Research Plan for New Scientific Whale Research Programin the Antarctic Ocean (NEWREP-A)
The Government of Japan

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 4
1.1 Importance of scientific research in the Antarctic Ocean ..................................... 4
1.2 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Judgment ............................................. 5
1.3 Japan’s consideration of the reasoning and conclusions in the ICJ Judgment....... 7
1.4 Overview of JARPA/JARPAII outcomes ............................................................ 11
2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES ...................................................................................12
2.1 Main Objective I ...............................................................................................122.1.1 Adoption of commercial whaling moratorium and introduction of the
RMP............................................................................................................132.1.2 The RMP and catch limits for the Antarctic minke whales ............................13
2.1.3 Improvements in the precision of biological and ecological information for
the application of the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales ............................15
2.1.4 Conclusion ..................................................................................................17
2.2 Main Objective II ..............................................................................................192.2.1 Importance of the investigation of the Antarctic marine ecosystem ...............192.2.2 Ecosystem modeling ....................................................................................20
2.2.3 Cooperation with CCAMLR........................................................................222.2.4 Contribution to the future improvement of the RMP ...................................23
2.3 Consistency with Annex P ..................................................................................24
2.4 Data and samples to be collected for the Main Objectives I and II ......................24
3. RESEARCH METHODS ........................................................................................25
3.1 Research area and period ..................................................................................25
3.1.1 Research area ..............................................................................................251

3.1.2 Research period ..........................................................................................26
3.2 Research Methods .............................................................................................26
3.2.1 Consideration of non-lethal means and lethal sampling ................................26
3.2.1.1 Main Objective I................................................................................ 26
3.2.1.2 Main Objective II .............................................................................. 28
3.2.2 Sampling survey methods for Antarctic minke whales ..................................28
3.2.3 Sighting survey methods for whales .............................................................28
3.2.4 Other established non-lethal survey methods for whales ...............................29
3.2.5 Survey methods for krill ..............................................................................30
3.2.6 Other survey methods .................................................................................30
3.3 Calculation of sample size for Antarctic minke whales ........................................31
3.3.1 Calculation..................................................................................................31
3.3.2 Possible adjustment to the latest available scientific knowledge ....................32
3.3.3 Necessity of new samples and importance of the long time-series data set .....32
3.4 Research vessels to be used and personnel to be involved ....................................33
4. TRIAL, EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NEW NON-LETHALTECHNIQUES ......................................................................................................33
4.1 Age data (Objective I (ii), Appendix 4) (also see Section 3.2.1.1) ..........................34
4.2 Stock structure (Objective I(iii), Appendix 6) .....................................................34
4.3 Prey consumption (Objective II(iii), Appendix 10) ..............................................35
4.4 Chemical markers as potential body condition indicator (Objective II(iii),
Appendix 10) ...................................................................................................37
4.5 Others ...............................................................................................................37
5. EFFECT ON THE STOCKS ...................................................................................38
6. TIMELINE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY ................................................................41
7. BACKUP PLAN FOR CONTINGENCIES ..............................................................44
8.

OUTPUT OFSCIENTISTS

THE RESEARCH, PARTICIPATION OFAND
COLLABORATIONWITHFOREIGNOTHER

RESEARCHES/ORGANIZATIONS ......................................................................452

9. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, PERSONNEL AND LOGISTIC RESOURCES .......47
REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................47

Appendices
Appendix 1: Process for development of this proposed research plan
Appendix 2: Clarification of research objectives in the proposed research plan
Appendix 3: Objective I(i) Abundance estimates for Antarctic minke whale taking account of g(0) andadditional variance estimate
Appendix 4: Objective I(ii) Improvement of precision of biological and ecological parameters Part 1:
Improvement of age data precision
Appendix 5: Objective I(ii) Improvement of precision of biological and ecological parameters Part 2:
Refinement of the SCAA model and estimation of biological parameters
Appendix 6: Objective I(iii) Refinement of stock structure hypotheses of Antarctic minke whale in
Areas III-VI for the implementation of the RMP
Appendix 7: Objective I(iv) Specification of RMP ISTs for the Antarctic minke whales
Appendix 8: Objective II(i) Plan for ecological research (krill abundance estimation andoceanographic observation)
Appendix 9: Objective II(ii) Abundance estimate of some cetacean species as input data for ecosystemmodeling
Appendix 10: Objective II(iii) Estimation of prey consumption by Antarctic minke whale and its
nutritional condition
Appendix 11: Objective II(iv) Ecosystem modeling Part 1: Spatial interaction among baleen whales
Appendix 12: Objective II(iv) Ecosystem modeling Part 2: Investigation of ecosystem dynamics in the
Antarctic Ocean
Appendix 13: A: Schematic charts on the data, analyses and steps related to Main Objective II of NEWREP-A
Appendix 14: Sample size calculation based on detectability of changes in the age-at-sexual maturity3

1. INTRODUCTION
The original proposal of the research plan was drafted and submitted to the Secretary to the International
Whaling Commission (IWC) and the Chair of its Scientific Committee (SC) on 18 November 2014, inconformity with paragraph 30 of the Schedule to the ICRW and Annex P (IWC, 2013b). Subsequently
it was reviewed by the Expert Panel in February 2015 (NEWREP-A Review Panel), and then additional
materials (in the form of ‘preliminary response’ and ‘addendum’) was reviewed by the IWC SC at its
2015 annual meeting from May to June, 2015.. The research plan has been now finalized taking into
account the comments and suggestions on scientific aspects provided by experts inside and outside the
IWC SC, in particular those from the NEWREP-A Review Panel, and from the IWC SC members. This
research plan forms the basis for the Government of Japan to issue a special permit, in accordance with
Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW). Even
after the research plan is finalized, the proponent always welcomes comments from outside on this planthat are based upon scientific consideration to which it will give due regard. Furthermore, this researchplan could be revised in relation to the lethal sample size, depending on the results of the analysis of
non-lethal research methods detailed in Section 4 below.

1.1 Importance of scientific research in the Antarctic Ocean
The Antarctic Ocean has its unique marine ecosystem and has the potential of its abundant living
resources that could be sustainably exploited for food and other purposes. In recent years, thesurrounding Antarctic region has been substantially affected by climate change and the resultant
fluctuations in the oceanographic environment are known to have influences on the global environment.
The Antarctic marine ecosystem is defined in Article 1, paragraph 3, of the Convention on theConservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (Convention-CAMLR) as “the complex ofrelationships of Antarctic marine living resources with each other and with their physical environment”.
This effectively means that it is composed of and made from complex interactions among the Antarctic
Ocean, its circumpolar currents, sea ice formations and biota including 17 species of cetaceans. Amongthese, blue (Balaenoptera musculus), fin (B. physalus), humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae), andAntarctic minke (B. bonaerensis) whales are the top krill predators. Other components of the ecosystem
include pinnipeds (e.g. crabeater seal), birds (e.g. penguins), and fish (e.g. toothfish) all of which are
directly or indirectly supported by the massive krill resources. For more than one hundred years,
mankind has been utilizing Antarctic marine ecosystem resources, including whales, seals, toothfish,and krill. Some of these have been severely overexploited in the course of history. The ICRW andConvention-CAMLR were promulgated in order to conserve and manage these important resources andto maintain their harvest potential for future generations.
In order to achieve conservation of its resources while pursuing their sustainable utilization and tounderstand and predict the effects of factors such as climate change, it is scientifically imperative toobtain an accurate understanding of many aspects of the Antarctic marine ecosystem including its
animals and their dynamics through collection, accumulation, and analysis of scientific data.
Long term research surveys in the Antarctic are scarce. Systematic sighting surveys were conductedduring the International Decade for Cetacean Research/Southern Ocean Whale and Ecosystem Research(IDCR/SOWER) under the auspices of the IWC SC for decades (Matsuoka et al., 2003). These surveys
produced important sighting data to study the abundance and abundance trends of large whales indifferent IWC Management Areas. The Japanese whale research programs in the Antarctic(JARPA/JARPAII) were the only comprehensive long-term systematic surveys that collected biologicalinformation from whales and data from its environment, using lethal and non-lethal approaches. The
comprehensive biological and environmental data (including abundance trends for several whale
species) collected by these programs for around 27 years have been very important to understand the4dynamics and interaction of whale species in the ecosystem, as recognized by the IWC SC review of
those programs (IWC, 2008; IWC, 2014a).
This scientific endeavor needs to be consistent with existing legal frameworks. The ICRW, in particular,
provides a fundamental ground for such research program on whales in the Antarctic. As discussed
below, this research plan is developed in accordance with the object and purpose as well as provisions
and other legal requirements of the ICRW including paragraph 10 (e) of its Schedule which establishedthe so called commercial whaling moratorium.
The main objectives of this research plan are twofold. The first main objective is “improvement in the
precision of biological and ecological information for the application of the Revised Management
Procedure (RMP) to the Antarctic minke whales” (see Section 2.1). This is aimed at contributing to theconsideration and work of the IWC SC in improving the IWC’s RMP that is the single-species
management procedure adopted by consensus of its members in 1994 to calculate a catch limit of baleen
whales for commercial whaling. The IWC SC continues to work on several issues on how the RMP
could be improved and how it could be implemented. The program under this proposed research plan
will collect and estimate the parameters required for application of the RMP to the Antarctic minke
whale. It will also contribute to the improvement of the RMP itself.
The second main objective is “investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine
ecosystem through building ecosystem models” (see Section 2.2). Previous research programs havefound that distributions and abundances of Antarctic minke, humpback, and fin whales, which areimportant parts of the Antarctic marine ecosystem, have been changing appreciably and that there could
be competitive relations among those whale species in terms of food (Matsuoka et al., 2011; Matsuoka
and Hakamada, 2014; Hakamada et al., 2013; Murase et al., 2014). It can be hypothesized that thisphenomenon was caused by increased pressure on Antarctic minke whales from the recovering
populations of humpback and fin whales that had been overexploited up to the 1960’s, and resultant
stagnation/decrease of the Antarctic minke whale populations that had experienced a drastic increase
supported by improved food availability as a result of the overexploitation of larger whales. They may
also be caused by fluctuations in the abundance of krill populations that are the common food resource
for the three species of whales or possibly as a result of changes in the ocean environment associatedwith climate change. Investigation of the causes and current dynamics is essential for the futureconservation and management of the whale resources as well as for the understanding of the Antarctic
marine ecosystem.
These objectives come within the research categories identified by the IWC SC in its Annex P (IWC,
2013b) (see Section 2.3).
Achieving a sustainable balance between the maintenance of the unique marine ecosystem and theutilization of its abundant resources is, as is common for all seas and oceans, an important challenge for
the Antarctic Ocean. This is also consistent with the objectives of the ICRW stipulated in its preamble;“to provide for the proper conservation of whale stocks and thus make possible the orderly developmentof the whaling industry”.

1.2 The International Court of Justice (ICJ) Judgment
On 31 March 2014, the ICJ issued its Judgment in the case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic(Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) (for the Judgment, dissenting opinions, separate opinions
and declarations, see http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/148/18136.pdf).
Although one needs to read through the entire Judgment in order to understand the context and precise
meaning of the Judgment as a whole, salient parts of what was stated in the Judgment are introduced inthis section.
In its operative paragraph, the Court found that “the special permits granted by Japan in connection with
JARPA II do not fall within the provisions of Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the International Convention
for the Regulation of Whaling” (paragraph 247 (2) of the Judgment. Hereafter, “paragraph …” refers to5the paragraph of the ICJ Judgment mentioned above), and decided that “Japan shall revoke any extant
authorization, permit or license granted in relation to JARPAII, and refrain from granting any further
permits in pursuance of that programme.” (paragraph 247 (7)). It should also be noted that the Court
found that “Japan has complied with its obligations under paragraph 30 of the Schedule to theInternational Convention for the Regulation of Whaling with regard to JARPA II.” (paragraph 247 (6)).
The Judgment, in its reasoning part, stated that “it is to be expected that Japan will take account of thereasoning and conclusions contained in this Judgment as it evaluates the possibility of granting any
future permits under Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the Convention” (paragraph 246). Although thisstatement was not made in the operative part of the Judgment, Japan takes account of “the reasoning
and conclusions contained in this Judgment”, key elements of which are as follows.
With respect to the function of Article VIII of the ICRW, the ICJ found that “since Article VIII,
paragraph 1, specifies that ‘the killing, taking, and treating of whales in accordance with the provisionsof this Article shall be exempt from the operation of this Convention’, whaling conducted under a special
permit which meets the conditions of Article VIII is not subject to the obligations under the Schedule
concerning the moratorium on the catching of whales for commercial purposes, the prohibition ofcommercial whaling in the Southern Ocean Sanctuary and the moratorium relating to factory ships”(paragraph 55).
The Court continued that, concerning the relationship between Article VIII and the object and purposeof the Convention, “the preamble of the ICRW indicates that the Convention pursues the purpose of
ensuring the conservation of all species of whales while allowing for their sustainable exploitation” andthus “amendments to the Schedule and recommendations by the IWC may put an emphasis on one or
the other objective pursued by the Convention, but cannot alter its object and purpose” (paragraph 56).
It then observed that “neither a restrictive nor an expansive interpretation of Article VIII is justified”
and noted that “the current Guidelines, Annex P, list three broad categories of objectives. Besides
programs aimed at ‘improv[ing] the conservation and management of whale stocks’, they envisage
programs which have as an objective to ‘improve the conservation and management of other living
marine resources or the ecosystem of which the whale stocks are an integral part’ and those directed at‘test[ing] hypotheses not directly related to the management of living marine resources’” (paragraph 58).
Based upon these considerations, the Court considered, with regard to the issuance of special permits,that “Article VIII gives discretion to a State party to the ICRW to reject the request for a special permit
or to specify the conditions under which a permit will be granted” but “whether the killing, taking andtreating of whales pursuant to a requested special permit is for purposes of scientific research cannot
depend simply on that State’s perception” (paragraph 61).
This led the Court to establish a standard of review; firstly “whether the programme under which these
activities occur involves scientific research” and secondly “if the killing, taking and treating of whales
is ‘for purposes of’ scientific research by examining whether, in the use of lethal methods, theprogramme’s design and implementation are reasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives”(paragraph 67). For assessing a program against this standard of review, the ICJ stated that “the Court
will look to the authorizing State, which has granted special permits, to explain the objective basis for
its determination” (paragraph 68).


As for the first limb of the standard of review, the Court observed that “the JARPA II Research
Plan describes areas of inquiry that correspond to four research objectives and presents a
programme of activities that involves the systematic collection and analysis of data by scientificpersonnel. The research objectives come within the research categories identified by the
Scientific Committee in Annexes Y and P (see paragraph 58 above). Based on the information
before it, the Court thus finds that the JARPA II activities involving the lethal sampling of whales
can broadly be characterized as “scientific research”” (paragraph 127). The Court in this context
noted that, concerning the avoidance of adverse effects on stock, “in the particular context of
JARPA II [….] Australia does not maintain that meeting the target sample sizes would have an
adverse effect on the relevant stocks” (paragraph 85).

