SC/66a/SPxx

Proponents’ additional responses to the Report of theExpert Panel to review the proposal for NEWREP-A
The Government of JapanThe Proposed Research Plan for New Scientific Whale Research Program in the Antarctic Ocean (NEWREP-A)(Government of Japan, 2014) was submitted to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in conformity with
Paragraph 30 of the Schedule to the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) and Annex
P (IWC, 2013) as a possible basis for issuing special permits in accordance with Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the
ICRW. The IWC Scientific Committee (IWC SC) carried out a review of the NEWREP-A research plan througha workshop of specialists (Review Panel), which offered several scientific recommendations to improve theresearch plan (IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep6). The proponents provided preliminary response to the report of theExpert Panel and noted that additional analyses and information will be submitted to the IWC SC (Governmentof Japan, 2015 SC/66a/SP1).

The objective of this document is to provide additional analyses and information, particularly on two specifictopics:i) Some analytical updates on NEWREP-A, andii) The research plan for the NEWREP-A’s dedicated sighting survey in 2015/16 austral summer season (=season).
Topic i) is related mainly to recommendations 1, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 26 offered by the NEWREP-A Review Panel
while topic ii) is related to recommendations 4-5 (feasibility studies on non-lethal methods), 6-7 (sighting
surveys), and 15 (krill surveys) (see Government of Japan, 2015 SC/66a/SP1).

Annex 1 shows the results on topic i) while Annex 2 shows the research plan for topic ii).

REFERENCES
Government of Japan. 2014. Proposed research plan for New Scientific Whale Research Program in the
Antarctic Ocean (NEWREP-A). 101pp.
Government of Japan. 2015. Proponents’ preliminary response to the Report of the Expert Panel to review the
proposal for NEWREP-A. Paper SC/66a/SP1 presented to IWC Scientific Committee, May 2015
(unpublished). 33pp. [Paper available at the IWC Office].
International Whaling Commission. 2013. Process for the review of special permit proposals and research resultsfrom existing and completed permits. J. Cetacean. Res. Manage. 14 (suppl.): 463-8.
International Whaling Commission. 2015. Report of the Expert Panel to Review the proposal by Japan for
NEWREP-A, 7-10 February 2015, Tokyo, Japan. Paper SC/66a/Rep6 presented to IWC ScientificCommittee, May 2015 (unpublished). 62pp. [Paper available at the IWC Office].

ANNEX 1
Some analytical updates on NEWREP-A
1. INTRODUCTION
The Review Panel carefully evaluated the proposal of original “NEWREP-A” program submitted to
the IWC Scientific Committee, and it made a number of recommendations in its report for further
clarification of the program. The proponent (the Government of Japan) has responded to the review
report by indicating that quantitative analyses (Recommendations 1, 11, 12, 13 and 26) would be done
and submitted as a paper by 2015 IWC/SC (see Table 1). This paper aims at reporting on progress.
Table 1. Extracts of recommendations made in the Panel Review Report and “planned and achieved”.
Proponents’ responses

Review Panel recommendations# (Item)

Summary

Timeframe

Planned works

Planned timeframe

Current
status1(2.1.2)

Evaluate the level of improvement thatmight be expected either in the SCAA orin RMP performance by improved
precision in biological parameters using
simulation studies including updated
Implementation Simulation Trials

Within 6
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted

Before 2015
IWC/SC

On-goingin a), e)2(3.1.3)

Analyses to distinguish between 2-stocks
with mixing versus isolation by distanceWithin 3
monthsAnalyses to be conducted toelucidate whether the genetic
and morphometric data areconsistent with isolation by
distance hypothesis

Within program(results to bepresented to 2016
IWC SC meeting)-3(3.1.3)

Simulation study to examine how
additional sampling could be expected to
improve precision and/or reduce bias inestimates of mixing rates

Within 3
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted

Within program(results to bepresented to 2016
IWC SC meeting)-10(3.4.3.1)

Evaluate the effect on SCAA of assuming‘resting’ females are immature females

Within 6
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted

Before start of the
program-11(3.4.3.2)

Update SCAA with respect todensity-dependence following Punt et al.,in press, and stock mixing based on
existing data

Within 3
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted

Before 2015
IWC/SC

Punt’smodel used.
Party in c)
below

12
(3.4.3.2)

Identify more fully the data to be used to
inform the time-varying natural mortality
in the SCAA and analyze existing data to
determine the feasibility and accuracy ofobtaining such estimates.

Within 6
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted in the context ofwork related torecommendation1 above

Before 2015
IWC/SCTo be
conducted

13(3.4.3.2)

Develop metrics to evaluate the benefitsof including time varying ASM data in the
SCAA

Within 3
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted in the context of thework related torecommendation 1 above

Before 2015
IWC/SCSome
analysesconducted
in b) below

25(3.11.2)

Provide an improved outline of the
proposed ecosystem and multispecies
model structures and provide a data gap
analysis

Within 3
monthsMore detailed description ofunderlying data and data
quality related to ecosystemmodelling to be provided, withan explanation of how the
information will be acquired.
Data gaps will be identified

Within program(preliminary results
will be presented to2016 IWC/SC andfinal ones will bepresented to 2017
IWC/SC)-26(4.3.2)

Provide a thorough power analysis ofsample sizes required to detect change in
ASM and follow the otherrecommendations in this Item

Within 3
monthsSimulation study to be
conducted

Before 2015
IWC/SC

Conducted- see d)below

2

Some analyses were conducted to cover Recommendations 1, 11, 13 and 26. The following items
among a)-i) originally shown in the proponent’s response paper were conducted and are reported inthis paper.
a) Prepare a document describing a specification of calculation to be used for this evaluation process(which will be based on the SCAA framework).
b) Using existing data assess how the biological parameters such as change in the ASM have impacts
on the estimation outcomes in the SCAA through some possible metrics [incl. Recommendation 13].
c) Using existing data, conduct SCAA analysis with consideration of the existing mixing information[Recommendation 11]d) Conduct additional simulation tests with a more realistic model to assess the sample size using data
generated from the SCAA [Recommendation 26].
e) Conduct simulation performance tests to evaluate the level of improvement in the precision ofquantities estimated by the SCAA during the period of NEWREP-A given the proposed sample size.
[Recommendation 1]
2. PROGRESS MADEa) Prepare a document describing a specification of calculation to be used for the evaluation
process
Under Main Objective I (Improvements in the precision of biological and ecological information for
the application of the RMP), drawing information on certain biological and ecological parameters is
one of key issues for the specification of trials. After a decadal discussion in the IWC, the SCAA
model (see. Punt, 2015, in press) is now recognized as the best currently available model for
examining stock dynamics for Antarctic minke whales (IWC, 2014). In the age-structured population
dynamics model, parameters such as the “natural mortality rate (M)”, the “MSYR”, recruitment
relationship and time-varying carrying capacity are influential on the results. The biologicalparameters including these which will be estimated from data collected by this program will contributeto the trials structure in the RMP ISTs. That is why “refinement of the SCAA model and estimation of
biological parameters” is one of the research sub-objectives.
Although future SCAA and relevant associated analyses may contribute to further refinement ofspecification and conditioning, the results which have been derived for the base case scenario of Punt
et al. (2015) are used for any quantitative assessments in this paper. The summary of specification isshown in Table 2. Formulae and their detailed explanation are shown in the original paper and omitted
here.
Using an operating model (OM) conditioned on the base case result of the SCAA, future catch-at-age
and abundance estimates are generated and used in estimation by the SCAA model. In the estimation,
to reduce computation time and avoid non-convergence cases in the iteration, some parameters are
fixed at their assumed true values (i.e. the values estimated in the Punt et al.’s base case) in thesefurther estimations. Even so, getting convergence is not easy with the SCAA.
Although this is not handled in this paper, the OM is potentially used for a simulation for evaluating
future benefit in terms of RMP Implementation Simulation Trials (ISTs), which is planned as one of the
sub-objectives under Main Objective I. Note that Small Areas will be defined based on the updated
information on stock structure and possible whaling operations.

