porpoise, Phocoenoides dalli; and harbor porpoise, Phocoena phocoena) and three mysticete species (humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae; minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata; and blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus). As expected, the detection of certain species among survey platforms (shore-based census watches, 25-power “Big Eye” binocular watches, and aerial surveys) was limited by species surfacing behavior and/or bathymetric preference. Comparisons among the shore-based census efforts showed a significant difference in sightings rates from 1967–84 (n = 14, mean = 0.11, SD = 0.11) to 1985–2007 (n = 11, mean = 1.48, SD = 0.47; t-Test: p < 0.001, df = 23). The warm period observed during the 1990’s may partially explain the increase in sighting rates and diversity of species observed at the census site compared to the much cooler temperatures of the 1970’s.

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.

Atlantic Blue Marlin, Makaira nigricans, and White Marlin, Tetrapterus albidus, Bycatch of the Japanese Pelagic Longline Fishery, 1960–2000

ABSTRACT—Since the late 1950’s, a multi-national longline fishery has operated throughout the Atlantic Ocean to supply the growing global demand for tunas (Scombridae) and swordfish, Xiphias gladius. Two species caught as bycatch include Atlantic blue marlin, Makaira nigricans, and white marlin, Tetrapterus albidus, referred to in this paper as “Atlantic marlin.” Pelagic longlining has consistently been the principal source of adult mortality for both species, which are currently depleted and have been so for more than two decades. In this paper, we examined aspects of the Atlantic marlin bycatch of the Japanese pelagic longline fishery from 1960 to 2000. Temporal and spatial patterns in effort, target catch (species combined), marlin bycatch, marlin catch-per-unit-effort (nominal CPUE), and ratios of marlin bycatch to target catch (B: T ratios) were analyzed. An objective was to reveal changes, if any, in marlin bycatch associated with the fishery’s target species “switch” (ca. 1980–87) from mostly surface-associated tunas to mostly the deeper-dwelling bigeye tuna, Thunnus obesus. The highest values of all variables examined occurred during the 1960’s and then fell by the second half of that decade. Since 1970, mean levels of fishing effort, target fish catches, and blue marlin landings have increased significantly, while blue marlin CPUE and B:T ratios have remained relatively stable. Concurrently, white marlin landings, CPUE, and B:T ratios have all declined. While results suggest the fishery’s target species change may have been a factor in lowering white marlin bycatch, the same cannot be said for blue marlin. Relative increases in blue marlin B:T ratios off the northeastern coast of South America and in the wider eastern Atlantic are cause for concern, as are continuing trends of CPUE decline for white marlin in this data set as well as others.

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.