6The second limb of the standard of review concerns “the programme’s design andimplementation” and its relevant elements are set forth in the judgment. The Court firstly
confirmed its views that “the stated research objectives of a programme are the foundation of aprogramme’s design” while noting that it is not for the Court “to decide whether the design andimplementation of a programme are the best possible means of achieving its stated objectives”.
It then found that “in order to ascertain whether a programme’s use of lethal methods is forpurposes of scientific research, the Court will consider whether the elements of a programme’s
design and implementation are reasonable in relation to its stated scientific objectives”,
suggesting that “such elements may include: decisions regarding the use of lethal methods[Element 1]; the scale of the programme’s use of lethal sampling [Element 2]; the methodology
used to select sample sizes [Element 3]; a comparison of the target sample sizes and the actual
take [Element 4]; the time frame associated with a programme [Element 5]; the programme’s
scientific output [Element 6]; and the degree to which a programme co-ordinates its activities
with related research projects [Element 7]” (paragraph 88, bracketed parts are added for thereference in the present plan). The Court then provided its analysis on these seven elements (forthe detailed discussions, see Section 1.3).

In its conclusion of assessments as regards the second limb of the standard of review, the Court firstly
found that “the use of lethal sampling per se is not unreasonable in relation to the research objectives of
JARPA II”. However, with respect to the design of JARPA II, the Court concluded that “the target sample
sizes in JARPA II are not reasonable in relation to achieving the programme’s objectives” (paragraph224). Four problems were specifically identified: The first three problems relate to the selection ofsample sizes relating to the Elements 2 and 3 above. The Court said: firstly “the evidence does not reveal
how those differences between the broad objectives of JARPA and JARPA II lead to the considerable
increase in the scale of lethal sampling in the JARPA II Research Plan”; secondly “the sample sizes forfin and humpback whales are too small” and “the programme’s design appears to prevent random
sampling of fin whales”; and thirdly the process used to determine the sample size for minke whales
lacks transparency.” The fourth problem relates to the use of lethal methods relating to the Element 1
above. The Court said, “little attention was given to the possibility of using non-lethal research methods
more extensively to achieve the JARPA II objectives and […] funding considerations, rather than strictly
scientific criteria, played a role in the programme’s design” (paragraph 225). With regard to theimplementation of JARPA II, the Court found, in line with the Element 4 mentioned above, that: firstly“no humpback whales have been taken”; secondly “the take of fin whales is only a small fraction of thenumber that the JARPA II Research Plan prescribes”; and thirdly “the actual take of minke whales has
also been far lower than the annual target sample size in all but one season. Despite these gaps between
the Research Plan and the programme’s implementation, Japan has maintained its reliance on the JARPA
II research objectives”. The Court also noted, in line with the Elements 5, 6 and 7 above, “other aspects
of JARPA II also cast doubt on its characterization as a programme for purposes of scientific research,such as its open-ended time frame, its limited scientific output to date, and the absence of significant cooperation between JARPA II and other related research projects” (paragraph 226). The Court thus
concluded that “the special permits granted by Japan for the killing, taking and treating of whales inconnection with JARPA II are not “for purpose of scientific research” pursuant to Article VIII, paragraph
1, of the Convention” (paragraph 227).

1.3 Japan’s consideration of the reasoning and conclusions in the ICJ Judgment
As mentioned above, the Judgment, in its reasoning part, stated that “it is to be expected that Japan willtake account of the reasoning and conclusions contained in this Judgment as it evaluates the possibilityof granting any future permits under Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the Convention” (paragraph 246).The
Court maintains that, in the use of lethal methods, the programme’s design and implementation need tobe reasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives (paragraph 67). The Court thus provides
meaningful guidance on the issuance of future special permits by Japan. The Court also states that it will
look to the authorizing State to explain the objective basis of its determination to grant special permits7

(paragraph 68). In this research plan, which duly takes account of “the reasoning and conclusions
contained in [the] judgment”, Japan explains the objective basis of its determination to grant special
permits.
Japan has in particular taken seriously the Court’s finding that the decision to grant special permits under
Article VIII, paragraph 1, of the ICRW, “cannot depend simply on that State’s perception” (paragraph61). It has therefore announced its determination to “follow an internationally open and highly
transparent process through securing the participation of renowned scientists from Japan and abroad,and through other processes including discussions at the IWC SC’s workshop and coordination withother institutions conducting relevant studies” (statement issued by the Minister of Agriculture, Forestry
and Fisheries, on April 18, 2014). Japan always welcomes comments from outside that are based upon
scientific consideration to which it will give due regard even after the research plan is finalized. The
process for development of the original proposal of the research plan, which was placed under the review
by the NEWREP-A Review Panel, is outlined in Appendix 1.
The question “whether the programme under which these activities occur involves scientific research”(the first limb of the standard of review adopted by the Court) is examined in more detail in relevant
parts in Sections 2, 3 and 6 respectively.
In the following part, it is explained that “in the use of lethal methods, the programme’s design andimplementation are reasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives” (the second limb of thestandard of review), through the examination of each of the aforementioned seven elements identified
by the Court.
Element 1: “decisions regarding the use of lethal methods”
 The Court noted, in respect of “decisions regarding the use of lethal methods”, that Japanand Australia “agree that non-lethal methods are not a feasible means to examine internalorgans and stomach contents” (paragraph 133) and took into account “the evidence
indicating that non-lethal alternatives are not feasible, at least for the collection of certain
data” (paragraph 135). However, the Court observed that “the JARPA II Research Planshould have included some analysis of the feasibility of non-lethal methods as a meansof reducing the planned scale of lethal sampling in the new programme” (paragraph 137).
In the course of its analysis, it paid a close attention to Japan’s response to a question
from a member of the Court on “what analysis it had conducted of the feasibility of nonlethal methods prior to setting the sample sizes for each year of JARPA II, and what
bearing, if any, such analysis had had on the target sample sizes” (paragraph 138). The
Court then concluded that “the papers to which Japan directed it reveal little analysis of
the feasibility of using non-lethal methods to achieve the JARPA II research objectives.
Nor do they point to consideration of the possibility of making more extensive use of
non-lethal methods in order to reduce or eliminate the need for lethal sampling, either
when JARPA II was proposed or in subsequent years” (paragraph 144).
 Japan continues to uphold its scientific policy with regard to whales that it does not use
lethal means more than it considers necessary. Taking account of the Court’s above
assessment, this research plan explains how the feasibility of non-lethal methods as ameans of reducing the planned scale of lethal sampling is carefully reviewed (see Section
3). It has been concluded, in particular, in this plan that there is no non-lethal methods for
obtaining age-data required for achieving Main Objective I. This plan also explains avariety of non-lethal methods to be tested, including satellite tagging, biopsy sampling
and their associated analytical methodologies, in order to further study their feasibility
and practicability (see Section 4). It should be noted here that the proposed plan
specifically includes the following:

Investigating the feasibility of age-determining methods other than earplug reading(i.e. DNA methylation analysis);8

Investigating the feasibility of biopsy sampling to collect skin and blubber samples
necessary for analysis of stock structure and other potential research items of Antarctic
minke whales;Conducting satellite tagging on Antarctic minke whales to elucidate the location of
their breeding grounds, in preparation for the collection of genetic samples from thebreeding grounds;

Investigating the feasibility of data-logger use for the research on feeding behavior of
Antarctic minke whales;Investigating the feasibility of chemical markers as potential body condition indicatorby using biopsy samples (biomarker).

Elements 2 and 3: “the scale of the programme’s use of lethal sampling” and “themethodology used to select sample sizes”
 Element 2, namely, “the scale of the programme’s use of lethal sampling” and Element 3,
namely, “the methodology used to select sample sizes” are both related to the selectionof sample sizes. The Court noted that “the evidence relating to the minke whale sample
size, like the evidence for the fin and humpback whale sample sizes, provides scantanalysis and justification for the underlying decisions that generate the overall sample
size. For the Court, this raises further concerns about whether the design of JARPA II isreasonable in relation to achieving its stated objectives” (paragraph 198). It should also
be noted, as mentioned above, that Japan and Australia “agree that non-lethal methods
are not a feasible means to examine internal organs and stomach contents. The Court
therefore considered that the evidence shows that, at least for some of the data sought by
JARPA II researchers, non-lethal methods are not feasible.” (paragraph 133).
 As noted above, age-data is indispensable for achieving Main Objective I of this researchplan (see Section 3). This is because it forms an essential input for detecting changes inbiological parameters such as age-at-sexual-maturity (ASM) and recruitment rates thatare necessary for this objective. The ASM makes considerable contribution to achieving
Main Objective I in the sense that it helps improve the Statistical Catch-at-Age Analysis(SCAA) performance for estimating other key parameters such as MSYR. This leads tothe better assessment and management of the Antarctic minke whales. It therefore
constitutes the scientific ground for the sample size calculation under this research plan.
In the initial stage of developing the research plan, availability, feasibility andpracticability of non-lethal research methods for obtaining age-data of the Antarctic
minke whales were carefully considered. However, it has been concluded that in order toobtain age-data at the annual scale, the collection of earplugs of whales is indispensable
and the sole practicable mean available at the present time. This can only be achieved bylethal sampling (the calculation of sample size to be explained in Section 3.3.1.)
 Under Main Objective II, stomach contents are required for assessing prey consumptionthat is necessary for investigating the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine
ecosystem (see Section 2.2). This also requires lethal methods as explicitly found in the
ICJ Judgment as mentioned above.
 Multiple approaches have been applied in order to calculate the sample size for thisresearch program including extensive simulations using ecosystem models. As a result,the final sample size was calculated based on age-data necessary for estimating ASM
which is one of the main interests under the Main Objective I. However, it has been foundthat the approaches attempted under the Main Objective II have not provided basis for
identifying specific sample sizes (see Section 3.3).
 This proposed sample size is the best possible estimation at the present level of scientificknowledge. As the research progresses and new information becomes available in the
coming years, there will be more knowledge that could improve the calculation of asample size. Under this research plan, revised sample sizes could be proposed, for the9consultation with the IWC SC, at the mid-term review after the first six year period and/or
other occasions as it becomes necessary.
Element 4: “a comparison of the target sample sizes and the actual take”
 Concerning “a comparison of the target sample sizes and the actual take”, the Court notedthat “Japan’s continued reliance on the first two JARPA II objectives to justify the target
sample sizes, despite the discrepancy between the actual take and those targets, coupledwith its statement that JARPA II can obtain meaningful scientific results based on the far
more limited actual take, cast further doubt on the characterization of JARPA II as aprogramme for purposes of scientific research. This evidence suggests that the target
sample sizes are larger than are reasonable in relation to achieving JARPA II’s statedobjectives” (paragraph 212).
 As research activities could be disrupted by both natural and human factors including
dangerous sabotage activities by an extreme anti-whaling NGO, this research planestablishes a contingency backup plan in order to secure the scientific value of data forthe purpose of achieving the established scientific objectives. This back-up plan responds
to the recommendation made at the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPA II
Special Permit Research Programme, held in Tokyo, Japan, February 24-28, 2014
(JARPA II review workshop) (see section 12.1.2 in IWC, 2014a).
 Issues arising from possible disruptions could include: reduced sample size, unsurveyed
research areas, missed research periods and sampling bias. The contingency back-up planaddresses three aspects; (i) adjustments of research protocols at the scene of disruption,(ii) adjustment of proposed research plans including research period, sample size, andresearch areas, and (iii) consideration of analysis methods to compensate the effects of
disruptions as much as possible. This ensures pre-planned response based on scientificconsideration to such disruptions, addressing concerns expressed in the Judgment.
Element 5: “the time frame associated with a programme”
 The Court observed, in relation to “the time frame associated with a programme”, that“with regard to a programme for purposes of scientific research, as Annex P indicates, a“time frame with intermediary targets” would have been more appropriate” (paragraph216).
 This research plan has set its research period as 12 years. It has also established“intermediary targets”, as suggested by the Judgment, specifying concrete target outputsof the first 6 years, together with a system of mid-term review. An assessment of the plan,
including on the feasibility of non-lethal methods will be made on a yearly basis. Thesetime frames are determined in view of the prospect of scientific works and practicalfactors including the natural environment in the Antarctic Ocean, required time forverifications and analyses of collected data and information, the capacity of the research
and financial constraints (See Sections 3.1.2 and 6).
Element 6: “the programme’s scientific output”
 In the context of “the programme’s scientific output”, the Court found that “in light of
the fact that JARPA II has been going on since 2005 and has involved the killing of about
3,600 minke whales, the scientific output to date appears limited” (paragraph 219).
 This research plan is primarily intended to contribute to the improvement of conservationand management of whale resources in the Antarctic in accordance with the ICRW as
shown in its research objectives. It follows that its scientific output will be produced firstand primarily for the review and discussion in the IWC SC. At the same time, in line withan observation by the Court, there will be increased efforts to publish its scientificachievements in peer-reviewed journals outside the IWC (see Section 8).
 It should also be noted that scientific data generated from this research will be madeavailable to other scientists both inside and outside the IWC SC in accordance with the
IWC Data Availability Agreement (IWC, 2004) and the Institute of Cetacean Research
10

(ICR)’s protocol for access to samples/data. Data availability arrangement is also
specified in this plan (see Section 8) in order to ensure that the research results will beutilized broadly by scientists worldwide.
Element 7: “the degree to which a programme co-ordinates its activities with related research
projects”
 Regarding “the degree to which a programme co-ordinates its activities with related
research projects”, the Court observed that “some further evidence of co-operation
between JARPA II and other domestic and international research institutions could havebeen expected in light of the programme’s focus on the Antarctic ecosystem andenvironmental changes in the region” (paragraph 222).
 Scientists of the ICR, which is expected to conduct the research program under this plan,
have already started to strengthen existing collaboration with relevant research
institutions that have direct interest in the Antarctic marine ecosystem such as
Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR),
Japan’s National Institute of Polar Research and Japan’s National Research Institute of
Far Seas Fisheries, among others. It should also be noted that deepening co-operation/coordination with these institutions will be sought in planning and implementing the krill
research and analysis and utilization of data derived from it, including abundance
estimate. For example, scientific outputs of this research plan will be shared with thoseresearch institutions and joint research will be proposed to relevant research institutions,
including CCAMLR scientists. Section 8 will deal with specific discussions on thiselement.
As the ICJ found that “Japan has complied with its obligations under paragraph 30 of the Schedule” tothe ICRW (paragraph 247(6)), it will continue to abide by this provision. This plan specifies, as required,(a) objectives of the research (see Section 2), (b) number of the whales to be taken (see Section 3.3), (c)opportunities for participation in the research by scientists of other nations (see Section 8) and (d)possible effect on conservation of stock (see Section 5) in the following sections. Sex, size and stock of
the whale to be taken are not specified as this program adopts random sampling procedure based upon
scientific consideration (see Section 3.2.2). Comments and suggestions offered during the review
process of the original proposal of the research plan by the IWC SC and the NEWREP-A Review Panel
were taken into account in finalizing this plan.. Finally, whales taken under this program will so far aspracticable be processed and the proceeds will be dealt with in accordance with the direction issued by
the government of Japan in conformity with Article VIII, paragraph II, of the ICRW.
It is important to reiterate that the Court confirmed that the objects and purposes of the ICRW include
sustainable exploitation of whale stocks and that special permit whaling under Article VIII, paragraph
1, of the ICRW is legally permissible under certain conditions. Japan has therefore announced that it
confirmed its basic policy of pursuing the resumption of commercial whaling, and collecting andanalyzing necessary data through special permit whaling for this purpose, in full accordance with legal
requirements including the ICRW, its paragraph 10 (e) of the Schedule which establishes the moratoriumon commercial whaling, as well as in light of the ICJ Judgment. This plan explains that the program
meets expectations of the Court and that Japan is thus ready to conduct its special permit whaling in the
Antarctic for purposes of scientific research under Article VIII in full compliance with international law,and gives due consideration to the comments from the IWC SC in accordance with paragraph 30 of the
Schedule and Annex P, comments outside the IWC SC, and the recommendations and suggestions by
the NEWREP-A Review Panel.