3

Table 2. Specification of SCAA-based OM and estimation model.
Parameter/Assumption

Assumption in OM (based on “base case Estimation in
result” of Punt et al. 2015 in press)
SCAA insimulation

Stock structure (# stocks)

2 (I/P: a hard boundary in between Area Fixed
V-W and V-E)

Mixing pattern

No mixing (with process error)

Fixed

MSYR1+

Stock-specificCalculated

Mortality rate

Stock/age-specific

Fixed

Age-at-sexual maturity (ASM)

Common to stocks: 8.5 and 11.5 for 50% Fixedand 95% ASM

Exploitation rate (F)Year/fleet-specificEstimated

Initial year and initial depletion

D (=1) at 1930 (1929/30 season)

Fixed

Carrying capacity in 1930

Stock-specificEstimated

Time varying K1+

Auto-correlated
deviation(given Estimatedsigma=0.05, no time-varying since 2012)

Growth formula

Stock/sex-specific VB
since 2012)

Resilience

Stock-specificEstimated

Recruitment deviation

Stock/year-specificEstimated

Selectivity
whalingduringSelectivity
whalingduring(no change in k Fixedcommercial Length-based

Fixedscientific Length-based (Ass. NEWREP-A = JARPA Fixedand JARPAIIJARPA and JARPAII estimates Assumed as biased estimates(historical)

Datag(0)-corrected
NEWREP-A Assumed as unbiased estimates as in Additional data
abundance estimates
IDCR/SOWER(CV=0.2)
Survey plan

See Annex 2

Survey Design

CAA

Age-reading errors (results of Kitakado et Additional dataal. (2013) are assumed)b) Using existing data assess how the biological parameters such as change in the ASM give
impacts on the estimation outcomes in the SCAA through some possible metrics
Punt et al. (2015 in press) assumed that the 50% and 95% age-at-sexual maturity (ASM) arerespectively at 8.5 and 11.5 for both of I- and P- stocks. However, as shown in Figure 1, the ASM has
declined since 1940’s because of increase of prey availability, and it may start increasing due to preycompetition to other baleen whales. The detection of a future change in ASM is one of main targets in
the NEWREP-A and has been used to determine the annual sample size of 333.
4

Of course it is of interest to see an impact of misspecification of values of ASM in the SCAA analyses,
and it may be possible to use a simulation framework above. However, the impact on the estimation
outcomes can be quickly assessed in an experimental analysis using existing data. Here two results
based on Punt et al.’s assumption for the ASM and an alternate one are compared.
Results for biological parameters such as M and MSYR are not so sensitive (see Table 3 below). Thisis also the case for some population component trajectories in the 1+ population size and recruitment,
although those for the mature component and associated recruitment rate do differ (Figs 3 and 4). Thisis explained by a trade-off between the ASM and fecundity rate (f0) at the carrying capacity (K) as
shown in Table 3.

I-stock

P-stock

Figure 1. Time series of the mean ASM for I- and P- stocks female animals (extracted from Bando etal. 2014). Open circles are the point estimates and the error bars are ranges of one sigma (SD).

Figure 2. Common values assumed for the age at 50% sexual maturity for both the stocks.

Table 3. Biological parameters estimated by the two different assumption of ASM.
M (age 3)

M (age 15)

M (age 35)

MSYR

f0 (pregnancy
rate at K)

Base case

0.07650.04790.1070

0.219

0.229

Different ASM50 assumption

0.07730.04790.1070

0.227

0.270

Base case0.07370.04600.1030

0.217

0.218

Different ASM50 assumption

0.07450.04610.1032

0.225

0.256

I-Stock

P-stock

5

Figure 3. Population trajectories for the two different assumptions about ASM

Figure 4. Recruitment rates for by the two different assumptions about ASM.

6c) Using existing data, conduct SCAA analysis with consideration on the existing mixing
information
As mentioned in item a), the SCAA analysis has been conducted assuming a hard boundary between
Area V-W and V-E although there also assumed to be an inter-annual variation in distribution. Theinter-annual variation was suggested in the analysis by Kitakado et al. (2014), where the spatial andtemporal pattern of mixing was examined (Figure 5 a,b), but the central of mixing occurs more west
compared to the hard boundary assumed in the SCAA. In theory, it is possible to incorporate this sortof mixing pattern into the SCAA, but an SCAA analysis with a different hard boundary easily allows
one to see the impact of stock structure. For this purpose, a comparison was made between theanalyses for two different stock boundaries as shown in Table 4.
The results are shown in Figures 6 and 7. Of course, the population size differs between stocks, but thedifference in the totals for the two stocks is negligible. However, the population management is
implemented on a stock basis, so the investigation of stock structure is of central to the SCAA
analysis.

Figure 5(b). Yearly variation of longitudes atwhich 50% mixtures occur. The blue, red, andgreen dots and lines are for mature male, mature
female and immature animals, respectively.

Figure 5(a). Yearly variation of mixing
proportion by Area and Group (blue=mature
males, red=mature females, green=immature
animals, black=all animals).

Table 4. Mixing proportions of P-stock used in Punt et al. and assumed in this preliminary trial.
III-E

IV

V-W

V-E

VI-W

Punt et al.’s base case

0

0

0

1

1

Different boundary

0

0

1

1

1

7

Figure 6. Population trajectories by the two different stock boundaries.

8Figure 7. Population trajectory for the total of the two stocksd) Conduct additional simulation tests with a more realistic model to assess the sample size using
data generated from the SCAAIn the original NEWREP-A proposal, the proponents performed a simulation study to indicate thesample size needed to detect the changes in an important ecological and nutritional indicator, ASM. In
the simulation, data were generated given a set of effect size and sample size values according to theintended experimental design (though restricted in the AREA IV), and analyses were conducted toassess the estimation precision for the ASM and statistical power of rejecting the null hypothesis (noASM changes over the research period).
The Panel acknowledged that this procedure is a standard approach for determining sample sizes, but
at the same time it recommended that the proponents conduct a power analyses by postulating a fairly
complex and realistic process model, fitting it to available data, and then simplifying it by eliminating