1.4 Overview of JARPA/JARPAII outcomes
JARPA was started in the 1987/88 and 1988/89 austral summer seasons as a two-year feasibility study.
The full program started in 1989/90 and was completed in 2004/05. The JARPA II started in the 2005/06
11

and 2006/07 as a two-year feasibility survey. The full program started in 2007/08 and the first six-year
period was completed in 2010/11. The JARPA II was cancelled after the 2013/14 season in compliancewith the ICJ Judgment. The objectives of JARPA and JARPA II as well as details of the scientific outputs
from the research were summarized in Pastene et al. (2014a).
Data and results from the JARPA were reviewed in three workshops: an IWC intersessional working
group meeting held in May 1997 (IWC JARPA mid-term review) (IWC, 1998a); a non-IWC JARPA
review workshop called by the Government of Japan in January 2005 (Japan JARPA review) (Anon,
2005); and the final IWC intersessional workshop held in December 2006 (IWC JARPA final review)(IWC, 2008).
Data and results of JARPA II obtained in the first period (2005/06-2010/11), being combined with
JARPA data, were reviewed under the IWC SC during a specialist workshop held in February 2014
(IWC, 2014a). The workshop welcomed the scientific contribution of JARPA/JARPAII. At the sametime it identified those areas where further work was required and provided useful suggestions andrecommendations. Several of those suggestions and recommendations are also relevant for some of theanalyses proposed in this research plan, and these were taken into consideration to improve the research
program proposed.
Below are some key scientific outcomes of JARPA and JARPAII:
JARPA (Pastene et al., 2014a; IWC, 2008)
•
•
•
•
•

Two biological stocks of the Antarctic minke whale (I and P stocks) distribute in the
JARPA research area.
Several biological parameters related to growth were estimated by biological stock.
The average annual natural mortality rate and the age-specific natural mortality were
estimated by biological stock.
Abundance of the Antarctic minke whale remained broadly stable while those of the
humpback and fin whales increased appreciably (and statistically significantly) during the
JARPA period.
Changes in whale species composition and distribution were observed in the JARPA
research area.

JARPAII (Pastene et al., 2014a; IWC, 2014a)
•
•
•
•
•

Trends of demographic parameters of Antarctic minke whale in 1940s-1970s wereconsistent with the pattern expected under the krill surplus hypothesis.
The changes in the Antarctic marine ecosystem suggested under the JARPA research e.g.
changes in whale species composition and distribution, and possible biological changes inkrill predators such as the Antarctic minke whale, were confirmed.
The stock structure hypothesis of Antarctic minke whale derived from JARPA research
was confirmed and refined. There is a soft boundary between stocks, which changes by
year and sex.
Hypotheses on stock structure of humpback, fin and southern right whales in the feeding
grounds, were proposed.
Progress was made toward the development of two types of ecosystem models: multispecies production model and Ecopath with Ecosim. Additional data and analyses wereidentified to further progress this work.

2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES
2.1 Main Objective I
Main Objective I
Improvements in the precision of biological and ecological information for the application of the RMP
to the Antarctic minke whales.
12In order to highlight the significance of the Main Objective I, this section describes i) adoption ofcommercial whaling moratorium and introduction of the RMP; ii) the basic idea of RMP catch limits
for the Antarctic minke whales; and iii) necessity of improvement in the precision of biological andecological information for the application of the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales.

2.1.1 Adoption of commercial whaling moratorium and introduction of the RMP
Whale stocks in the Antarctic had been heavily utilized since the beginning of 20th Century until the
1980s. There is no doubt that the large baleen whales such as blue, fin and humpback whales were overhunted, which caused sequential depletion of those whale stocks in the Antarctic (Allen, 1980).
As a temporary measure responding to the situation, “the Commercial Whaling Moratorium” wasestablished by adopting Paragraph 10(e) of the Schedule to the ICRW in 1982. Its text reads:“Notwithstanding the other provisions of paragraph 10, catch limits for the killing for commercial
purposes of whales from all stocks for the 1986 coastal and the 1985/86 pelagic seasons and thereafter
shall be zero. This provision will be kept under review, based upon the best scientific advice, and by
1990 at the latest the Commission will undertake a comprehensive assessment of the effects of thisdecision on whale stocks and consider modification of this provision and the establishment of othercatch limits (underline added).”During discussions at the IWC that resulted in the establishment of the Commercial Whaling
Moratorium, it was argued that the scientific information for the management of whales was uncertain
and therefore scientific knowledge should be accumulated while suspending all commercial whaling.
This is specifically reflected in the text of Schedule 10(e) as underlined above.
With this awareness, the RMP was finalized in 1992 by the IWC SC for the purpose of undertaking “acomprehensive assessment” of the effects of the IWC’s decision on whale stocks (reflected by the
population models underlying the RMP ISTs), and of establishing non-zero catch limits, as stipulated inparagraph 10(e) (IWC, 1986, 1987 and 1988).
The RMP is a risk-averse, powerful and important management tool developed by the IWC SC. The full
RMP process is composed of three steps: i) pre-implementation assessment, ii) implementation processincluding the Implementation Simulation Trials (ISTs), and iii) application of the Catch Limit Algorithm(CLA) based on the output from steps i) and ii). The implementation process (ii) above takes two years
to be completed. Each of the steps requires data identified in the Requirements and Guidelines for
Implementations under the Revised Management Procedure (IWC, 2012a).

2.1.2 The RMP and catch limits for the Antarctic minke whales
The basic idea behind the RMP is as follows:
1) The RMP is to calculate a catch limit for a target area assumed to consist of a single stock, based ona specified algorithm, the CLA. The RMP has a built-in safety threshold (i.e. zero catch if the
population size is estimated below 54% of carrying capacity). The RMP employs a simple surplus
production model and the CLA requires only time series of past catches and available abundance
estimates (with their associated CVs) with several tuning levels (60-72% of target depletion levelof population size after 100 years implementation for a specified trial with the lowest Maximum
Sustainable Yield Rate (MSYR) value) to calculate catch limits. The calculation requires regularavailability of abundance estimates with reasonable precision. According to the definition of thetarget area and spatial stock structures, several harvesting scenarios in terms of areas and seasons(i.e. variants) for calculation of catch limits are considered.
2) Apart from the simple model above, a wide variety of realistic models (“trials”, not necessarily thesame as the model used in the CLA but rather complicated because of model uncertainty concerning13

the population dynamics itself and population structure) are proposed in order to replicate future
population dynamics based on supposed implementation of the CLA above and consideration of
uncertainty in dynamics, estimation and so on. Based on this form of comprehensive simulation
testing, only variants of harvest rules with acceptable levels of risks are selected for calculating theactual catch limits (IWC, 2012a).
As mentioned above, the RMP ISTs require several types of information for the management of whales,
which include
time series of past catches by areatime series of abundance estimates (and their CVs) by areahypotheses of stock structure (for trial structures, definition of target areas, variants of the CLA)biological information on natural mortality, production rate, maturity and recruitment relationshipetc. (for trial structures)

stochastic variation of migration, mixing etc. (for trial structures)

Based on the historical and legal background mentioned above and also based on the fact that the IWC
SC has been engaged in improving the basis for the Implementation of the RMP, the calculation of catch
limits of the Antarctic minke whales through the application of the RMP is consistent with the provisionof Schedule 10(e) and the work of the IWC SC (Morishita, 2013). The specific idea of the RMP and theflow of the full process of the RMP Implementation is described below.
The IWC SC carried out in 1993 a trial application of the RMP to Antarctic minke whales and calculated
a range of circumpolar annual catch limits of approximately 2,049 to 4,490 (IWC, 1994). However, thistrial calculation can be characterized as being based on excessively conservative assumptions in viewof the limited knowledge of the Antarctic minke whale stock structure at that time; for example, thelongitudinal width of Small Areas (reflecting possible separate stocks) was set as 10 degrees and thelower end of the MSYR (for the mature component of the population) was 1%. In recent years new
information became available that could improve the implementation of the RMP on the Antarctic minke
whale (see below).
In this context, it should be noted that the most conservative whaling scenarios are selected as aprecautionary approach, when there is uncertainty in the biological and ecological information requiredin the RMP ISTs such as stock structure and reproductive parameters (uncertainty is related to the limited
amount of data, which in turn implies less precision in the parameters). In other words, further biologicaland ecological information will contribute to reducing uncertainty, and therefore less conservative
whaling scenarios can be used, which usually provide larger catch limits. In this way, additional data to
be obtained under this new research program could be used to increase the allowable catch limits ofAntarctic minke whales without increasing the depletion risk. This will be in line with one of the IWC’s
management objectives for commercial whaling under the RMP, which is “making possible the highest
possible yield from the stock” (IWC, 1990).
IWC Resolution 1997-5 “INSTRUCTS the Scientific Committee not to consider Southern Hemisphereminke whales in the context of implementation of the RMP unless advised to do so by the Commission”(IWC, 1998b). From this perspective, it should be noted that this research plan does not request the IWC
SC to conduct the implementation of the RMP on Antarctic minke whales. Furthermore, the general
RMP issues of improving the SCAA analysis and investigating means to incorporate ecosystem effects
into the RMP have been recognized as high priority issues by the IWC SC (see for example section 13.2
in IWC, 2014e) and this new research program is expected to contribute to the IWC SC discussions.
Since the adoption of the RMP, the RMP itself has served as a good example for recent management
procedures developed for other domestic/international fishery management organizations. Such amanagement scheme with comprehensive simulation testing to produce objective harvest control rules
is now well-known as the framework of “Management Strategy Evaluation (MSE)”, which makes it
clear that the RMP is a pioneer of modern fishery resource management.
142.1.3 Improvements in the precision of biological and ecological information for the application of
the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales
The IWC SC has been investigating the population dynamics of the Antarctic minke whales through the
SCAA modeling approach. However, the results of SCAA analyses conducted until now have led to theconclusion that issues such as the improvement of the precision of MSYR estimates still require further
relevant information and warrants further investigation on the time-varying parameters such as carrying
capacity and productivity (IWC, 2014c).
Under this Main Objective I, not only abundance estimates and hypotheses of the stock structure but
also certain biological and ecological parameters, including ASM estimated by age and reproductive
data, are keys in the specification of trials, and therefore narrowing the reasonable range of their values
and hypotheses is an important issue for calculating reasonable catch limits and thus ensuring the soundmanagement of whaling once paragraph 10 (e) of the Schedule is lifted. Using this basic idea, the IWC
SC has improved RMP ISTs to allow improved selection amongst RMP variants.
Abundance data
Some international and national surveys have been conducted in the Antarctic Ocean for estimating
whale population sizes and monitoring their population trends. Particularly, the IDCR and the SOWER
surveys under the auspices of the IWC have provided valuable information on the distribution andabundance of large whales at the circumpolar scale. Also, the Japanese surveys in the Antarctic(JARPA/JARPA II) contributed information on finer time-scale trends in abundance because of theavailability of abundance estimates virtually every other year. From these surveys, recovery of
population sizes for the blue, fin and humpback whales have been confirmed (Branch, 2007; Matsuoka
and Hakamada, 2014; Matsuoka et al., 2011). Also, for the Antarctic minke whales, the problem of g(0)attributed to their surfacing/diving behavior was resolved by a new statistical model (OK method,
Okamura and Kitakado, 2012), and a set of abundance estimates agreed by the IWC SC was produced(IWC, 2013a). These estimates of g(0) were also used in the JARPA/JARPA II estimates and abundancetrends in the study areas reflecting near-stability have been confirmed (Hakamada et al., 2013;
Hakamada and Matsuoka, 2014).
Biological and ecological parameters
For the Antarctic minke whales, in addition to the abundance estimates mentioned above, several typesof biological data have become available since the commercial whaling era (e.g. Kato, 1982). In
particular, the technical procedures for determination of age and maturity status were well-developed
and became consistently used over years (Bando et al., 2006; Zenitani et al., 1997). These advances
could then give key information for inferring population dynamics of the Antarctic minke whales. The
catch-at-age data and knowledge on maturity by age, which usually play a central role in fisherypopulation assessments, are important sources of information for estimating population dynamics of the
Antarctic minke whale, including yearly changes in carrying capacity and productivity. The current
changes observed in the Antarctic ecosystem warrants continuing research efforts to focus on thechanges in the carrying capacity and productivity.
The parameters of age-structured population dynamics models have been estimated using both theabundance estimates and catch-at-age data provided by samples from commercial whaling and the
JARPA/JARPAII (Mori and Butterworth, 2006; Punt, 2014a). In the population dynamics model,
parameters such as the “natural mortality rate (M)” (whose age-dependence was also determined (Punt,
2014b)) and the “MSYR” are important. It should be noted that the estimate of MSYR is still sensitive
to model assumptions and thus can take a wider range of values, including those which are unrealisticallyhigh in view of knowledge for other baleen whales. The biological parameters including these which
15will be estimated from data collected by this research program will contribute to the trials structure in
the RMP ISTs.
These biological parameters are estimated using catch-at-age modeling methods. Several of suchmethods have been already applied to data for Antarctic minke whales to draw inferences regarding
trends in abundance for this species. As one of these methods, the SCAA was first presented to the
Scientific Committee in 2005 (Punt and Polacheck, 2005). It has been modified over time to more
adequately mimic the available data on length, conditional age-at-length and indices of abundance from
IDCR/SOWER and JARPA/JARPAII. A summary of the history of the application of the SCAA to
Antarctic minke whales was presented by Punt (2014a). The SCAA model is recognized as the “bestcurrently available model for examining stock dynamics for Antarctic minke whales” (IWC, 2014a).
Typical outputs from the SCAA analysis are the historical trends in abundance (total abundance andrecruitment), MSYR, natural mortality (M), recruitment rates and growth curves. The 2013 IWC SC
meeting considered that some of the conclusions regarding the application of the SCAA to Antarctic
minke whales appear to be supported “quite robustly” (IWC, 2014c). This includes the result that
relative trends in past abundance are generally estimated consistently (IWC 2014c). The SCAA is
designed to detect, among others, changes in recruitment rates and to provide better estimation of thesechanges, which have important contribution to RMP trial specifications for the species as a time-varying
parameter. Antarctic minke whales have exhibited growth rates well in excess of 1% per year (Punt,
2014b). Using such updated parameters, sustainable catch levels are considered to be much greater than
outputs from the current RMP would provide. This leads to a reasonable scientific assessment that an
improved RMP could be developed for Antarctic minke whales that would allow appreciably greater
catches without any risk to the population. This is in line with both the management objectives agreed
by the Commission for the RMP and the objectives and purposes of the Convention itself.
There are, however, certain difficulties associated with these important parameters such as MSYR. In
fact, although MSYR can be estimated by the SCAA, its output still has considerable level of uncertainty.
One of the possible approaches to overcome this challenge is the use of ASM. The ASM is influential
to the numbers of mature animals, especially females, and possible future changes in the ASM affect thecarrying capacity and the productivity. In addition, the ASM is of great importance for contributing to
information on the proportion of matured Antarctic minke whales that is used for SCAA. This could
lead to the improvement of the SCAA performance for estimating aforementioned key parameters suchas MSYR. The mean ASM can be derived directly from an analysis of the proportion of mature animals
at each age in the catch. Usually the age at which 50% of the animals are sexually mature is taken as theaverage at first sexual maturity. This is identified through direct observation of reproductive organs.
There are also indirect methods for estimating ASM. As noted in the relevant literature, “[i]ndirect
methods of estimations of mean age at sexual maturation (tm) include estimating tm from mean length
at age curves when mean body length at first sexual maturity is known, calculating the age at firstovulation from regression of age on corpus number, and analysis of the earplug transition phase”(Lockyer, 1984a). This research plan will use the former method, namely direct observation of
reproductive organs. Samples will be arranged by cohorts (i.e. years in which the whales born). As noted
above, the ASM is crucial to define the mature component in the population, which can contribute to its
reproduction, and thus has an implication to the recruitment process and will contribute to achieving
Main Objective I of the research plan. This data item can also be used as an indicator of prey availability
over time, since less availability of prey would cause delayed sexual maturity. In this regard, the ASM
is useful for understanding inter-species competition among baleen whales over krill in the Antarctic
Ocean and it is also relevant to the Main Objective II of the research plan.
Stock structure
When it comes to the stock structure, Pastene (2006) showed that there are two genetically different
stocks (so-called I-stock and P-stock named after “Eastern Indian Ocean stock” and “Western South
Pacific Ocean stock”, respectively) and these two stocks are mixed in a transition area. This inference
was confirmed by integration of various sources of information provided by the JARPA/JARPA II
16