9

factors that are not supported by the data. Especially, in the generation of the data set, the following
process model was recommended to be used:(1) Generate the cohort sizes for all cohorts that will be subject to sampling during NEWREP-A.
This can be achieved given the estimates of the cohort sizes from the SCAA [note that some of thecohorts to be sampled during NEWREP-A already exist and the analysis could condition on
those](2) Select the ASM for each cohort. A model which is likely sufficient would entail an underlying
time-trend, and cohort-specific variation about that trend that is temporally correlated.
(3) Select the width of the maturity ogive, likely a constant, but perhaps withtemporally-correlated cohort-specific deviations.
(4) Project each cohort forward given natural and NEWREP-A related mortality, taking accountof the selectivity of NEWREP-A.
(5) For each year generate a year-specific random effect to account for the effect of spatial andtemporal variation in sampling effect.
(6) Generate the expected numbers of females by age and maturity state (mature, immature) for
each survey year(7) Sample from the expected numbers given the intended sample numbers(8) Add ageing error to true ages based, for example, on the analyses of Kitakado et al. (2014a).
This would necessarily account for the possibility of ageing bias as well as random ageing error.
(9) Restrict the data set to ages 4-13 if the analysis method is to be based on this range of ages.
Procedure
To attempt to incorporate the fundamental idea underlying this recommended procedure, theproponents considered that the following approach would be adequate.:(1) Fix a population dynamics until XX (XX= 1999/00 or 2003/04), make a projection forward until
2026/27 according to an assumed sample size.
(2) Assume ASM50 for the cohort up to XX as 8.5 and increase it by an effect size (/year) until
2026/27. Assumed effect sizes are 0.075 and 0.1 (/year).
(3) Assume 95% maturity age as 11.5 up to the cohort XX, which is same as that of Punt et al. (2014),
but 10.5 thereafter, which is nearly consistent with the conditioned value shown in Appendix 13 of
NEWREP-A proposal.
(4) In addition to the age-specific natural mortalities, the catch is taken into account in the projection.
(5) To account of heterogeneity in the representativeness, some extent of overdispersion can beconsidered. However, as shown in Annex G of the SC/66a/Rep06, the estimated overdispersion is
negligible. Nevertheless, purely for illustration, attempts are made to use a variance inflation
factor  ( 0.01) in the variance of counts, (1   ) Np(1  p) , through a Dirichlet-multinomial
distribution, so that the coefficient of variation of p is around 30% in case of p=0.1. To illustrate
the impact of the inflation factor on the performance in the estimation and testing,   0.1 is also
used.
(6) Calculate the expected numbers of females by age and maturity state(7) Sampling is conducted based on an intended total sample size10(8) Supposing that the observed ages with ageing-errors can be reasonably transformed to the actual
ages in expectation, it might be appropriate to account only for some additional variation in
observed ages in addition to the overdispersed ages of the whales actually sampled.
(9) Here we do not need restrict the age range of samples for the analysis because sampling from all
the age classes by accounting length-based selectivity is assumed in the simulation.
Performance measures
Performance measures are same as in Appendix 13 of NEWREP-A.
1) RRMSE (relative root mean squared error, a proxy for CV because estimated values for ASM50
can be negative)   
1 n

RRMSE 



i 1

2

i

n

,

where  is the true parameter (ASM50, here), and  i is the i-th estimate among the nreplications in each sample size.
2) Power of the statistical test for a null hypothesis of no year effect in age-at-sexual maturity.
Results
Results are shown in Figures 8-12. Figure 8 compares the results of the more complex procedure
recommended by the Panel in their review with those given in Appendix 13 of the NEWREP-A
proposal. The horizontal axis for the previous results is modified by multiplying by a reciprocal value,
0.15, which is an observed sampling proportion of female animals of age 4-13. This Figure shows that
accounting the age-reading error variance and random sampling from a whole population inflated thevariance of estimates and reduced the statistical power. Note that, as shown in Figure 10, there-assessed power without accounting for the ageing-error is similar with the power assessed using anequilibrium condition in the original NEWREP-A proposal. Of course, the incorporation of
overdispersion (random effects) also tended to worsen estimation and testing performance (see Figure
12).
Note that, although the results are not shown here, an integrated likelihood approach to account for theage-reading error via integration did not change performance as regards estimation and statisticalpower. This might be a consequence of the nature of smaller age-reading errors in ages at which thenumbers caught are influential for the sexual maturity analysis.

11

(i) Simulation results with a complicated procedure recommended by the Panel’s review(ii) Previous simulation results shown in the NEWREP-A proposal

Figure 8-(a). (i) Simulation results for an effect size of 0.075 (/year) with unbiased age-reading errors.
The first cohort for which the ASM changes is the 1999/2000 cohort. In the top left panel, 1000
estimates of ASM50 of cohort at its initial change are plotted against the total sample size. Blue points
are the mean of estimates in each sample size. In the top right and bottom left panels, the standard
deviations and relative root mean squared relative errors are drawn to correspond to the sample size
under consideration. The bottom right graph shows the statistical power for two significance levels(5% and 1%). The dashed red lines are 80% and 90% power levels. (ii) Previous simulation results
shown in the NEWREP-A proposal. The horizontal axis is modified by multiplying by a reciprocal
value, 0.15, the sampling proportion of female animals of age 4-13.

12

(i) Simulation results with a complicated procedure recommended by the Panel’s review(ii) Previous simulation results shown in the NEWREP-A proposal

Figure 8-(b). Simulation results as in the previous Figure except here for an effect size 0.1 (/year).

13

Figure 9-(a). Simulation results for an effect size of 0.075 (/year) with unbiased age-reading errors.
The first cohort for which the ASM changes is the 2003/2004 cohort.

Figure 9-(b). Simulation results as in Figure 9-(a) except here for an effect size of 0.1 (/year).
14

Figure 10-(a). Simulation results for an effect size of 0.075 (/year) without age-reading errors. The
first cohort for which the ASM changes is the 1999/2000 cohort.

Figure 10-(b). Simulation results as in Figure 10-(a) but here for an effect size of 0.1 (/year).
15

Figure 11-(a). Simulation results for an effect size 0 (/year) with unbiased age-reading errors. The firstcohort for which the ASM changes is the 1999/2000 cohort. The type I errors with values of 5% and
1% are shown to be verified.

Figure 11-(b). Simulation results for the effect size 0 (/year) without age-reading errors. ASM50 ofcohort at its initial change is 1999/00. The type I errors with values of 5% and 1% are shown to beverified.
16

Figure 12-(a). Simulation results for an effect size of 0.075 (/year) with age-reading errors andoverdispersion  =0.01 (left) and 0.1 (right). The first cohort for which the ASM changes is the
1999/2000 cohort.

Figure 12-(b). Simulation results for an effect size of 0.1 (/year) with age-reading errors andoverdispersion  =0.01 (left) and 0.1 (right).

17e) Conduct simulation performance tests to evaluate the level of improvement in the precision ofquantities estimated by the SCAA during the period of NEWREP-A given the proposed sample
size
The base case SCAA summarized in Table 2 is used as an operating model for these simulations to see
how the future catch-at-age (CAA) data contribute to improving scientific knowledge on the
population dynamics. Here, a comparison is made for the estimation performance between the analysis
with both the abundance and CAA data and that only with the abundance data. The CVs of abundance
estimates are assumed to always be 0.2, and the annual sample size of CAA is fixed at 333. The true
recruitment rate is fixed as the average over the last 10 years for each stock to investigate the variationin their estimates against the true value (0.161 and 0.115 for I- and P-stocks, respectively).
In the proposed specification for estimation shown in Table 2, some nuisance parameters are assumed
to be fixed at the same values as in the OM. This is to reduce the computation time for optimization
and avoid non-convergence situations. Further time is necessary for completing those simulations.
For the moment, we assess the confidence interval estimates for recruitment rates for a single set ofgenerated data:(a) Results using data up to 2012 [Both abundance and CAA data](b) Results using data up to 2012 [Both abundance and CAA data, M, Selectivity, growth parameters
are fixed]. Note that by fixing M, the recruitment CVs no longer include the more important
uncertainties about their absolute levels, which depend on M.
(c) Results using data up to 2027 [Both abundance without noise and CAA data, M, Sel, growthparameters are fixed, future sample size equals to 333](d) Results using data up to 2027 [Only abundance without noise, M, Sel, growth parameters are fixed,
future sample size equals to 0]
The CVs are assessed through the Hessian matrix for a single set of generated future data as well as
past data. This is adequate for current purposes, whose aim is to show the how the precision ofrecruitment estimates depends on the availability of various future types of data. These estimates areimportant for management and related purposes, as they give more details of and insight into the
dynamics of the population, as well as providing a more powerful basis to check for evidence of theeffects of possible environmental change.
Results
The results are shown in Figure 13 and are perhaps clearest in the comparative plots for CVs shown in
Figure 14. Note in Figure 13-(a) that the CVs for recruitment estimates increase for the most recent
years in the assessment (around some years before 2012); this is because the more recent the cohort,the fewer occasions during which it has been sampled. Figure 13-(b) for which M is fixed rather thanestimated shows CVs that are slightly smaller. Given 12 years future data with survey estimates ofabundance but no further age data, CVs (Figure 13-(d) and also Figure 14) show hardly any difference
from those up to 2012 in Figure 13-(b), and the CVs continue at a high level for the next 15 years.
However, if the additional age data (from 2016 onwards) are added to the existing age data, CVs fromabout 2008 onwards decrease dramatically, especially for the I stock, showing that the analysis
provides more information on recent yearly changes in the recruitment and recruitment rate (Figure
13-(3) and Figure 14). Hence the availability of age data from NEWREP-A will provide substantially
improved estimates of key aspects of these minke whale populations’ dynamics, which will in turnenable improved management and related recommendations.