programs such as different genetic markers, morphometrics and other biological traits. In addition, a
recent study using microsatellite loci and morphometric measurements suggests that the spatial
distribution of the two stocks has a soft boundary in the main JARPA/JARPAII study area (IWCManagement Areas IV and V) and the mixing pattern depends on year and sex. However, the JARPAII
review workshop noted that another interpretation of the data is possible instead of variable mixing of
two stocks over years, and furthermore the certainty associated with these conclusions becomes weaker
for locations outside the main research area (IWC, 2014a). Therefore it is considered that further
analyses with the existing data in the current study area and additional data from the outside of the mainarea are worth conducting. These analyses may provide extensive information to specify valid
population structure hypotheses in more detail, and these would also provide a basis for improvementof the SCAA, trial specifications and application of the CLA.

2.1.4 Conclusion
As described above, the RMP is a management procedure which guarantees sustainability with safe
levels of catch limits over a period of 100 years (IWC, 2012a). While considerable data and information
are already available through past research, more refined information over a longer period is necessary
for improvement of the RMP Implementation (see Table 1).
Therefore, the Main Objective I aims at providing required data for application of the ISTs and improving
the assessment process under the RMP Implementation. Furthermore, the actual catch limits which may
be used for the lifting of the Moratorium, will be derived from the achievement of this research objective.
The specific data and samples required in this proposed program for the Main Objective I are amplified
in the subsequent section (Section 2.4).
Table 1. Existing information and problems to be addressed relevant to RMP Implementation for the
Antarctic minke whales.
Existing
values Problems/pending issues
and knowledge

1) Abundance

IDCR/SOWER(OK estimates)
JARPA/JARPAII

Aspects to potentially becleared with past data andnew data under the
proposed research plan

IDCR/SOWER estimates  Obtain new series of
become subject to theabundance
estimates“phase-out rule”
from surveys with IWC
oversightwithg(0) usable for conditioning
correction
purpose Application of the g(0)
 usable for CLA in trials
estimate for correcting
 no estimates agreed for
JARPA/JARPAII
use in the actual CLA as Repeated calculation of
yetabundance estimates forstudy areas will be helpful
to draw information oninter-annual variation of
distribution(better
estimate of additionalvariance and inference offactoraffectingthevariation) and to improve17

adjustments
g(0)

made

for

(Objective I(i))2) Biologicalandecologicalparameters

M: Age-dependent  How the time-varying
valueswereparameters such as K
estimated by theand productivity will
SCAAchange in the future is
unknown
MSYR(1+) ： 1 ～ Theestimateof
4％
MSYR(1+)bythe(revised
range
SCAA is sensitive to thegiven by metamodel configuration
analysis)
ASM ： Time-  ASM seems to beslightly increasing
invariant maturity
(age
at
50%
maturitywas
assumed to be 8.5)

3) Stockstructure

Improvement of precisionofbiological/ecologicalinformation
 Further monitoring of thechanges in the carrying
capacity and productivity
 Try to narrow the range ofMSYR with longer seriesof catch-at-age data,
abundance estimates Detection of changes in
ASM over years(Objective I(ii))

A hard boundary  Soft boundaries with
with a process error
annual variation andisassumedinsinglestock
withstatistical catch-atisolation by distanceage analysis.
constituteanotherpossible assumption

Further investigation withadditional data in previously
uncoveredareas
andadditional repeated data inthe main study areas(Objective I(iii))

4) Specification Possible to use  Need to define future  Trials structure can beof RMP/IST existing
outputschanges in carrying
considered with changes
from Punt’s SCAA
capacityin carrying capacity etc.
and linkage between
 No specific species
recruitment
andinteraction, which likely
environmental changes
occur Possible
contribution
from ecosystem modeling(in Main Objective II)(Objective I(iv))

As shown in Table 1, there are several research items necessary to achieve the Main Objective I. For
this reason, this proposed plan also identifies four sub-objectives as follows (see also Appendices 3-7):
Objective I(i): Abundance estimates for Antarctic minke whales taking into account of g(0) andadditional varianceObjective I(ii): Improvement of precision of biological and ecological parameters
Objective I(iii): Refinement of stock structure hypotheses of Antarctic minke whale in Areas IIIVI for the implementation of the RMP
Objective I(iv): Specification of RMP ISTs for the Antarctic minke whales

18Figure 1. Relationship among the four sub-objectives under the Main Objective I(the directed arrows mean flows of information among them)

2.2 Main Objective II
Main Objective II
The other main research objective is Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine
ecosystem through building ecosystem models.

2.2.1 Importance of the investigation of the Antarctic marine ecosystem
JARPA and JARPA II have found, through their lethal and non-lethal research components, thepossibility of ongoing and substantial changes in the Antarctic marine ecosystem as reflected by annual
shifts in the distribution and migration of the main species of whales (e.g. Antarctic minke, humpback,and fin whales) (Murase et al., 2014) and changes in the nutritional condition of minke whales (Konishi
et al., 2008; 2014, Konishi and Walløe, 2014). Such findings indicate that whales are crucial species inunderstanding the changes in the Antarctic marine ecosystem.
One important indicator of shifts in the ecosystem is ASM. In fact, ASM in the Antarctic minke whales
changed from 12 years old to 7 years old between 1946 and 1970 and stabilized subsequently until now(Thompson et al., 1999; Zenitani and Kato, 2006). It has been hypothesized that such changes occurredin response to change in nutritional condition, which became better for the Antarctic minke whales after
the depletion of large whales such as blue and humpback whales, which fed on the same prey, theAntarctic krill.
Furthermore in view of potential ecosystem functions in the Antarctic marine ecosystem such as climate
control and sustainable provisions of useful natural resources, investigation of the structure anddynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building ecosystem models is thus criticallyimportant.
While numerous attempts have been made to build ecosystem models in the Antarctic and other marine
areas, it is well recognized that the exercise is not simple and requires substantial investment in termsof time, data, analysis and trials.

192.2.2 Ecosystem modelingIn the Antarctic Ocean, Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) is the main prey species and plays a crucialrole in influencing the ecosystem surrounding large baleen whales like blue, fin, humpback andAntarctic minke whales and other krill predators like seals and sea birds. On the other hand, as
mentioned earlier, a sequential depletion took place in the 1950s and 1960s amongst the baleen whalesin the Antarctic, and the pattern of utilization of krill among the whale species may also have been
affected by these occurrences. It is necessary under these circumstances to build models to quantify
interactions among predators like whale species for the main prey species, krill, and to examine thedynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem. This will enable to conduct the investigation on what has
happened in the past and to predict what is going to happen in the Antarctic.
A broad range of approaches have been proposed and attempted for building ecosystem models (e.g.
Plagányi, 2007). One of the most comprehensive approaches (or so-called the "whole-of-ecosystem"
modelling, e.g. Plagányi et al., 2012) is Ecopath-with-Ecosim (EwE, e.g. Pauly et al., 2000), in which acomplicated system is represented by multi-directional linkages among component species withconsideration of an initial mass-balancing of the system and its subsequent dynamics. This approach has
been widely used for constructing marine ecosystem models, but it also requires various types of
information such as the biomass levels, the diet compositions, per capita growth rates and the extent ofnecessary consumption with consideration of required energy, and these types of information are often
influential with regard to the models’ results. Furthermore, predicting future population dynamics
demands further information and assumptions. Nevertheless, it is still beneficial, recognizing thechallenges and limitations, to try to draw a bigger picture of the ecosystem through attempting thisapproach.
There is another framework of ecosystem modeling. The dynamics of the population size of wildlife
species has traditionally been expressed as a form of production model (e.g. Butterworth and Rademeyer,
2005; Hilborn, 1990). This contains, of course, the effect of density dependence, which is usually linked
with the relative depletion of a population compared to its carrying capacity. The model is then extended
to consider prey availability together with competition in utilizing them to inform of the impact of
predators on prey species. This can be regarded as a model of intermediate complexity of an ecosystem(e.g. Plagányi et al., 2012). Pioneering works were developed by Lotka and Volterra (Lotka, 1910;
Volterra, 1931). Each of them derived different sets of equations, which are now called “predator-preyinteractions” and “competition for food and space”. Since then, the models have been further developed
to take into account multiple prey and predator species simultaneously while facing “the curse ofdimension”, especially in the presence of many species to be considered in, for example, a region of the
Antarctic. Although the multiple-predators and multiple-prey system potentially requires a large numberof parameters, the Antarctic marine ecosystem is simpler than most of the others, and hence offers aparticularly good opportunity to impose limits on the component species and their hierarchy without
unduly jeopardizing the realistic consideration of the model.
When considering this simple hierarchical structure, the extended production model might work wellwithout encountering the difficulty of over-parameterization. This proposed program thus re-visits amodeling approach in a preceding study conducted by Mori and Butterworth (2006) and Kitakado et al.
(2014a). Although the multi-species production model is less complex than the other approaches toecosystem modeling, it still has many unknown parameters. Some modifications were therefore added
into their basic system of equations for multiple predators (some baleen whales and seals) and single
prey species (krill) by considering bioenergetic and allometric reasoning (e.g. Yodzis and Innes, 1992).
The maximum consumption is linked to the body weight of the predators.
This sort of model has the potential to estimate the extent of competition between the baleen whales.
For example, since the population sizes of other larger baleen whales such as blue, fin and humpback
whales declined through commercial harvesting in the past, there may have been a state of krill surplus
in the Antarctic (Laws, 1977; 1985). This surplus could have been taken by the Antarctic minke whales,and since that time this species may have been and may still remain above their pre-exploitation level(Pastene et al., 2014a).
20

In view of examining multi-species competition among whales, it is important to collect relevant
information on humpback and fin whales. This is mainly because it has been observed that they haveincreasing biomass and are in possible competition with other whale species over space and krills forfood in the Antarctic marine ecosystem. Data on distribution and abundance for these species will beobtained by the non-lethal component of the program and this program will also seek to utilize proxies
derived from existing scientific knowledge accumulated through JARPA and JARPA II on other speciesof whales in the Antarctic and the same species in other seas at this stage, pending the result of the midterm review after the first six year-period of the program.
This program therefore attempts to build ecosystem models through analyzing data (data required under
the Main Objective II is listed under section 2.4) in the Antarctic Ocean; 1) Modeling spatial interaction
among baleen whales, 2) estimation of multi-production models with consideration of the predator-preysystem and allometric reasoning.
As the second main objective, this plan proposes the Main Objectives II “Investigation of the structureand dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building ecosystem models”. Ecosystemmodeling was one of the primary objectives in the JARPAII. However, it became evident that the lackof information on krill abundance and its trend caused difficulty in the identification of key parametersin the model. In this new research proposal, the krill survey component is strengthened to obtain that
key information. In addition, observations of the body condition of Antarctic minke whales conductedin JARPA and JARPA II are proposed to continue, and improvement of the indicators of body conditionand nutrition level through the collection and use of blubber thickness and stomach contents will be
attempted so as to detect an effect on the prey consumption by the Antarctic minke whales. It should
also be noted that such an effort will further contribute to the better interpretation of ASM data that is
an important indicator, as mentioned above, of the Antarctic marine ecosystem. These data are to be
integrated for better ecosystem modeling and estimation.
It is important to reiterate that the Main Objective II has also scientific significance regarding the
elucidation of the Antarctic marine ecosystem as a whole from mid- and long- term perspective, despite
current uncertainties in the models investigated, as recognized among scientists/by IWC SC(IWC,
2014a).
This plan therefore identifies the following sub-objectives to achieve the Main Objective II (see also
Appendices 8-12):
Objective II(i): Ecological Research (krill abundance estimation and oceanographic observation)
Objective II(ii):Abundance estimate of some cetacean species as input data for ecosystemmodeling
Objective II(iii): Estimation of prey consumption by the Antarctic minke whale and its nutritional
condition
Objective II(iv): Ecosystem modeling (Spatial interaction among baleen whales and consideration of
predators-prey system and allometric reasoning)As noted by the NEWREP-A Review Panel, the Main
Objective II of NEWREP-A “relates to a field in development which makes specifying the overalloutcomes in a 12-year program more difficult than for” the Main Objective I (IWC, 2015a pp39).
Appendix 13 includes charts showing the structure of the models, basic analyses, data/samples, and thesteps required to accomplish the Main Objective II of NEWREP-A. This Appendix is prepared tofacilitate understanding of complexity of the structure of the Main Objective II.

21

Figure 2. Relationship among the four sub-objectives under the Main Objective II(the directed arrows mean flows of information among them)

2.2.3 Cooperation with CCAMLR
The CCAMLR has been engaged in scientific research and analyses regarding the Antarctic marine
ecosystem, and in 2008 an IWC/CCAMLR joint workshop on ecosystem modeling in the Antarctic (theJoint CCAMLR-IWC Workshop to Review Input Data for Antarctic Marine Ecosystem Models) was
held. The proponent contributed to the Workshop through providing information on whale abundance,
biology and ecology for the baleen and toothed whales in the Antarctic. Furthermore the CCAMLR
Working Group on Ecosystem Monitoring and Management (WG-EMM) agreed in its 2014 meeting tofurther IWC/CCAMLR joint work. Data obtained from this new scientific research program, e.g.
abundance and trends of key whale species, will contribute to this joint effort.
As noted earlier, within the Antarctic marine ecosystem the krill is a key prey species, supporting
different species of baleen whales, pinnipeds, birds and fish. Information on krill biomass trends andkrill size structure is fundamental for the development of ecosystem models, independent of the specificpurposes the modeling exercise could have. This was recognized by the JARPA II review workshop thatrecommended, in the context of ecosystem modeling research, ‘that future high priority be given to
obtaining new estimates to allow an area-based time series of krill biomass estimates’ (IWC, 2014a).
The JARPA II review workshop recommended that ‘future surveys conducted during JARPA II employ
survey design standards, including the spacing between net-tow stations along the acoustic transect lines,
similar to those developed and implemented for the CCAMLR 2000, BROKE and BROKE-Westsurveys’ (IWC, 2014a). With this recommendation the workshop recognized the experience accumulated
by CCAMLR on the study of krill biology and abundance.