18

(a) Results using data up to 2012(b) Results using data up to 2012 (some parameters fixed)

Figure 13. Trajectories for recruitment rates and recruitment estimates with their precision estimatedfrom the existing data. The gray regions are 95% confidence intervals.

19

(c) Results using data up to 2027 (with 333 CAA data)(d) Results using data up to 2027(without CAA data)

Figure 13(continued). Trajectories for recruitment rates and recruitment estimates with their precision
estimated from the additional future data. The gray regions are 95% confidence intervals.

20

Figure 14. Comparison of the trajectories of estimated CV for recruitment rates and recruitment
estimates.

3. FUTURE PLANS
The Review Panel provided several insightful recommendations to improve the NEWREP-A program.
A comprehensive simulation for assessing the performance of SCAA and improvement of RMP as
recommended by the Review Panel is on-going. Progress has been made for creating an evaluation
procedure including developing the code for linking possible scientific improvements with the21

proposed sample size and research design. Further analyses are planned before the start of program sothat the plan of NEWREP-A can be modified if necessary.
Finally, note that the NEWREP-A has the following implications for RMP trials and improving the
RMP.
a) The operating models for the trials (see Table 2) can now be based on the more realistic SCAA
model which is able to take more detailed data into account, especially ageing data, and also assumes
more realistic stock structure models based on genetic analyses.
b) A problem with past ISTs for minke whales has been lack of information about MSYR. The newtrials can use this as the stock-recruitment relationship estimated in the SCAA model contains
information about the productivity of the population assessed. It also provides a basis for forward
projection of recruitment in the trials under alternative hypotheses about future trend (if any) incarrying capacity.
c) Because of the information now available, through JARPA and JARPA II, on Antarctic minke whale
productivity, it will no longer be necessary to require robustness to inputs used previously for aminimum MSYR value. Instead the actual SCAA-basaed estimates from the data can be used toprovide plausible values.
d) Given new age information, the RMP can be improved by incorporating use of these data as well.
For example, as with fish populations to provide an early indication of poor recruitment and hence
make timely adjustments to catches in a manner, the existing CLA is less able to do well.

REFERENCES
Kitakado, T., Lockyer, C. and Punt, A.E. 2013. A statistical model for quantifying age-reading errors
and its application to the Antarctic minke whales. J. Cet. Res. Manage. 13: 181-90.
Kitakado, T., Schweder, T., Kanda, N., Pastene, L.A. and Walloe, L. 2014. Dynamic population
Segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales (SC/F14/J29rev). Paper
SC/65b/IA13 presented to the Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 25pp.
Punt, A.E., Bando, T., Hakamada, T. and Kitakado, T. 2015. Assessment of Antarctic Minke Whales
using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. (in press)

22

ANNEX 2
Research plan for the dedicated sighting survey in 2015/16
Background
The NEWREP-A includes a dedicated whale sighting component aimed to produce abundance estimates ofAntarctic minke whale and other large whales species and develop spatial distribution models (SDM). This
information will contribute to the ecosystem models as well as providing direct input for the SCAA and the RMP.
In other words this information is considered essential for addressing Main Objectives I and II of NEWREP-A.
The NEWREP-A also includes a krill survey component, and two kinds of surveys are planned: ‘krill survey
under the NEWREP-A’ and ‘CCAMLR standard type krill survey’. The former survey is relevant to the 2015/16
dedicated sighting survey, which is aimed to provide an index of relative abundance of this prey species.

On the other hand, section 4 of the proposed research plan for NEWREP-A explains that the feasibility andpracticability of non-lethal methods will be evaluated in a systematic manner through the implementation of theresearch plan. The feasibility and practicability of some of those non-lethal methods such as biopsy sampling andtelemetry studies on Antarctic minke whale will be evaluated during the NEWREP-A dedicated sighting surveys,
and such evaluations will start at the 2015/16 season.

In this annex, a draft research plan for the 2015/16 dedicated sighting survey in Antarctic Area V is presented forconsideration of the IWC SC. While the main research activity will be systematic sighting surveys for abundance
estimates and SDM, the surveys will be also engaged in the systematic collection of krill and oceanographic data
as well in the start of experiments on the feasibility of some non-lethal methods. The draft research planconsiders the specific recommendations offered during the NEWREP-A review workshop.

Research needs and recommendations from the NEWREP-A Review Panel
Sighting survey for abundance estimates and SDM
Systematic sighting surveys of whales by the Line Transect Method are required to address Objective I (i)‘Abundance estimates for Antarctic minke whales taking into account of g(0) and additional variance’, Objective
II (ii) ‘Abundance estimates of some cetacean species as input data for ecosystem modeling’ and II (iv) ‘To study
the spatial interaction among baleen whales – To construct appropriate SDMs of cetacean as well as krill, basedon the guidelines developed by the IWC SC’, of the NEWREP-A research plan.

The NEWREP-A Review Panel made the following recommendations regarding the sighing survey (IWC, 2015
SC/66a/Rep6):a)Every effort be made to estimate g(0) for the other whale species, at least to determine rather thanassume whether it is significantly different from one.

b) The survey design and analysis methods be carefully considered to enable the survey results to havemultiple uses.
c)Carefully consider a number of options for survey design and methods taking into account: (i) theexperience gained from the several years of data analysis before the Scientific Committee adopted
abundance estimates from the previous IWC IDCR/SOWER cruises; (ii) the developments in spatialmodelling approaches; (iii) the experience of previous multi-disciplinary survey efforts; (iv) therecommendations from the JARPAII review; (v) the possibility of incorporating more focused surveys
to address specific issues in some years; (vi) consideration of whales within the ice; (vii) updated power
analyses of the effects of survey interval and estimation of trend to determine necessary levels of effort

23

and survey design in the future (including consideration of the regions outside the core study area(additional longitudinal range in Areas III, VI, and coverage north of 60°S).
d) Work closely with the IWC Scientific Committee before finalising their survey approaches.
e)Ensure that future survey plans submitted to the Scientific Committee follow fully the guidelines forsuch survey plans, including incorporating proposed track lines - since the dedicated sighting
survey/echo sounder platform will be separated from the sighting/sampling vessels, sabotage should not
be an issue.

The section ‘survey procedure and design’ below shows the procedure and design for the sighting surveys in thecontext of the 2015/16 season. The recommendations from the Review Panel were taken into account as much as
possible.

Krill surveys for relative abundance estimate
Systematic krill surveys are required to address Objective II (i) ‘Krill abundance estimation and oceanographic
observations – To produce annual krill abundance estimate by using echo-sounder and net installed in research
vessels participating in the NEWREP-A surveys’, of the NEWREP-A research plan. It should be noted that the‘krill surveys under NEWREP-A’ are focused to estimate an index of relative abundance as noted above.

The NEWREP-A Review Panel made the following recommendations regarding the krill surveys related to
NEWREP-A (IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep 6):a)Consider the adoption of this multibeam sonar in krill surveys.

b) Trial the ship and echosounder system(s) in Japan well before going to the Antarctic to determine thelikely effective acoustic sampling range and potential for detecting krill for multiple frequencies over
the required survey depth. Conduct for both annual and board-scale survey vessels.
c)

In the years (two out of 12) when both NEWREP-A and CCAMLR-type surveys are conducted, try tosurvey the same transects by both vessels in near synchrony.

d) Conduct full analysis of statistical power to detect changes in krill abundance from proposed
techniques.
e)Develop more detailed plans to consider whether comparisons between stomach contents and proposed
krill survey data are feasible and if so, how they can be done.

f)Ensure that sufficient time is allocated for adequate net sampling, based an analysis of previous net
sampling data (e.g. BROKE/BROKE West data).