22

The best way to collect the information on abundance and size structure of krill, in line with therecommendations by the JARPA II review workshop, is through international research collaboration
with CCAMLR experts. In this way, data on krill collected by this research can be used for multiple
purposes and by multiple organizations, e.g. for the purpose of ecosystem modeling under the Japanese
research program, and for ecosystem modeling under CCAMLR.
As described in Appendix 8, two kinds of krill surveys are proposed, i.e. (i) a krill survey along with adedicated whale sighting survey, aimed to obtain a relative index of abundance (Sighting survey vesselbased krill survey), and (ii) a dedicated krill survey that follows CCAMLR standard methodology, aimed
to obtain an absolute index of abundance (CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey). In order to facilitate
the international participation and collaboration, the latter will be conducted outside of, but coordinatedwith, this program. For this international survey, Japan is considering to provide the research vessel
Kaiyo-Maru (2,630GT) owned by the Fisheries Agency of Japan. It is under consideration that the vessel
would be available for at least one austral summer season in the first six-year period of the research
program.
A detailed survey proposal, which will follow previous survey designs developed by CCAMLR, will be
submitted to the CCAMLR Scientific Committee meetings for discussion and endorsement.
The research and analyses under this new research proposal, focusing on whale species, and the research
activities on the Antarctic marine living resources under the auspices of CCAMLR should be and indeed
are mutually complementary in promoting the understanding of the Antarctic marine ecosystem throughdata exchange, joint analysis and so on.
In consultation with experts to be involved in the international, independent krill survey mentioned
above, regular krill surveys (the former of the aforementioned two proposals) will be carried out as partof this research program, by using echo-sounder instruments and sampling net installed in some of thevessels participating in the dedicated whale sighting surveys.
An outline of the future krill surveys as indicated above was already presented to the WG-EMM held in
July 2015. The Working Group agreed that detailed information on the design of sighting survey vesselbased krill survey would be submitted with data from the survey in the first season to the next meetingof the Sub Group on Acoustic Survey and Analyses Methods (SG-ASAM), Working Group on Statistics,
Assessment and Modelling (WG-SAM) and WG-EMM.

2.2.4 Contribution to the future improvement of the RMP
While the RMP was developed as a single species whale management system, there are scientificdiscussions that an attempt should be made in order to incorporate factors such as interactions with otherwhale species into the RMP evaluation process and also into the RMP itself. This need is recognized by
the IWC SC (IWC, 2014d). This research program aims to support the system to calculate sustainable
catch limits, the RMP, under the Main Objective I, in accordance with the ICRW while reflecting thereality in the marine ecosystem (e.g. multi-species interactions) more accurately. This is regarded as animportant long-term project for the IWC SC (IWC, 2014d). It is also consistent with the general directionin the field of fisheries resources management to introduce the ecosystem approach (e.g. Plagányi, 2007).
This new research program also intends to contribute scientifically to the future improvement of the
RMP through the investigation of the possibility of building ecosystem models which constitutes animportant interaction between the Main Objectives I and II of this research program. More specifically,in the existing RMP Implementation, species interactions are not taken into account explicitly. However,some adjustment to reflect this multi-species aspect would contribute to the improvement of operating
models and harvest controls. For example, the ecosystem model could give some information on changes
in carrying capacity and provide a scenario for running "RMP" simulation to see if the current single
species CLA may or may not “work” (e.g. may fail to allow harvests levels that are perfectly possible
without putting a population at risk) under the changes in estimated carrying capacity. In this regard,

23

this Main Objective II could contribute to the future improvement of the RMP in terms of species
interactions.

2.3 Consistency with Annex P
In the development of these objectives, scientific issues that have been actively discussed at the IWC
SC (e.g. Implementations and Implementation Reviews of the RMP, in-depth assessments of Antarctic
minke and other whales, investigation of marine ecosystems through ecosystem models) as well as theprevious four research objectives of JARPAII have been taken into account (see Appendix 2).
Under the framework of the ICRW, the IWC SC has established its guidelines for reviewing scientificresearch to be conducted under Article VIII, and the current guideline is Annex P adopted in 2008 andmost recently revised in 2013 (IWC, 2013b). As discussed in the ICJ Judgment (paragraph 58), Annex
P lists these broad categories of objectives for such research: (1) to “improve the conservation andmanagement of whale stocks”; (2) to “improve the conservation and management of other living marine
resources or the ecosystem of which the whale stocks are an integral part”; and (3) to “test hypotheses
not directly related to the management of living marine resources”.
Both of Main Objectives I and II of this program, namely, (i) Improvements in the precision of biologicaland ecological information for the application of the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales and (ii)
Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building
ecosystem models are clearly within the research categories identified by the IWC SC in Annex P
mentioned above, as were the cases of JARPAII research objectives (Appendix 2). Each of them has
more specific and detailed targets and sub-objectives (for further details, see sections 2.1 and 2.2).
It should be noted that, as mentioned above, the ICJ Judgment noted that “[t]he research objectives [ofthe JARPAII] come within the research categories identified by the Scientific Committee in Annex Y
and P” and “based on the information before it, the Court thus finds that the JARPAII activities involving
the lethal sampling of whales can broadly be characterized as “scientific research” (paragraph 127).

2.4 Data and samples to be collected for the Main Objectives I and II
In order to achieve the Main Objectives I and II described above, collection of a variety of data andsamples, which provide important information for abundance, reproduction and nutritional conditionsof whales, will be conducted under this research program (see Table 2). These data will be collected
through an appropriate combination of lethal and non-lethal techniques as explained in Section 3.
Valuable data and samples to be collected should be fully utilized as much as possible, so they could
also be used in various scientific analyses for purposes other than achieving the Main Objectives I andII (see Table 2). For example, organ abnormalities have been observed in whales in the Northern
Hemisphere (e.g. Mikaelian et al., 2003), and this situation cannot be discarded for whales in different
ocean basins. Therefore in this new program, internal tissues obtained by the lethal sampling of Antarctic
minke whale, the necessity of which will be explained in Section 3, would be examined for monitoring
pathology. Visual observation for organ abnormalities would be made on internal organs such as liver,lung and thymus. Immunological examinations would be conducted on blood serum samples.

24

Table 2. Data and samples to be collected under this research program.
Data
Abundance estimate*# Weather data*# Effort data*# Sighting record of whales*# Angle and distance experiments*# Ice edge line

SampleEnvironmental data#
Temp. Salin. (XCTD)#
Echo sound (krill distribution/abundance)
M arine debris (sea surface)
Antarctic minke whale*# Catching date and location
Photographic record of external character
Record of internal and external parasites*# Sex and body length*
Body proportion for stock structure*
Skull measurements (length and breadth) for stock structure*
Satellite tracking for stock structure#
Body weight for feeding ecology#
Organ weight including fat weight for feeding ecology#
Diatom film record for feeding ecology#
Blubber thickness for feeding ecology#
Stomach content: freshness and weight for feeding ecology#
Diving behaviour for feeding ecology*# Testis weight for reproductive study
M ammary grand: lactation status and measurement for reproductive study
Fetal number, sex, length and weight for reproductive study
M arine debris (stomach)
Gross pathological observation and sampling
Other large whales
Photo-ID

#
#
*#
*#
*#
*#
*#
*#
*#
#

Prey species in stomach for feeding ecology
Feces and colon contents for feeding ecology
Testis for reproductive study
Ovary for corpora counting and reproductive study
M ammary grand and endometrium for reproductive study
Earplug for age determination
Ocular lens for age determination
Baleen plates for age determination
Tissue samples for genetic study
Tissue and organ samples for chemical study
Tissue and plasma samples for physiological study
Vertebral epiphyses for physical maturity

Skin sample (biopsy)*: Data or samples to be used for M ain Objective I; #: Data or samples to be used for M ain Objective II (Other items will be used for other research purposes)

3. RESEARCH METHODSIn this section, research methods employed under this proposed program are described step by step inthe following order: 1) firstly, research area and period are specified (Section 3.1); 2) secondly, survey
methods for whales and other targeted objectives are explained, including Japan’s consideration of theuse of lethal and non-lethal means (Section 3.2); 3) thirdly, having provisionally concluded that there isno other means than lethal methods to obtain age data that is indispensable for achieving the Main
Objective I, the calculation of sample size for Antarctic minke whales, including its logic and result ispresented (Section 3.3); 4) lastly, research vessels to be used, and personnel to be involved are specified(Section 3.4). New non-lethal techniques to be employed and tested in this research program aredescribed in Section 4.

3.1 Research area and period
3.1.1 Research area
Determination of the research area and period is a crucial component of the proposed project. The
Management Areas from III to VI as defined by the IWC SC, including Areas IIIW and VIE that were
not covered under JARPAII but were a part of the recommendation of the JARPA II review workshop
in 2014 for further research (IWC, 2014a), are proposed to be the primary research areas for the Main
Objective I. This is because of the existing level of scientific knowledge about the Antarctic minke
whale stocks in those areas and the resultant high potential for the application of the RMP to them. Thesefour areas are also relevant to Main Objective II and data obtained there will be used for the purpose ofbuilding ecosystem models. It should be noted in particular that the Management Areas IV and V provide
25useful information in this regard as the recent observed shifts of the species composition of whales inthose areas might be related to changes in the Antarctic ecosystem (Pastene et al., 2014a).

3.1.2 Research period
The research period under this program is planned to be 12 years with a midterm review after the first 6
years in order to achieve research objectives. The Main Objectives I and II require intensive researches
that last for certain period of time. This is because the data sought under these objectives includes longterm trends of changing rates of various biological and ecological parameters. It is therefore consideredthat certain scientific achievements could be made after about 12 years of the analytical works that is tobe conducted based on data obtained through this program (Section 6 shows a flowchart of surveys andanalyses to be conducted in the first and second six-year period). In addition, in designing the time frameof this program, practical considerations need to be taken into account, including the naturalenvironment in the Antarctic Ocean including sea and ice conditions where research can be conducted
only during a limited period time, required time for verifications and analyses of collected data andinformation, the capacity of the research such as the number of available vessels, researchers andpersonnel, and financial constraints. In view of the prospect of scientific works as well as practicalconsiderations, this plan sets 12 years as the timeframe for its research.
This plan is going to conduct a midterm review after the first six year-period of the program, at the halfof the entire research period. The detailed timeline of research activities in this program is presented in
the Section 6.
An assessment of the plan, including on the feasibility of non-lethal methods will be made on a yearlybasis.
After the 12 year research period, with an additional research period if necessary under a contingency
backup plans (see Section 7), this research will be completed and reviewed in accordance with AnnexP.
3.2 Research Methods
3.2.1 Consideration of non-lethal means and lethal sampling
Under this research program, it is required to collect various types of data which are essential for
estimating different parameters necessary under the Main Objectives I and II. Taking account of what isstated in the ICJ Judgment, the most important issue, with regard to its research methods, to be examined
first is whether it is necessary to adopt lethal methods in order to achieve its stated objectives. This plan
attempts to carefully consider this aspect, namely the availability, feasibility and practicability of nonlethal methods in collecting required data, at the initial stage of the drafting of this new program (forfurther details, see Section 4). There are a lot of information required for achieving the Main Objectives
I and II, namely abundance estimate, stock structure and other biological and ecological parameters
including ASM as demonstrated in Section 2. In obtaining such information, one need to look at whattypes of data are necessary, and in view of the ICJ Judgment, whether such data is obtainable throughnon-lethal methods. This plan focuses on one of the data that is least likely to be obtained through nonlethal methods and then critically review whether it is indeed unobtainable by methods other than lethal
sampling. After giving serious scientific consideration, it has been concluded that age data at the annual
scale can be obtained only through lethal sampling methods and thus lethal methods need to be employed
under this program (see, Section 3.2.1.1).

3.2.1.1 Main Objective I
It is considered that this plan should look into the possible use of non-lethal methods in collecting agedata for the purpose of achieving the Main Objective I.
26

There are mainly two potential methods and one well-developed method to collect age-data for whales:
DNA-based methods, the use of enantiomers of aspartic acid in lens and counting of growth layer groups(GLGs) accumulated in the earplug of whales. Each of these methods is assessed below.
Firstly, there have been continued academic efforts in recent years to explore the use of DNA-based
methods for age determination in different animal taxa. They include 1) telomere length assays; 2) T
cell receptor excision circle (TREC) qPCR for humans; 3) changes in levels of specific mRNA in
mosquitoes; 4) assays for specific CpG site methylation levels in humans; and 5) accumulation of
specific lipids in whale blubber (see Polanowski et al., 2014). In the case of whales, DNA can beextracted from biopsy skin samples, and there have been various attempts, including in JARPAII, toemploy and improve this method (Kanda et al., 2014). This indicates that there is a potential that age
can be determined using such non-lethal approaches.
However, it should be noted that there is an insurmountable difficulty at this juncture to use these DNAbased methods. This technique does not provide the chronological age of the individual but rather aphysiological age that can be used as a proxy for chronological age (IWC, 2015a pp16). The“physiological age” does not change with an annual trigger, but change with constant biologicalprocesses. There is almost always population-wide variability in correlation between “physiological age”
estimates and “chronological age” because individuals within a population have different genotypes andexperience different life histories (Polanowski et al., 2014). A DNA methylation approach was recently
developed and applied to humpback whales (Polanowski et al., 2014), and the IWC SC noted that thisapproach can be applied to increase the power of the close-kin mark recapture by identifying the intergenerational relationship within parent-offspring pairs (IWC, 2014f). It should be recognized,
nevertheless, that the precision of the age determination by this method (i.e. SV=2.991) is not large
enough for using age data in population dynamics models like the SCAA. Furthermore the IWC SC
noted that de novo calibration of methylation pattern is required to develop this method to different
species as inter-species methylation patterns and accumulation rates are not consistent (IWC, 2014b).
This technique may require calibration not only by species but by population and period. There is as yet
no experience on this regard, because it has been applied to a single population of a single species ofcetacean, i.e. humpback whales, due to the novelty of the technique (IWC, 2015a pp16). This has led toa conclusion that the DNA-based methods are not practicable at this juncture.
Secondly, there is another method for age determination utilizing enantiomers of aspartic acid in lens ofwhales. These parameters are measured using high performance liquid chromatography (Yasunaga etal., 2014). New statistical methods, such as the Delta method (George et al., 1999), are applied toestimate the precision of age estimation with the enantiomers. Nevertheless, there is no practical method
to obtain lenses of whales without lethal sampling. It should also be noted that the precise measurement
methodology is still under development (see Appendix 4).
Lastly, these discussions leave counting GLGs accumulated in the earplug of whales as the only
practicable mean at the present time to obtain age data at the annual scale. It was indeed pointed out inthe scientific literature that the earplug has proved to be a valid and useful tool for age determination(Lockyer, 1984b), and is the only method providing age data accurate enough for population-level
analyses such as the SCAA analyses of Antarctic minke whales (Punt et al., 2014a). This methodology
has been used for more than 25 years under JARPA and JARPAII and its scientific outcomes have been
positively evaluated in previous IWC SC meetings (IWC, 2014a). When it comes to the earplugs ofwhales themselves, they are formed in the auditory meatus and there have been no academic literaturethat proves that there is practical alternative method to collect them other than lethal sampling.
Recent investigations have indicated that the precision of methylation-based recruitment estimates fromSCAA are much worse than those obtainable from ear-plug based readings, with the methylation-based
results hardly better than those in the absence of any age data at all (Kitakado, 2015). Hence at thisjuncture, indications are that the non-lethal methylation approach cannot provide ageing information as
precise as ear-plug base age readings to perform assessments and consequently management.

27

In light of these scientific considerations, lethal sampling is indispensable for achieving the research
objective of this research plan, namely Main Objective I.
However, this does not establish that non-lethal methods will not be effective for the collection of othernecessary parameters as well as meaningful age-data in the future. In order to benefit from their practicalcontribution and to explore possibility of their future use, this plan will utilize non-lethal methods forcollecting other parameters. At the same time, assessment of the feasibility of non-lethal methods will
be intently conducted in this program (see Section 4), which would lead to future adjustment of thesample size for lethal sampling as appropriate. As part of the efforts, a feasibility study on DNA
methylation approach for age determination will attempt i) a de novo calibration of methylation pattern
for Antarctic minke whale, and ii) to investigate ways on how to increase precision of the age estimate(see Section 4 for details).

3.2.1.2 Main Objective II
Necessary data for Main Objective II are listed in Table 2, Section 2.4 (non-lethal methods, which will
be adopted for the Objective, will be described in detail in Section 4). Among them, information about
blubber thickness and stomach contents cannot be obtained through non-lethal methods as the ICJ
observed (paragraph 133). However, as described more in detail in section 3.3.1, the calculation of asample size based on the parameters required for Main Objective II is not feasible at this stage. Therefore,
biological data, namely blubber thickness and stomach contents, of Antarctic minke whales obtained
through lethal methods under the sample size calculated based on the parameter for Main Objective I,
in combination with necessary data taken through non-lethal methods, will be utilized and analyzed forMain Objective II as well.

3.2.2 Sampling survey methods for Antarctic minke whales
Antarctic minke whales will be taken in the area south of 60°S in Management Areas III to VI (for the
sample size, see Section 3.3). Survey courses will be established in offshore and ice edge waters of theresearch area by the line transect method. Two or three sampling and sighting vessels will advance along
parallel track-lines 7n. miles apart, at a standard speed of 11.5knots. Basically, each of the sampling andsighting vessels will change the track-line order every day to avoid possible sighting bias by fixed
position. Starting point of the day will be set at the position where one of the vessels ended the surveys
on the previous day in the most advanced position. Other vessel will move to the starting position of thenext day after the end of the daily survey. A maximum of two (2) Antarctic minke whales per schoolsighted will be taken randomly. Sampled whales will be immediately transported to the research basevessel, where biological measurements and sampling will be carried out in a systematic manner.
Detailed annual plan which includes areas to be surveyed is not included in the present plan because of
the security reason (i.e. to avoid violent sabotage activities by anti-whaling groups).
All whales will be taken using explosive grenades to ensure instantaneous death in line with existingnorms of whale killing methods. If instantaneous death is not achieved by the primary killing method, a
suitable secondary method, such as a large caliber rifle or another grenade will be chosen, depending on
the condition of the whale.

3.2.3 Sighting survey methods for whales
Abundance estimation is fundamental information necessary for the conservation and management of
the whale stocks concerned. Sighting surveys are to be conducted by the line transect method. Survey
protocols follow the Requirements and Guidelines for Conducting Surveys and Analyzing Data within
the Revised Management Scheme (IWC, 2012c) so that they are conducted under the oversight of the
IWC SC. Sighting protocols are the same as those in IDCR/SOWER (Matsuoka et al., 2003). In general,
28the surveys will cover areas south of 60°S. Surveys are to cover one IWC Management Area (one of theAreas III to VI) in a year. Cruise tracks will be designed systematically in accordance with mathematicaland scientific calculation in the research area. The sighting survey will be conducted using (1) Closing
mode and (2) Passing with Independent Observer mode. Both survey modes follow the protocol
endorsed for the IDCR/SOWER surveys. Primary search effort will be conducted only when weather
conditions are acceptable (Matsuoka et al., 2003) (see details in Appendices 3 and 9).
This sighting survey method was used in JARPA II and it should be noted that the expert panel to review
its results (“JARPAII Review Panel”) “welcome[d]” the results from sighting surveys conducted under
the JARPA/JARPA II programs, mentioning that the “importance of monitoring trends in abundance forcetacean species is of general conservation and management interest as well as providing information
relevant to the JARPA II programme objectives and especially as input to ecosystem models” (IWC,
2014a).
The plan of the dedicated sighting survey for each austral summer season including details of the survey
design, will be presented to the corresponding annual IWC SC meetings. The survey plan for the
dedicated sighting survey in the 2015/16 austral summer season was presented to the 2015 IWC SC
meeting (SC/66a/SP08).
The survey design will take into account the specific research activities planned for a particular Area
and austral summer season, and will follow the recommendations provided by the NEWREP-A Review
Panel (IWC, 2015a pp14-15), including incorporating detailed track lines. NEWREP-A researchers will
work closely with the IWC SC before finalizing the survey approaches and to ensure that future survey
plans fully follow the IWC SC guidelines for such survey plans.
The survey design for the first two-three years will include feasibility studies on biopsy sampling of andtelemetry for Antarctic minke whales, on which the NEWREP-A Review Panel made specificrecommendations (IWC, 2015a pp11-12). It will also include krill and oceanographic surveys (see below
and Section 6).

In response to the NEWREP-A Review Panel recommendation regarding the g(0) estimation (IWC,
2015a pp13), identification of duplicate sightings will be also conducted for whale species other thanthe Antarctic minke whale during NEWREP-A sighting surveys in IO mode. In order to determine
whether g(0)is significantly different from one, analyses on duplicate sightings will be conducted for
those whale species given that sufficient data will be obtained under the NEWREP-A program.

3.2.4 Other established non-lethal survey methods for whales
Photo-ID and biopsy experiments will continue to be conducted for blue, fin, humpback, southern rightand killer whales. These methods will provide useful data for stock structure, mixing and movements.
The JARPAII Review Panel welcomed photo-ID photographs of humpback, blue, and southern rightwhales taken during the JARPA and JARPA II cruises, recognizing “their potential to provide
information on stock structure, mixing and movements” (IWC, 2014a). The JARPAII Review Panel also
“welcome[d]”, in general, results of genetic studies on humpback, fin and southern right whales using
biopsy samples collected under the JARPA and JARPA II programs (IWC, 2014a). As to Antarctic minke
whales, effectiveness and practicability of these techniques are in dispute due to its characteristics suchas their size and speed of their movement that are different from other species (IWC, 2014c).

29

3.2.5 Survey methods for krill
As noted in Section 2.2, two kinds of krill surveys are planned, one under an international researchoutside of this research program (CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey), and the other under thisprogram (Sighting survey-based krill survey). Details are shown in Appendix 8.
The former one will apply a standard survey design similar to those developed and implemented for
CCAMLR 2000 (Trathan et al., 2001), BROKE (Nicol et al., 2000) and BROKE-West (Nicol et al.,2010)..
The main objective of the krill surveys is to estimate the abundance of Antarctic krill acoustically(absolute and relative), and to obtain the length frequency distribution and maturity stage of Antarctic
krill in the survey area.
The proponent will respond to recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel (IWC, 2015a pp2023) in the following ways.
i)

ii)

iii)

iv)

Ship(s) and echosounder system(s) will be tested before steaming to the Antarctic todetermine the likely effective acoustic sampling range (signal-to-noise by depthcharacterization) and potential for detecting krill.
Cross-calibration between both types of krill surveys vessels will be carried out the in waters
around Japan, in a near synchronous way, as the first priority. However, the proponent might
conduct the calibration in the survey area as well if conditions are met.
Simultaneous survey by the dedicated krill survey vessel equipped with a frame-type trawl
and echosounder and that by, the dedicated whale sighting vessel equipped with anechosounder and the whale sampling vessels will be conducted within a small-scale
experimental survey area over a short time period (e.g. one week) so that comparisonsamong vessels/samples can be made.
Sufficient time will be allocated for net sampling of krill, by following a survey design
similar to those developed and implemented for CCAMLR 2000, BROKE and BROKEWest. Approximately 2.5-3 hauls per day will be a standard for net sampling frequency
under the proposed CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey.

Recommendation i) above will be conducted in the 2015/16 season. The other recommendations will beconsidered in future surveys. Further details of the krill survey design along the dedicated whale sighting
vessel in 2015/16 season have been given in SC/66a/SP08.
3.2.6 Other survey methods(i) Oceanographic observations
Oceanographic observations will be conducted in parallel with krill surveys (see Appendix 8).
The JARPAII Review Panel recommended continuation of oceanographic observations withimprovement in several points, stating that “collection of such simultaneous [oceanographic] data is an
important component of being able to relate the physical and biological habitat with whale distribution
and density and ultimately to assist in developing an understanding of the role of whales in the ecosystem”(IWC, 2014a). The expendable conductivity-temperature-depth profilers (XCTD) and conductivitytemperature-depth profilers (CTD) will continue to be used.
For the CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey, careful consideration will be given to the scale and designof oceanographic sampling, considering the previous experience of BROKE and BROKE-West surveys.
Sampling at approximately 2-3 sites per day will be a standard for the CTD oceanographic sampling
frequency under the proposed CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey.
Further details of the oceanographic survey to be conducted along the dedicated whale sighting vesselin the 2015/16 season have been given in SC/66a/SP08.
30

(ii) Marine debris
The JARPAII Review Panel commended the collection of debris data, both in the environment and in
the stomachs of the whales that could provide valuable baseline data and stated that such information
should regularly be analyzed and presented to the IWC (IWC, 2014a). Observation of marine debris willcontinue to be conducted during sighting surveys.

3.3 Calculation of sample size for Antarctic minke whales
3.3.1 Calculation
As discussed in Section 3.2.1 above, the key data that requires lethal methods is the age. The age will
be measured from counting GLGs accumulated in the earplug. The age data themselves will be thenused as main data in SCAA analysis for the estimation of biological parameters including the natural
mortality, MSYR and parameters in recruitment relationship and also ecological parameters like thetime-varying carrying capacity. In addition, an indicator derived from a combination of age and maturity
status, ASM, is of great importance not only for contributing information on the proportion of matured
animals in the SCAA but also as an important indicator to know the change in the nutritional condition
for whale populations.
The examination for the Antarctic minke whales based on the transition phase in the earplugs has shownthat the mean ASM gradually got younger since the late 1940's, when other baleen whales went todepletion, and it then became stable or slightly increasing since 1970 (Bando et al., 2014). This behavior
might be attributed to the decreased and then increased food competition and it also reflected to the pastincrease and recent decline of carrying capacity for the Antarctic minke whales (Punt, 2014b), possibly
due to the competition with other species.
The population parameters such as natural mortality, ASM, recruitment rate and carrying capacity canbe dynamically changing across years by reflecting the ecosystem interaction among species in the
Antarctic Ocean. The ASM is affected by the mid- or long-term nutritional condition in the population.
This does neither change rapidly nor fluctuate greatly. In this sense, it might be possible to detect afuture change in the ASM if it happens. In addition, the ASM can be observed with relatively lessuncertainty to monitor and also has an advantage that it can be observed directly. The ASM is influential
to the number of mature animals (especially female), and hence a possible future increase in the ASM
affects the productivity and of course population dynamics of the Antarctic minke whales. These factors
demonstrate that the ASM makes considerable contribution to achieving Main Objective I in the sensethat it helps improve the SCAA performance for estimating other key parameters such as MSYR. This
leads to the better assessment and management of the Antarctic minke whales. It therefore constitutes
the scientific ground for the sample size calculation under this proposed plan.
Given that the ASM has an accessible feature to set a target sample size, a single indicator, the age-at50% sexual maturity (ASM50), is used to set an annual sample size in this plan (see Section 2.1.3). For
this purpose, a conditioning was conducted to infer some effect sizes using maturity data taken frompast JARPA and JARPA II samples. Secondly based on conditioned values for the changes in the ASM50
and consideration of the changes in the mean ASM based on transition phase over a couple of last
decades, simulation studies are performed to examine sample sizes to detect possible changes. A
necessary level of annual sample size is finally determined by the statistical testing and estimation
performance. Specifically, the annual sample size is calculated to assure a reasonable degree of statisticalpower for detecting the change (i.e. the statistical power is greater than 90% for detecting ASM50’s
annual increase of 0.1 per year, and is close to 80% for the extent of increase 0.075 per year) with 5%
significance level (i.e. the level of accuracy) over the whole research period (i.e. 12 years) and to
improve estimation precision of the estimate of the extent of change (for more details, see Appendix 13).
The annual sample size for Antarctic minke whales is thus set at 333.
31

The sample size for lethal method is calculated based on the required amount of both earplugs andreproductive organs for collecting age and maturity data respectively. This is directly related to Main
Objective I, which includes to perform the SCAA and to provide better specifications for the ISTs.
It should be noted that, in the initial stage of developing of this proposed plan, it was examined throughsimulation studies whether required sample size for Main Objective II can be calculated. For
determination of the sample size with a simulation framework, the first thing to do is to derive someconditioned models as in the case above. One of the ecosystem models which will be employed in thecurrent plan is a set of multiple production models for prey (krill) and predators (mainly baleen whales)with some links between them (see Section 2.2). It may be possible to set some conditioned values forthe models. However, parameters in the models such as abundance estimate might have their own large
uncertainty in addition to the inevitable uncertainty of the models themselves, and therefore it was not
feasible to fix a set of reliable simulation scenarios at this stage. In addition, the models assume to use
both the time series of abundance estimates for component species and that of a nutrition index for the
Antarctic minke whales (e.g. stomach fullness or its proxy value), but the latter index from one krill
predator, the Antarctic minke whales, is not so influential in the model simulations. Therefore it is notachievable at this stage to assess its contribution to the estimation of ecosystem models. In other words,
it is not possible to evaluate the influence of sample size for Antarctic minke whales on models’performance. For this reason, the sample size determination based on the data items to be used for theMain Objective II is not scientifically feasible at this time. As the program progresses, the calculationof sample size of Antarctic minke whales could be retried and the plan could be accordingly modified.
Even though the calculation of a sample size under the Main Objective II is not feasible at this stage,
tissue and other biological samples and data to be obtained from their analysis under the sample size
calculated based on the ASM as described above will be fully utilized for achieving the Main Objective
II in combination with information from non-lethal research methods and other researches and studies.
With such effort, there must be certain progress in achieving the Main Objective II, while it is notpossible to foresee the level of expected achievement by using statistical methods at present time. (Forthe effect of the proposed sample size on the stocks, see Section 5.)