As noted earlier, two kinds of krill surveys are planned in relation to NEWREP-A: ‘krill survey under the
NEWREP-A’ and ‘CCAMLR standard type krill survey’, and only the former survey is relevant to the sighting
survey in the 2015/2016 season. It should be clarified here that only the recommendation b) above is directly
relevant to and covered by this research plan, since the recommendations a), c), e) and f) are mainly relevant to
the latter one, and the recommendation d) is on the statistical power analysis.
The section ‘survey procedure and design’ below shows the procedure and design for the krill surveys in thecontext of the 2015/16 season.
Oceanographic survey
Systematic oceanographic surveys are required to address Objective II (i) ‘Krill abundance estimation andoceanographic observations, of the NEWREP-A research plan.

24

The NEWREP-A Review Panel made the following recommendation regarding the oceanographic survey inrelation to NEWREP-A (IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep6):a)Give careful consideration to scale and design of oceanographic sampling, taking into account
BROKE/BROKE West data.
It should be noted that this recommendation from the Review Panel mentions the BROKE/BROKE-West dataand seems to be offered mainly in the context of the ‘CCAMLR standard type krill survey’, but not of the ‘krill
survey under the NEWREP-A’.
The section ‘survey procedure and design’ below shows the procedure and design for the oceanographic surveys
in the context of the 2015/16 season.
Feasibility of biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale
The NEWREP-A research plan includes a feasibility study on biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale to beundertaken along the dedicated sighting surveys. On this particular study, the NEWREP-A Review Panel madethe following recommendations (IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep6):a)

The experiment to examine the effort required to obtain biopsy samples from Antarctic minke whales begiven high priority at the start of any long-term programme.

b) Involve people with expertise in successfully biopsy sampling common minke whales in the North
Atlantic.
c)

Mimic the sampling strategy developed for lethal sampling (e.g. when dealing with schools >2).

d) Record information on time taken, sea state, swell, etc. to enable a plausible measure of effort required
to be developed.
e)Consider the amount of tissue and nature of tissue required (for each analysis and in total).
The section ‘survey procedure and design’ below shows the procedure and design for the feasibility study on
biopsy sampling in the context of the 2015/16 season. The recommendations from the Review Panel were taken
into account as much as possible.
Feasibility of telemetry in Antarctic minke whale
The NEWREP-A research plan includes a feasibility study on telemetry in Antarctic minke whale to beundertaken along the dedicated sighting surveys. On this particular study, the NEWREP-A Review Panel madethe following recommendations (IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep6):a)This experiment should be accorded high priority but notes the difficulties in the attachment andfunctioning of long-term satellite tags on minke whales in both hemispheres.

b) Undertake this work in collaboration with research groups with experience in such work rather than try
to develop techniques on their own.
The section ‘survey procedure and design’ below shows the procedure and design for the feasibility study on
telemetry in the context of the 2015/16 season. The recommendations from the Review Panel were taken into
account as much as possible.

25

Survey procedure and design
This section describes the survey procedure and design for each of the research items mentioned above for thismulti-purpose survey. Some of the Review Panel’s recommendations summarized above are taken into
consideration in this survey while others will be considered in future surveys or during the analyses.
GeneralResearch area
Antarctic Area V (130°E-170°W) included the Ross Sea will be covered by the 2015/16 survey.
Research period and schedule
The duration of the survey including transit is planned to be 115 days. The number of days dedicated to researchin Antarctic waters is planned to be 65 days.The schedule of the survey is as follow:

Date

Activity

Late November

Vessels leave Japan

Late December

Start survey in the research area

Early March

Complete survey in the research area

Late March

Vessels return to Japan

Research vessels
Two specialized vessels will be available for this survey, the Yushin Maru No. 3 (YS3) and an undetermined
vessel similar to YS3 (Figure 1 and Table 1). Both vessels are equipped with top barrel (TOP), independent
observer platform (IOP) and upper bridge platform (UBP). The YS3 is also equipped with instruments required
for the krill and oceanographic surveys (see details below).

Researchers on board
For the sighting activities including experiments in IO mode, two researchers are required on board each vessel.
An additional researcher to conduct the krill and oceanographic surveys is required on board the YS3.

Sighting survey for abundance estimates and SDM
Guidelines for sighting survey
The plan outlined here follow the ‘Requirements and guidelines for conducting surveys and analyzing data
within the Revised Management Scheme (RMS)’ (IWC, 2012), as recommended by the NEWREP-A Review
Panel. Table 2 summarizes the proposed sighting procedure and design in the context of the IWC requirements
and guidelines.

Stratification of the research area
The research area is divided into a western and eastern sector at 165°E. Each sector is further divided into asouthern and northern strata. At the western sector the boundary between southern and northern strata is definedby a line 45n. miles from the ice-edge. At the eastern sector the boundary is defined at 69°S (Figure 2).

26

Track line design
The survey track line for each vessel will consist of two legs in the northern stratum at 5° longitudinal degreeintervals and four legs in the southern stratum at 2°30’ longitudinal degree intervals in a 10 degrees longitudinalband following Nishiwaki et al. (2014). The two vessels alternately survey the northern and southern strata eachcrossing the track line at the way-point between two strata (Figure 3). Track lines are decided based on theoriginal longitude line, which was selected at random. The interval of legs and number of legs in each stratum
could be changed in consideration of delay caused by bad weather conditions and other factors. The proposed
track lines in sectors and strata of Area V are shown in Figure 4. Note that these tracks are based on ‘guessestimated’ ice conditions in an unpredictable area, especially the Ross Sea. Considerable flexibility may beneeded by the Cruise Leader in determining the final cruise tracks.
In principle, the South East stratum in Area V (Ross Sea) is defined as an area south of 69oS and between 165oE
and 170oW surrounded by ice edge. The stratum is divided into western and eastern part by 180 o longitudinalline. A longitudinal zig-zag line was allocated in the western and eastern sector, respectively (Figure 4). Tracklines are decided based on the original longitude line, which was selected at random in the western and easternpart of the stratum, respectively. The interval of legs and number of legs in each stratum could be changed inconsideration of delay caused by bad weather conditions and other factors.
Sighting effort and mode
Research hours will be consistent with those in previous IWC/SOWER surveys. Research will start 60 minutes
after sunrise and will end 60 minutes before sunset, with a maximum 12-hour research day (approximately
06:00-18:00). Time-zone changes will be recorded in 30-minute intervals, effective from 01:00h. Schedules will
adhere to local ‘ship’ time ranging between +9.0 and +12.0 GMT. Data collected throughout the survey and all
associated reporting will be in accord with the local ‘ship’ time. The vessel speed during the sighting survey willbe 11.5 knots with slight adjustment to avoid vibration of the vessels.
Sighting activities onboard the vessels will be classified into two principal types: ‘On-effort’ and ‘Off-effort’.
On-effort means sightings activities executed under weather and sea state conditions considered acceptable (e.g.
visibility better than 1.5n. miles and wind speed less than 20knots in the northern stratum and less than 25 knots
in the southern stratum). Off-effort means all activities that are not On-effort. All sightings to be recorded
On-effort will be classified as ‘Primary sightings’. All other sightings will be classified as ‘Secondary sightings’.

Sighting effort will be conducted by the boatswain and topmen from the top barrel (there will be always two
primary observers on the top barrel) and the upper bridge where the helmsman, captain or officer-on-watch,researchers, and the chief engineer (or second engineer) will be also present (always two primary observers andfour secondary observers).