3.3.2 Possible adjustment to the latest available scientific knowledge
This proposed sample size is the best estimation at the present level of scientific knowledge in relation
to ASM. However, the sample sizes should be calculated based on the existing knowledge or estimatesat the time and it is hard to deny that the assumptions used above could turn out to be inappropriate inlight of updated information generated during this research plan. In this regard, the calculated sample
sizes should be re-visited at the time of mid-term review (see Sections 3.1 and 6). This research program
allows for possible modification of the future sample size by taking advantage of the latest available
knowledge.

3.3.3 Necessity of new samples and importance of the long time-series data set
In accordance with the IWC’s review process (IWC, 2013b), special permit research proposals shall
include an assessment of why: 1) non-lethal methods; 2) methods associated with any ongoingcommercial whaling; or 3) analyses of past data; have been considered to be insufficient. An assessmenton the first item is already presented in Section 3.2, and for the second item, it is obvious that methods
associated with ongoing commercial whaling are not available since there is not such an operation in
the Antarctic Ocean. In relation to the third item, as described in Section 2 and the earlier part of Section
3, this research program’s objectives require to ascertain ongoing changes occurring in whale resourcesand Antarctic ecosystem through the collection of relevant data on a yearly basis. This inevitably needs
new samples under this program.

32

The data to be obtained from the new samples, being combined with the past data derived from JARPA
and JARPA II as well as from commercial whaling operations, will form an integral part of the longtime-series data set, while there is a one-year gap in between (2014/15). Such a data set would be thefoundation for the better understanding of the long-term transition of the Antarctic ecosystem including
whales and for the conservation and management of whale resources.
The critical importance of the long time-series data set is duly recognized within the framework of the
ICRW, and clearly expressed in the convention, specifically Article VIII, paragraph 4, which says
“continuous collection and analysis of biological data in connection with the operations of factory ships
and land stations are indispensable to sound and constructive management of the whale fisheries”(emphasis added). This idea is not unique to the ICRW. Agenda 21, an action plan with regard tosustainable development, adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Developmentin 1992, provides that “States, with the support of international organizations, whether sub-regional,
regional or global, as appropriate, should cooperate to exchange on a regular basis up-to-date data andinformation adequate for fisheries management” (paragraph 17.56 (b)). To have long time-series data
set in both fisheries-dependent and fisheries-independent by continued accumulation of new data is acommon practice in regional fisheries management organizations established under international
conventions.

3.4 Research vessels to be used and personnel to be involved
For this research program, one research base vessel, a few sighting and sampling vessels and one or two
dedicated sighting vessels will be used. The vessels are equipped with necessary facilities that aresuitable for collecting the data and samples required to achieve the research objectives.
The research under this plan will be conducted by the ICR. Scientific experts from the ICR will be
engaged in the systematic collection of data and samples on board and laboratorial analyses of them, incooperation with other relevant researchers.

4. TRIAL, EVALUATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NEW NON-LETHAL TECHNIQUESThere are established non-lethal research methods, non-lethal methods of which their usefulness is indispute, and newly emerging non-lethal methods at very preliminary development stages. In thisresearch plan, all those non-lethal methods will be employed and tested as described below.
JARPA and JARPAII employed a series of non-lethal research methods for research items that require
non-lethal methods or that can be conducted with non-lethal methods. Those non-lethal methods which
will continue to be used in this research program are described in Section 3.2.4.
Taking account of the 31 March 2014 ICJ Judgment, specifically its statement that “the JARPA II
Research Plan should have included some analysis of the feasibility of non-lethal methods as a meansof reducing the planned scale of lethal sampling in the new programme” (paragraph 137) the newresearch proposal includes the examination of non-lethal techniques, which could potentiallycomplement or replace lethal techniques used in the context of achieving the research objectives. The
proposed lethal sample size in Section 3.3 represents the best estimation at the present time taking
account of the available and established non-lethal research methods. However, it should be noted thatthese methods could be further improved in the future depending on the progress of the feasibility
experiments in this Section.
This Section presents a summary of the non-lethal techniques to be considered and tested in this new
research program. The aim is to investigate the potential of these techniques for achieving the objectivesof the program. In the investigation it is necessary to consider the following four major tests in assessing
the feasibility of non-lethal methods; whether the same data sought (e.g. age) can be obtained by a nonlethal method; whether it is of sufficient quality for analysis (i.e. accuracy); whether the cost to obtain
the data is realistic and reasonable; and whether enough data can be obtained in terms of quantity for33

statistical analysis. These tests are often inter-related and not exhaustive. Depending on the results of
the investigation, as well as the results of the feasibility study of non-lethal methods under JARPN II,
this research plan could be revised in relation to the lethal sample size.
It should be noted that the number of samples to be obtained by non-lethal methods is not necessarily
the number to be reduced from the lethal sample size. For example, even if the age-data can be obtained
from a non-lethal method in the same quality and accuracy as from the lethal method, when the cost ofobtaining the data by the non-lethal method is prohibitive, a sample size trade-off cannot be establishedin a simple manner.

4.1 Age data (Objective I (ii), Appendix 4) (also see Section 3.2.1.1)
In the previous as well as this new research program, age-data used in population dynamics models, areobtained from counting GLGs accumulated in the ear plugs of whales, which requires lethal samplingof whales. However, additional new methods of age determination, both lethal and non-lethal, will be
developed and tested under this new research plan.
One of the methods is based on enantiomers of aspartic acid in lens of whales, which are measured using
high performance liquid chromatography (Yasunaga et al., 2014). New statistical methods, such as the
Delta method (George et al., 1999), are applied to estimate the precision of age estimation with theenantiomers. Lens of whales are obtained by lethal sampling.
In recent years some potential ageing method at a DNA level, have been reported (e.g. Koch and Wagner,
2011). If such methods are further developed there is a potential that whale ages can be estimated fromanalysis of DNA extracted from biopsy samples. In particular a DNA methylation approach was recently
applied to humpback whales (Polanowski et al., 2014).
In this new research plan, the DNA methylation approach will be evaluated to see whether or not themethod is feasible for Antarctic minke whales (see Objective I(ii)).
Following the recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel (IWC, 2015a pp16), at first, the stock
effect on the DNA methylation (DNA-M) technique will be examined using 50 highly readable earplugs
each from I-stock animals sampled in Area IVW and P-stock animals sampled in Area VE under JARPA
II, ideally from whales sampled in a same year in each Area. In the next step the effect of the period will
be examined by using a similar number of samples from different austral summers. DNA methylation
changes will be identified at the Antarctic minke whale genes homologous to the humpback whales. The
procedure for identification of age-related DNA methylation site and measurement of methylation level
will follow previous studies (Maegawa et al., 2010; Bocklandt et al., 2011; Polanowski et al., 2014).
The proponent has already contacted a specialized laboratory and a university in Tokyo so that this study
can be conducted in collaboration with experts. Preliminary results will be reported at the 2017 IWC SC
meeting and final results at the 2018 IWC SC meeting. In this way the proponent will respond to the
Review Panel recommendation that this feasibility study be conducted early in the NEWREP-A
program (IWC, 2015a pp16). The proponent will also address the issue of inter-laboratory calibration in
consultation with the IWC SC.
4.2 Stock structure (Objective I(iii), Appendix 6)
As explained in Objective I(iii), stock structure analyses of Antarctic minke whales are based on both
DNA and morphometric data since both data have been informative for studying the stock structure. As
recently reported by Kitakado et al., (2014b, c), indeed, morphometric data are as useful as genetic
information. Accurate and detailed morphometric measurements used in the analyses require lethal
sampling.
However DNA analyses can be carried out using skin samples obtained by biopsy as materials. Some
previous studies have reported success in biopsy sampling of Antarctic minke whales, especially fromareas near the ice-edge and for large school sizes (Gales et al., 2013). There is however the need to
conduct a feasibility study to examine whether or not biopsy sampling is possible for this species in34

offshore areas and for small schools because these are cases where approaching whales are more difficult.
This new proposed program will include such a feasibility study.
The feasibility study on biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale will be undertaken along with the
dedicated sighting surveys, at an early stage of the first six-year period of NEWREP-A (Section 6 andSC/66a/SP08). As the program develops, the design of the feasibility study on biopsy sampling will takeaccount of the four specific recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel [1) involve people withexpertise in successfully biopsy sampling common minke whales in the North Atlantic; 2) mimic thesampling strategy developed for lethal sampling; 3) record information on time taken, sea state, swell,etc. to enable a plausible measure of effort required to be developed; and 4) consider the amount oftissue and nature of tissue required (for each analysis and in total)], as far as practicable (IWC, 2015a
pp11-12). In planning and implementing the feasibility study, the program will make use of experiences
obtained by foreign (e.g. colleagues working with North Atlantic minke whale) and Japanese (e.g.
colleagues working with North Pacific minke whale) experts. The “ideal” framework of the study
suggested by the NEWREP-A Review Panel (e.g. representativeness of the entire area and time period
as well as, random sampling techniques) (IWC, 2015a pp11-12) will be considered as a second step after
examining the practicability of the sampling technique itself in the initial stage. It should be noted thatthe value of biopsy samples for the NEWREP-A research objectives should be evaluated in parallel withthe results of feasibility studies of analytical approaches that potentially use biopsy samples (e.g. DNAM, stable isotopes, hormones).
The new research considers the use of satellite tracking as an additional non-lethal approach tocontribute to the study of stock structure of the Antarctic minke whale.
The feasibility study on telemetry for Antarctic minke whale will be undertaken along the dedicatedsighting surveys, at an early stage of the first six-year period of NEWREP-A. With regard to field
methods as well as tag types, the proponent will collaborate and consult with experienced foreign andJapanese colleagues (Section 6 and SC/66a/SP08).
4.3 Prey consumption (Objective II(iii), Appendix 10)
In JARPA and JARPA II, consumption by the Antarctic minke whale has been estimated using
theoretical energy requirements and the diurnal changes of stomach contents mass through the lethal
sampling of whales (Tamura and Konishi, 2014).
However it is very difficult to obtain robust estimates of consumption by Antarctic minke whales intheir feeding area because of year-to-year variation of krill availability and uncertainty in the migration
patterns and daily feeding behavior of the Antarctic minke whale. Successful attachment of several
logger and transmitters for satellite tracking for the Antarctic minke whale has been reported (Gales etal., 2013), that could potentially reduce the uncertainty in the consumption estimate. Therefore in the
new research plan, the proponent will carry out both satellite tracking (migration patterns) and datalogger trials (daily feeding behavior) to contribute to the study of feeding ecology and estimation of
consumption by the Antarctic minke whale.
The JARPAII Review Panel noted that ‘several cetacean research programmes include the collection of
faeces from wild population to assess diet and food habit’ and that ‘the JARPAII programme is in
position to assess the efficacy and accuracy of this non-lethal approach’. Furthermore the review
workshop recommended that faecal samples (from the colon) be compared with stomach samples for
species composition (IWC, 2014a). Japanese scientists have already examined the feasibility of prey
identification based on DNA of the colon content, under the whale research program in the North Pacific(JARPN/JARPNII) (Kobayashi, 2010).
It is considered that this feasibility experiment is more relevant to North Pacific whale research becauseof the high diet diversity of whales in this region. It is already known that in the Antarctic, the Antarctic
minke whales feed mainly on a single species, the Antarctic krill. Furthermore this technique does notprovide quantitative information of food consumed, which is important for ecosystem model studies.
35

Therefore there is not much value to attempt this technique for investigating ‘species composition’ in
the Antarctic minke whale diet.
In response to the NEWREP-A Review Panel suggestions and recommendations on the use of stable
isotopes (IWC, 2015a pp 24-25), the new research plan also considers the examination for concurrent
analysis of krill samples to ensure the correct determination of stable isotope ratios (δ13C and δ15N)
in studies on feeding ecology. For the feasibility study different whale tissues will be used, which include
skin that can be potentially obtained through biopsy sampling.
As a first step in the work to compare the overlap in diet amongst predator species using stable isotopes,
prey species (krill) samples will be analysed to ensure the correct determination of stable isotope
baselines. This will be done during the first six-year period of NEWREP-A (Section 6). Sampling of
krill will be conducted in different geographical strata. At least five samples per sub area (e.g. EastSouth, East-North and Prydz Bay) will be analysed. Stable isotopes ratios for krill in each sub-area will
be analysed each year. Accumulated information on isotope ratios in krill will be applied for the analysisof the overlap in diet amongst fin, humpback and Antarctic minke whales. After the first six years, thebaseline data for krill will thus have been obtained. These results will be evaluated at the mid-term
review of NEWREP-A (Section 6).
Concurrently, the overlap in diet amongst fin, humpback and Antarctic minke whales will be examinedusing stable isotope ratios in skin samples collected by lethal method (Antarctic minke whales) and bybiopsy sampling (fin and humpback whales) under NEWREP-A program. This analysis will be carriedout at an early stage of the NEWREP-A program based on the information on stable isotope baselinesof krill in each area (Section 6) accumulated under the program. Results will be reported to the IWC SC
meeting whenever available during the first six-year period and evaluated during the mid-term review
of NEWREP-A.
Stable isotopes analyses on the edge of baleen plates will also be conducted under the NEWREP-A
program to estimate time spent by Antarctic minke whale in feeding grounds. Stable isotopes in baleen
plates (n=10-20) of Antarctic minke whales sampled under JARPA II will be analysed early in the
research program, as an initial step. The results of the analyses will be reported to the IWC SC in 2018.
Regarding food consumption estimates, efforts will be made to develop more sophisticated calculations
by adding some categories such as age, growth and maturity status based on energy requirements
measured by changes in blubber mass and lipid contents, as recommended and suggested by the
NEWREP-A Review Panel (IWC, 2015a pp24-26). The use of data collected previously is important inbuilding the basic structure of the bioenergetics model but collection of recent data is essential formonitoring and forecasting the dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem. Thus, the proponent will
use the data collected previously for body weight-length relationships and maturity status as much as
possible; however they also need recent data from NEWREP-A samples to examine the lipid contents
and blubber weight relationship, and to monitor and forecast the dynamics of the Antarctic marine
ecosystem. Preliminary results of the analyses will be reported to the 2016 IWC SC meeting. It also
should be noted that the proponent will conduct consumption calculations based on the stomach contents
in parallel.
For both of the calculation methods based on allometry (bioenergetics model) and stomach contents, theproponent will conduct the Monte-Carlo simulation trials which have been recommended by the
JARPAII Review Panel and the IWC SC to take into account the actual range of the estimates including
the uncertainties (see Tamura and Konishi. 2014). In the calculation based on the stomach contents, theproponent will continue to make efforts to minimize uncertainties in r (the ratio of low/high feeding
intake), the length of the feeding season and the extent of night feeding for better estimation by satellite
tagging, stable isotope of baleen plates and night-time sampling.