The sighting survey will be conducted using (1) Closing mode (NSC) and (2) Passing with Independent
Observer (IO) mode. Both survey modes follow the protocol endorsed for the IWC/SOWER surveys (e.g.
Matsuoka et al., 2003, IWC, 2008).

Under NSC mode, there will be two primary observers on the top barrel (TOP). These observers will search forcetaceans by using angle board and binoculars (7x), which include the distance estimate scales. Members of two
observer teams on TOP will be fixed and will operate in one or two hours-shifts. There will be open
communication between the upper bridge and the TOP. These observers report sighting-information toresearchers and other observers on the upper bridge for data recording.

Under IO mode, there will be two primary observers on the TOP and one primary observer on the independent
observer platform (IOP). These observers on TOP and IOP platforms will conduct searching for cetaceans by27

using angle board and binoculars (7x). Members of the two observer teams on TOP will be fixed and will operate
in one or two hours-shifts. There will be no open communication between the IOP and the TOP. The observers
on the upper bridge will communicate to the TOP (or IOP) independently, with the topmen required only toclarify information without distracting them from their normal search procedure. These observers reportsighting-information to researchers and other observers on the upper bridge for data recording. For encounters ofvery rare species (e. g. blue and southern right whales), it will be decided that the vessels approach the whales
immediately to avoid losing them due to the delay of closing (IWC, 2008).

Following a recommendation from the NEWREP-A Review Panel, IO experiments will be conducted on both
Antarctic minke and other large whale species.

Distance and angle experiment
Sighting distance and angle experiment will be conducted in order to evaluate the accuracy of sighting distanceand angle provided by primary observers. Observers on each vessel will be required to assess eight sets of angles
and distance from two platforms (TOP and IO) and upper bridge. All trials will be conducted under the weather
and sighting conditions defined above.

Data entry system
Researchers will input the data collected during the survey (weather, effort, sighting and experiments data) into
the computer onboard the vessel using the ‘onboard data collecting system’ (ICR, 2013). Survey modes andeffort codes definitions for this survey correspond to those used in the IWC/SOWER surveys. The data will bevalidated and stored at the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR), and all sighting data for abundance estimates
will be submitted to the IWC based on the IWC SC Guidelines (IWC, 2008; 2012).

Krill surveys for relative abundance estimate
Echosounder system and frequencies
Research vessel YS3 is equipped with a scientific echo sounder Simrad EK60, a ‘de facto’ world standard system
for fishery research applications. The Simrad EK60 can operate seven echo sounder frequencies simultaneously
ranging from 18 to 710kHz. Therefore it can operate in the frequencies recommended by the NEWREP-A
Review Panel: 38, 120 and 200KHz.

Echo-sounder survey will be conducted during the sighting survey. The data obtained on the sighting track line will
be used for the analysis.

Trial of the vessel and echosounder system
A trial of the ship and echosounder system will be carried out in Japan before going to the Antarctic to determine
the likely effective acoustic sampling range and potential for detecting krill for multiple frequencies over therequired survey depth. This is in line with one of the recommendations from the NEWREP-A Review Panel (seerecommendations above).

Net equipment
Research vessel YS3 is equipped with a small ring net with over 45cm mouth opening (e.g. NORPAC Standard
Net). A high intensity white LED lamp would be used to increase sampling efficiency of krill (e.g. Wiebe et al.,2004). Basically, this net will be hauled vertically from 250m to surface.

28

Scale and design of the net sampling
Net sampling will be conducted along the sighting survey track line. Basically it will involves one sampling site
per day.

Oceanographic survey
Instruments
Research vessel YS3 is equipped with a SBE 19plus V2 SeaCAT Profiler CTD. This instrument measuresconductivity, temperature, salinity, pressure, chlorophyll and oxygen at 4 scans/sec (4 Hz) at different sea depths.
The wire of CTD is equipped with a Niskin-sampling bottle (Model 1010). It can sample a maximum of 1.2 littleof sea water. The depth selected for the present survey is 500m.

Scale and design of oceanographic sampling
CTD survey will be conducted along the sighting survey track line. Basically it will involve one sampling site
per day.

Feasibility of biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale
Following a NEWREP-A Review Panel recommendation, this feasibility study will start early at the
NEWREP-A program, i.e. at the 2015/16 season.

Biopsy sampling system
The Larsen gun will be used for the feasibility experiment of biopsy of Antarctic minke whale. The Larsen gun isconsidered one of the most efficient method for biopsy sampling and it is used regularly during the IWC
POWER surveys in the North Pacific. It was also used during the former IWC IDCR/SOWER cruises.

Feasibility study design
The NEWREP-A Review Panel provided very useful suggestions for conducting this feasibility study (seesummary above). The Review Panel also noted that ‘consideration might be given to focus initial training efforts
primarily in near-shore areas where animals can more reliably be encountered. Consideration also should begiven to standard issues relating to any biopsy programme, such as an upper limit to the number of attempts to
be made on an individual, how long a whale will be followed, whether females with calves will be targeted, etc.’(IWC, 2015 SC/66a/Rep 6).

In this first year the objective will be the training of research personnel with the Larsen biopsy gun on Antarctic
minke whales. Following the Review Panel’s statement above, efforts will be focused in near-shore, when thevessels survey the southern strata. A total of 10 trials on Antarctic minke whales are planned by YS3. In each trial
the school size, school behavior, sea state, swell, wind speed and the time taken in the trial will be recorded. The
kind and amount of tissue obtained will be recorded as well.

A whale will be followed for a maximum of 1h, and the upper limit to the number of attempts to be made on an
individual will be 3.

The procedure for shifts from the sighting surveys to the feasibility studies on biopsy sampling and from thefeasibility studies to the sighting surveys will be similar to those during the past IWC/SOWER surveys and will
be determined by the Cruise Leader.

29

Feasibility of telemetry in Antarctic minke whale
Following a NEWREP-A Review Panel recommendation, this feasibility study will start early at the
NEWREP-A program, i.e. during the 2015/16 season.

Telemetry system and feasibility study design
The NEWREP-A Review Panel noted ‘the difficulties in the attachment and functioning of long-term satellite tagson minke whales in both hemispheres’ and recommended that ‘the proponents undertake this work in collaboration
with research groups with experience in such techniques rather than try on their own’.

In this first dedicated sighting survey, effort will be spent in developing an attachment system in consultation with
the National Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries (NRIFSF).

During NEWREP-A surveys, tags have to be attached by shot of air gun from a large vessel. Additionally themount system needs to be suitable for long-term monitoring of satellite tracking. A blubber penetration-type mountby air-gun will be tried on Antarctic minke whale, which already proved useful in other applications (Fernando andGuzman, 2014; Guzman et al., 2013). If this attachment becomes useful for Antarctic minke whales, then it will be
used to deliver both satellite tracking and data logger tags in future surveys.

At least ten attachment trials on Antarctic minke whales are planned by YS3. In each trial the school size, school
behavior, sea state, swell, wind speed and the time taken in the trial will be recorded.

The procedure for shifts from the sighting surveys to the feasibility studies on telemetry and from the feasibility
studies to the sighting surveys will be similar to those during the past IWC/SOWER surveys and will be
determined by the Cruise Leader.

Data availability
After validation by ICR, the sighting and associated data will be submitted to the IWC secretariat. Other data andsamples obtained during the survey will be available to IWC SC members through data access Procedure B.

Cruise report
A cruise report will be prepared just after completed the survey and will include a list of the samples and datacollected during the survey. The cruise report will be presented to the 2016 IWC SC meeting.

Oversight report
An oversight report will be presented as an appendix to the cruise report of the survey.

REFERENCES

Fernando, F., and Guzman, H.M. 2014. Satellite tracking and sighting data analyses of southeast Pacifichumpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae): Is the migratory route coastal or oceanic? Aquatic
Mammals, 40(4), 329-40.
Guzman, H. M., Gomez, C. G., Guevara, C. A., and Kleivane, L. 2013. Potential vessel collisions with Southern
Hemisphere humpback whales wintering off Pacific Panama. Marine Mammal Science, 29(4), 629-642.
Institute of Cetacean Research, 2013. The outline of the ICR Accurate Information System (ICRAS). 13pp.

30

International Whaling Commission, 2008. IWC SOWER Cruise 2008/09, Information for Researchers.
https://iwc.int/private/downloads/etqkmccvto0sw0w8s0cs80400/Guide%20%20for%20Researchers%202008-09.pdf [Paper available at the IWC Office].
International Whaling Commission. 2012. Requirements and guidelines for conducting surveys and analysing
data within the Revised Management Scheme. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (suppl.):507-19.
International Whaling Commission. 2015. Report of the Expert Panel to Review the proposal by Japan for
NEWREP-A, 7-10 February 2015, Tokyo, Japan. Paper SC/66a/Rep6 presented to IWC ScientificCommittee, May 2015 (unpublished). 62pp. [Paper available at the IWC Office].
Matsuoka, K., Ensor, P., Hakamada, T., Shimada, H., Nishiwaki, S., Kasamatsu, F. and Kato, H. 2003. Overview
of minke whale sightings surveys conducted on IWC/IDCR and SOWER Antarctic cruises from 1978/79
to 2000/01. J. Cetacean. Res. Manage. 5(2):173-201.
Nishiwaki, S., Ishikawa, H., Goto, M., Matsuoka, K. and Tamura, T. 2014. Review of general methodology andsurvey procedures under the JARPAII. Paper SC/F14/J2 presented to the JARPAII review workshop,
February 2014 (unpublished). 34pp. [Paper available at the IWC Office].
Okamura, H and Kitakado, T. 2012. Abundance estimates of Antarctic minke whales using the OK method.
Paper SC/64/IA2 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June 2012 (unpublished). 24pp. [Paper
available at the IWC Office].
Palka, D.L. and Smith, D.W. 2004. Update of specifications of data simulating the IDCR/SOWER surveys 2004. Paper SC/56/IA6 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, July 2004, Sorrento, Italy(unpublished). 15pp. [Paper available from the Office of this Journal].
Wiebe, P.H., Ashjian, C.J., Gallager, S.M., Davis, C.S., Lawson, G.L. and Copley, N.J. 2004. Using ahigh-powered strobe light to increase the catch of Antarctic krill. Marine Biology. 144(3): 493-502.

31

Table 1. Specifications of the vessels to be engaged in the 2015/16 season dedicated sighting survey under the
NEWREP-A (TBT = to be determined).
Yushin-Maru
No.3
Call sign

7JCH

Length overall [m]69.61Gross tonnage (GT)742

Barrel height [m]19.5

IO platform height
[m]

13.5

Upper bridge height
[m]

11.5

Bow height [m]6.5

Engine power [PS /kW]

5,280 / 3,900

TBD

Table 2. Correspondence of sighting survey design proposal and the ‘Guidelines for Conducting Surveys andAnalyzing Data within the Revised Management Scheme (IWC, 2012).
Item

Suggestions/Guidelines in IWC (2012)

Responses/Proposals

The design and conduct of surveys and theverification and analysis of data from such
surveys that are intended to provide
estimates of abundance to be used in the
CLA shall be under the oversight of the
Scientific Committee to ensure that theyadequately follow the requirements
described in Section 2 and take into accountthe guidelines described inThis table shows that the proposal adequately
follow the requirements described in Section 2
and take into account the guidelines describedin Sections 3-6.

RelatedsectionReference

2.Requirement underRMS
2.1 Oversight by the
Scientific Committee

Sections 3-6.
2.2 Notification andplanning

Plans for survey design and proposed
methods of data collection, verification andanalysis that are intended to provide
estimates of abundance to be used in the
CLA shall be reviewed by the Committee inadvance of their being carried out.

This document explained the plans for thesurvey.

2.3 Survey conduct
and personnel

Based on review of the proposed survey
plans, including the experience of scientists
participating in the surveys, the Committee
will determine the level of oversightrequired. (a) For surveys in which theproposers have previous experience inapplying the methodology for the species
and region being surveyed, the Committee
will generally specify one of the proposing
scientists as its representative to oversee
survey conduct; (b) If the proposers request
Committee oversight, or if the Committee
judges that the proposers have insufficientexperience of conducting the planned
surveys, independent oversight by a scientist
appointed by the Committee will be required

The steering group of this cruise will nominate
these researchers, including international
researchers. These researchers should haveenough experience conducting line transect
surveys, biopsy sampling and photo-id
experiments in the Antarctic through the
IWC/IDCR-SOWER, JARPA/JARPA II
Programs or other research program.

32

Koji Matsuoka (Institute of Cetacean
Research) will be the responsible person forthis survey, and same as recent seasons, would
act as the oversight person on behalf of the
IWC SC if the IWC SC agree.

Researchers on board
andoversight
personto assess the adequacy of survey conduct.
2.4 Survey
documentation anddata provision andverification

The following documentation shall be
provided to the Secretariat no later than six
months prior to the meeting of the ScientificCommittee in which data from the survey are
to be used as input to the CLA:
(1) cruise planning report; (2) field
instructions and example data sheets; (3)cruise summary report; (4) documentation ofany experiments conducted, e.g. to estimate
measurement error in distances and angles;

Before submitting results of abundance
estimation based on this survey data,
documentations (1)-(9) will be submitted to theSecretariat before six months prior to themeeting.
Sighting data obtained during the survey will
be submitted to the the Secretariat no later thansix months prior to the meeting of the
Scientific Committee in which they are to beused(5) documentation of methods used toestimate distances and angles to sighted
groups; (6) specification of data accuracy
verification procedures; (7) documentationof observations excluded for any reason;(8) description of analysis methodology
planned to be used, including factors orcovariates to be used in the derivation of theestimate; and (9) documentation of
additional information related to the conductof the survey necessary for interpretation of
the data
The data outlined in Appendix 1 shall be
provided to the Secretariat no later than six
months prior to the meeting of the ScientificCommittee in which they are to be used..

2.5 Data analysis

The documentation should be sufficient toallow: (i) independent replication of theestimates; (ii) evaluation of theappropriateness of the estimates presented
relative to possible alternatives (e.g. model
selection procedures, pooling/stratificationof the data); and (iii) evaluation of whether
the estimates, associated variances andpotential biases fall within the ranges usedin evaluating the CLA.

Documentation of data analysis will be
sufficient to allow (i)-(iii).

3.1 Area and timing

Consideration therefore needs to be given towhich particular areas should be surveyed in
the context of providing the information onabundance needed by the RMP.

Management Areas V in south of 60oS isplanned to be surveyed in 2015/16 survey forabundance estimation.

Researchschedule,
Researcharea

3.2 Choice of platform

The choice of platform for a survey may be
determined by factors beyond the control of
those designing the survey. For example, thearea to be covered may be so large or so
remote that it is impossible to survey fromany platform other than a ship.

Two survey vessels will be used.

Research
vessels

3.3 Cruise tracks

If qualitative or quantitative information on
the relative abundance of animals isavailable, more effort should be devoted to
strata of known high abundance.

It is suggested that Antarctic minke whales
tends to distribute near ice edge. Therefore
more track lines will be allocated in southern
strata than northern strata.

Track line
designSurveys should be designed so that thecoverage probability in each stratum is
uniform, or close to uniform, or canotherwise be determined.

Track lines will be allocated in each stratum sothat the coverage probability in each stratum isclose to uniform

3. Survey design

When considering the placement of cruise
tracks, care should be taken that they do notfollow physical features that may becorrelated with whale abundance.
If there is a known or suspected migration ofwhales through the survey area, care should

33

Track lines will be designed not to parallel toice edge lines given distance from ice edge
may be correlated to whale density.
By using two dedicated sighting surveys, twovessels simultaneously survey the northern andsouthern strata

be taken when designing cruise tracks andsurvey direction to ensure that the datacollected are representative.
3.4 Personnel

It is essential that survey teams contain atleast some personnel who are experienced in
conducting sightings surveys for whales.
Cruise leaders should have sufficientknowledge of the analytical methods toenable them to make informed decisions in
the face of unforeseen circumstances, e.g.
with respect to modification of cruise tracks
and coverage due to weather, ice extent etc.

Researchers should have enough experience
conducting line transect surveys, biopsy
sampling and photo-id experiments in the
Antarctic through the IWC/IDCR-SOWER,
JARPA/JARPA II Programs or other research
program.

Researchers on board
andoversight
personCruise leader will be selected who has
sufficient knowledge of the analytical methods
to enable them to make informed decisions in
the face of unforeseen circumstances.

4. SHIPBOARDSURVEYS
4.1 Methodology

A number of methods have been developed
to account for animals missed on the trackline and, in some cases, responsive
movement. These methods require the use of
two teams of observers on independent
platforms on the same vessel and theidentification of groups, animals or cues seenfrom both platforms (duplicate
identification).

In the research proposal, accounting foranimals missed on the track line, the sighting
survey will be conducted using (1) Closing
mode (NSC) and (2) Passing with Independent
Observer (IO) mode. Hazard probability
method is planned to be used in analysis ofsighting data.

Primary
searchingactivity

4.2.1 IO method

Collecting data from two independent
platforms is considered by the Committee tobe a standard method and estimates ofabundance have been obtained from thesedata e.g. for Antarctic minke whales.

The sighting survey will be conducted using(1) Closing mode (NSC) and (2) Passing with
Independent Observer (IO) mode.

Primary
searchingactivity

4.2.2 Tracking method

Buckland and Turnock (1992) proposed amethod to account both for animals missedon the track line and responsive movement.
The method is based on one team ofobservers (the Tracker team) searching
sufficiently far ahead of the vessel to detect
groups/animals before they may have
responded to it.

Instead of tracking method, The resighting
record will be record by researchers in upper
bridge to collect resighting data during IO
modes.

IWC(2008)

4.2.3 Hazard
probability method

The hazard probability method treats thesighting process as a point process in space(representing the locations of individual
whales), time (representing the surfacing of
the whales), and a sequence of Bernoulli
experiments representing whether or not awhale was observed at a given surfacing

The hazard probability method is planned toapplied to model detection function used in
Okamura and Kitakado (2012)

4.2 Methods used by
the Committee

4.3 Common
considerations

IWC(2008)

4.3.1 ‘Passing’ versus‘closing’ mode

When a sighting is made by an observer,
either (i) data on the sighted group can becollected and recorded as searchingcontinues (passing mode) or (ii) searching
can cease while the group is approached toconfirm species identification and estimategroup size (closing mode). There areadvantages and disadvantages to bothmethods.

Considering the advantage and disadvantage inboth mode, the sighting survey will be
conducted using both mode. Two survey
modes will be conducted alternately (Figure 3).

Primary
searchingactivity

4.3.2 Searching effort
data

Searching effort data should be collected andrecorded in a disaggregated form to allow
the recalculation of estimates of abundance
if boundaries of Management Areas arealtered. Changes in Beaufort sea state andother indicators of sighting conditions should
be recorded to allow the data to be stratified

Searching effort data will be collected andrecorded in effort record. Sighting condition
will be recorded in weather record

IWC(2008)

34

by these variables where appropriate.
4.3.3 Estimates ofangle and distance to asighted group ofAngle and distance experiments should be
carried out, if possible, before, during andafter the survey.

Distance and angle measurement training is tobe conducted at the first stage of the survey.
The experiment to evaluate measurement error
is to be conducted twice around the middle ofthe survey and at the last stage of the survey(IWC, 2008)

Distance
and angle
experiment

The species must be identified with certainty
and the number of whales in the group must
be counted or estimated.

To ensure that species and group size data arerecorded accurately, researchers should haveenough experience conducting line transect
surveys (see item 3.4)

Researchers on board
andoversight
person4.4.1 Duplicate
identification

Use of electronic recording devices is criticalfor obtaining accurate sighting times ofindividual groups or cues, and hence reliable
duplicate identification.

An automated data collection system (ICR
accurate information system) will be
implemented in the NEWREP-A surveys, andtherefore it will contribute to help duplicate
identification.

4.4.2 Tracking
procedures

Tracking teams should consist of more than
one observer. When one member of a teamstarts tracking, the operational proceduresfor the other observer(s) should be explicit.

Observers in upper bridge will be in charge
with tracking. Procedure of tracking isprovided in e.g. Information for Researchers
on the IWC SOWER Circumpolar Cruises(IWC, 2008).

IWC(2008)

4.4.3 Direction of
movement of detectedanimals

Information on the direction of movement ofgroups/animals should be recorded for eachdetected sighting of a group, animal or cue.

This information will be recorded in sighting
record.

IWC(2008)

4.4.4 Groupfragmentation andformation

When tracking, group fragmentation andgroup formation should be explicitly
recorded. Data forms should be designed toaccommodate the recording of these data.

Observations of the dynamic structure of thegroup will be recorded in sighting record.

IWC(2008)

4.4.5 Additional data

Each (re)sighting record in the data forms
should have field for additional data, such asdetails of group/animal behavior.

Group/animal behavior will be recorded in(re)sighting record

IWC(2008)

4.4.6 Closing with IO
mode surveys

If analysis is group-based, closing should bedelayed until either the group has been
detected by observers on both platforms(2-way independence), the primary platform(BT method), or it has passed abeam.

Closing should be delayed until detectedschool has passed abeam during IO mode.

IWC(2008)

whales

4.3.4 Species
identification andestimation of groupsize
4.4 Independent
observer data

We didn’t check if our proposal meetsguideline regarding aerial surveys because it is
not planned to conduct aerial surveys in2015/16 surveys.

5. AERIALSURVEYS

6. Analyticalconsiderations
6.1 Varianceestimation and the
CLA

6.2 Simulation
techniques

It is important that underestimation of the
CV of abundance estimates be avoided andthat the estimator for the CV of anabundance estimate should not have an
excessively high variance.

This situation can arise when survey effort has
been very small, which may result in very few
transects upon which to base a CV estimate.
Sufficient effort will be allocated in the
research to avoid this situation.

A CV estimate should take into account, tothe extent possible, all major sources ofobservation error.

Additional variance (i.e. variance due tointer-annual variation in distribution of whales)
will be estimated to avoid underestimate of CV
of abundance estimate.

Simulations should be carried out to provide
sufficient information to indicate the basic
statistical properties (e.g. bias and precision)of the abundance estimators and theirvariance.

It may be necessary to conduct simulation test
for model-based g(0) estimation model. The
current simulated data are designed torepresent features of minke whales in the North
Atlantic and the Southern Hemisphere and theprotocols used on surveys of these species(Palka and Smith, 2004)

35

Track line
designFigure 1. Research vessel to be used in the dedicated sighting survey: Yushin Maru No. 3.

Figure 2. Sectors and strata to be covered by the dedicated sighting survey in Area V.

36

Figure 3. Basic design for track lines. Red and black bold line indicates track line for each vessel, respectively. ‘I’
indicates that the survey will be conducted under IO mode and ‘C’ indicates that the survey will conducted in
NSC mode.

Figure 4. Proposed track lines given assumed ice edge lines. Considerable flexibility may be needed by the
Cruise Leader in determining the final cruise tracks.

37