36

4.4 Chemical markers as potential body condition indicator (Objective II(iii), Appendix 10)
The body condition indicators such as blubber thickness, length of girth and total fat weight that can beobtained by lethal sampling have been used throughout JARPA and JARPA II periods (Konishi et al.,2014, Konishi and Walløe, 2014). These data will continue to be collected as they will contribute to theMain Objective II. In 2014 the IWC SC agreed that the body condition and stomach content trends ofAntarctic minke whales were decreasing significantly during the JARPA period (IWC, 2015b pp46).
In response to the suggestion by the NEWREP-A Review Panel (IWC, 2015a pp25), instead of retinol,
the proponent plan to analyse the lipid content % of blubber throughout NEWREP-A research. At first,
the total lipid content % of blubber from mid lateral position (near the position used in JARPA and
JARPAII for the point measurement of blubber thickness), will be analysed since this position has been
informative of changes of blubber thickness in relation to feeding season (Konishi et al., 2008). The
lipid content % of blubber will be compared to other body condition indicators such as blubber thickness
and girth measurements. As an initial feasibility test, the measurements of body condition (blubber
thickness, girth, total fat weight and the lipid content % of blubber) obtained from Antarctic minke
whales collected under NEWREP-A will be used. At least 50 whales for each sex and sub area will be
used for this analysis. (see details in Appendix 10).

4.5 Others
To respond the recommendation by the NEWREP-A Review Panel to investigate potential non-lethal
techniques to determine sexual maturity in whales (IWC, 2015a pp17), progesterone analyses will be
conducted in blubber tissues of Antarctic minke whales using JARPAII samples. Females with various
reproductive status such as ovulating, resting and pregnant with small fetus will be selected, andhormone levels will be compared with histological information for reproductive organs. Analysis of
the progesterone level for a total of 50 Antarctic minke whale samples will be assayed using thecompact ELISA workstation (Crocodile, Titertek Berthold). Progesterone will be assayed with the
Cayman Practice ELISA Kits (Cayman Chemical), according to the manufacturers’ protocols.
Preliminary results will be reported in the 2017 IWC SC meeting.

37

Figure 3. Use and evaluation of non-lethal techniques on Antarctic minke whale in the new research
program (White: Lethal methods; Blue: Non-lethal methods that will be evaluated in thisresearch)

5. EFFECT ON THE STOCKS
It is recognized that the RMP developed by the IWC SC is the most appropriate way to calculate catch
limits for baleen whales without threatening the stock. At the JARPA II review workshop, it was notedthat “the most appropriate way to assess the impact of future Special Permit catches on stocks is within
the framework of an RMP-type process” (IWC, 2014a). However, the RMP Implementation for
Antarctic minke whales has not been conducted for the last 20 years. In the calculation of the catch
limits, conducted in 1993 (IWC, 1994), very narrow areas (i.e. 10 degrees longitudinal sectors) wereused as Small Areas because limited information on the stock structure for the Antarctic minke whales
was available at that time. Now that, some updated information is available for the stock structure of the
Antarctic minke whales (e.g. “two-stock with mixing hypothesis” by Pastene et al., 2014a, b, Kitakado
et al., 2014b, c) wider Small Areas might be a more appropriate definition to apply the CLA comparedto the previous definition. Since the Main Objective I is to provide improved information for the RMP
Implementation, a comprehensive RMP Implementation would be conducted after the completion of the
proposed program.
Given this situation, a simple CLA application was made based on some new definitions of Small Areas
using the most recent agreed abundance estimates (IWC, 2013a) shown in Table 3, the historical catch
series in the study area and tuning level of 0.6, which is one of the tuning levels used by the IWC SC toexamine performance of candidate management procedures (IWC, 1992). Catch limits obtained by the
CLA were compared with the sample size in this proposed research plan (n= 333) in order to assess theeffects of sampling on the stocks.

38

Table 3. Abundance estimates for each half area and for each stocks applied to CLA
Area

Year

P

CV

Stock

Year

P

CV

IIIW

1987/88

69,267

0.277

1988/89

58,5450.161

1994/95

33,3750.209

I-stock
Base case

1996/97

90,5320.229

1987/88

11,7820.440

1987/88

116,818

0.113

1994/95

34,6590.237

I-stock
Sensitivity

1998/99

114,534

0.183

1988/89

23,6680.237

1987/88

281,047

0.122

1996/97

29,745

0.477

P-stock
Base case2000/01

228,303

0.092

1988/89

23,096

0.237

1987/88

222,774

0.138

1998/99

26,1270.477

2000/01

204,301

0.100

1985/86

105,951

0.159

2001/0243,6400.139

1985/86

154,658

0.189

2003/04

136,457

0.134

1990/91

20,4380.271

1995/96

48,206

0.177

1990/91

29,9280.308

2000/01

25,683

0.199

IIIE

IVW

IVE

VW

VE

VIW

VIE

P-stock
Sensitivity

Based on information from JARPA and JARPAII two stock scenarios were examined: i) a base-casewhere two stocks occur in the research area, one distributed west of 130°E (I stock) and the other eastof that longitude (P stock), and ii) a sensitivity test where two stocks occur in the research area (I and P
stocks) which mix to each other in Area VW with a proportion of the I stock of 55% (Pastene and Kanda,
2005). Catches are made to the west of 130°E in the first year (austral summer season 2015/16), and to
the east of that longitude in the second year (austral summer season 2016/17). Subsequently futurecatches are conducted in each of the sectors every two years alternately (therefore figures obtained by
the CLA should be compared with sample size n= 333/2). Calculated catch limits by the CLA for thetwo sectors (stocks) are shown in Table 4 for both base case and sensitivity case. Under both cases thecatch limit for I and P stocks are much larger than the sample size in this proposed research plan.
Calculations by the CLA were also made for half of the Management Areas (Table 5). Total catch limits
for Areas IIIE, IVW and IVE combined (I stock in the base case) is 571 while that for the combined
Areas VW, VE and VIW (P stock in the base case) is 3,169. For all cases examined the calculated catch
limits were larger than the proposed sample size.
Table 4. Catch limits obtained by the CLA for I and P stocks under the base case (left) and the sensitivity
case (right)
Istock739

Pstock
3,153

Total
3,892

Istock
1,260

Pstock
2,857

Total
4,117

Table 5. Catch limits obtained by the CLA by half Management Area
IIIE
202

IVW
186

IVE
183

Sub-total
571

VW
614

VE
2,142

VIW
413

Sub-total
3,169

Total
3,740

Because CLA provides catch limits that would not threaten the Antarctic minke whale stock for 100
years, which is much longer period than the proposed research period, an alternative approach toevaluate the effect of the catches on the stock was required. For this aim the Hitter-Fitter population
dynamics model was used. The same stock scenarios in the calculation of the CLA above, were used(base case and sensitivity case). A constant carrying capacity was assumed. In the Fitter runs, somebiological parameters were used: MSY level of 0.6, ASM 7.5 (50%) and 10 (95%). 50% ASM of 7.5 isassumed because 50% ASM for recent cohort ranges 7-8 years in both stock (Bando et al., 2014). It is
assumed natural mortality for the I stock for ages <=3, 10-20 and >=40 are 0.077yr-1, 0.048yr-1, and39

0.107 respectively and the corresponding values for the P stock are 0.074yr-1, 0.046yr-1, and 0.103 yr1 respectively and that natural mortality is assumed to vary linearly with age between ages 3 and 10,
and between ages 20 and 40 (Punt, 2014c). Using a fixed MSYR (1+) option of the Hitter-Fitter program,runs were conducted for MSYR (1+)=1%and 4% and for agreed abundance estimates and historicalcatches. Abundance estimates to be fitted to the population model for the base case stock scenario are
58,545 (CV=0.161) in 1988/89 and 90,532 (CV=0.229) for I stock and 281,047 (CV=0.122) in 1987/88
and 228,303 (CV=0.092) in 2000/01 for P stock. Those for the sensitivity scenario are 116,818(CV=0.113) in 1987/88 and 114,534 (CV=0.183) in 1998/99 for I stock and 222,774 (CV=0.138) in
1987/88 and 204,301 (CV=0.100) for P stock based on the abundance estimates in IWC (2013). The
effect on the stocks was evaluated by examining the population trajectory for 1+ component of bothstocks. Additionally two sensitivities were considered regarding future catches for the base casescenario: zero catch and double of the proposed annual sample size (n=666). Therefore four scenarios
were considered for each stock and each MSYR.
Figure 4 shows the population trajectory for the I and P stocks, respectively, for MSYR (1+)=1% and
4%, under the four scenarios. The trajectory for I stock shows an increasing trend after the 2015/16 forall scenarios examined (Figure 4 left). In the case of the P stock, trajectory remains constant around thepre-exploitation level (Figure 4 right).
In conclusion both approaches used, CLA and Hitter-Fitter, suggest no negative effect on the stocks ofthe proposed annual sample size of the new research program.

Figure 4. Population trajectory for the I (left) and P (right) stocks for MSYR (1+)= 1% and 4% underfour scenarios. Vertical lines indicate 95%CI of abundance estimate.
The effect of catches on the stocks was also evaluated for future catches in Areas IIIW and VIE. For thisevaluation and with regard to I and P stocks, the same base and sensitivity cases in the previous
calculations were used. The stock structure in Areas IIIW and VIE is unknown. For the effect of thecalculations, the most conservative scenario was considered e.g. the occurrence in Area IIIW of adifferent stock (no occurrence of I stock), and the occurrence in Area VIE of a different stock (nooccurrence of the P stock). Abundance estimates derived from IDCR/SOWER were employed in theestimation. The estimates in Area IIIW used were 69,267 (CV=0.277) in 1987/88 and 33,375(CV=0.209) in 1994/95. Those in Area VIE were 29,928 (CV=0.308) in 1990/91 and 25,683(CV=0.199) in 2000/01. Whales are sampled one every two years in the sectors west (occupied mainly
by I stock) and east (occupied mainly by P stock) of 130°E, respectively. In the western sector, catches
among sectors are distributed as follow: IIIW: 90; IIIE: 90; IVW: 77 and IVE: 76 (total: 333). In theeastern sector catches are distributed as follow: VW: 106; VE: 76; VIW: 76 and VIE: 75 (total: 333).
Figures change according the wide of the longitudinal sector.
Catch limit obtained by the CLA in Area IIIW was 182 which is larger than the level of catch (90/2) inthat Area. Catch limits obtained by the CLA in Area VIE was 259 which is larger than the level of catch(75/2) in that Area.

40

For the Hitter-Fitter analysis the same additional sensitivities described in the previous calculations wereused. Figure 5 show the population trajectories for the population in Areas IIIW and VIE. In both cases
the trajectories are stable or show an increase on the time.

Figure 5. Population trajectory for Areas IIIW (left) and VIE (right) for MSYR (1+)= 1% and 4% under
three scenarios. Vertical lines indicate 95%CI of abundance estimate.
Even under the conservative scenario used, the catch of the future research has no negative effects on
the stocks in Areas IIIW and VIE.

6. TIMELINE OF RESEARCH ACTIVITY
The chart below shows the kinds of research activities and associated timeline under the NEWREP-A’s
Main Objectives I and II. For both of the Main Objectives, the upper part of the figures shows thetimeline for the research activities in the entire 12-year research period. The lower part of the figures
shows the timelines for the first six-year period, specifying the outputs and evaluation to be obtained
after the first six-year period. Details are explained in the footnotes to the charts.

41

Main Objective I
First 6 years

Flowchart of survey & analyses(i) Abundance#1

Estimationc) + d) variation / interpretation(ii) Biologicalparameters

Age

Analysis

Assessa) Racemization

Analysis

Assessb) DNA methylation#2

Analysis/Assess

Earplug

Estimation
Analysis
Continue?
Continue?

Others c) Age at sexual matuity

Analysisd) New age reader

Assess#3

Initial applicatione) SCAA#4

Hormones in blubberb) Mixing I/P stocks

Continue?

SurveyAnalysis

Survey#5#6Feasibility biopsy

SurveyAnalysis

Continue?

Survey & Analysis

Triald) New genetic technique#7

SurveySurvey & Analysis
Prep.

c) Movement

Improvement / application

Analysis/Assessa) IIIW/VIE stock structure(iii) Stock structure

ReviewAbundance estimationg(0) initial triala) + b) abundance, g(0)Second 6 years

Review

Interpretation
SurveySurvey & Analysis

Survey(iv) RMP/ISTs

Initial specification with SC

Continue?
Continue?
Final specification

Main Objective I
First 6 years

Flowchart of survey & analyses(i) Abundancea) + b) abundance, g(0)Abundance estimationg(0) initial trial

Estimatec) + d) variation / interpretation(ii) Biologicalparameters

Age

Earplug

Analysis

AssessAnalysisa) Racemization

Analysis

AssessContinue?

b) DNA methylation

Analysis/Assess

Continue?
AnalysisOthers c) Age at sexual matuity

Assessd) New age reader

Specificatione) SCAA
Hormones in blubber(iii) Stock structureContinue?

Analysis/Assessa) IIIW/VIE stock structure

SurveyPrep.

(iv) RMP/ISTs

SCAA

Survey & Analysis

Triald) New genetic technique
Feasibility biopsy

Analysis

SurveySurvey & Analysisb) Mixing I/P stocksc) Movement

Evaluation of non-lethal
methods on a wholeprogram basis

Interpretation
SurveySurveySurvey & Analysis
Initial specification with SC#1

The survey plan for each austral summer season including details of the survey design, will be presented to the annual IWC SC meetings.
The survey design will take into account the specific research activities planned for a particular Area and austral summer season, and will
follow the seven guidelines or suggestions provided by the Review Panel regarding survey design. The survey design for the first two-three
years will include feasibility studies on biopsy sampling and telemetry of Antarctic minke whale. The survey plan for the 2015/16 australsummer season was presented to the 2015 IWC SC meeting as Document SC/66a/SP08.
#2
At first, the stock effect on the DNA methylation technique will be examined using 50 highly readable earplugs each from I and P-stocks. In
the next step the effect of the period will be examined by using similar number of samples from different austral summers. A specializedlaboratory and a university in Tokyo have been contacted so that this study can be conducted in collaboration with experts. Preliminary
results will be reported to the 2017 IWC SC meeting and final results at the 2018 IWC SC meeting.
#3
The proponent responded preliminarily to several SCAA/RMP-related recommendations from the NEWREP-A Review Panel at the 201542

IWC SC meeting (SC/66a/SP08).
The proponent will conduct progesterone analyses in blubber tissues of Antarctic minke whales using JARPAII samples. Females withvarious reproductive status such as ovulating, resting and pregnant with small fetus will be selected, and hormone levels will be comparedwith histological information of reproductive organ. Analysis of progesterone level for a total of 50 Antarctic minke whale samples will beassayed using the compact ELISA workstation (Crocodile, Titertek Berthold). Progesterone will be assayed with the Cayman Practice
ELISA Kits (Cayman Chemical), according to the manufacturers’ protocols. Preliminary results will be reported to the 2017 IWC SC
meeting.
#5
The estimation of performance will consider the use of a random effect model for the mixing proportions, by using a statistical principle of“borrowing strength”.
#6
The feasibility study on telemetry in Antarctic minke whale will be undertaken along the dedicated sighting surveys, in the early stage of thefirst six-year period of NEWREP-A. Detailed study design will be provided in the sighting survey plan to be presented and discussed at theannual IWC SC meetings. With regard field methods as well as tag types, the proponent will collaborate and consult with experienced
foreign and Japanese colleagues (see details in the main text).
#7
The feasibility study on biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale will be undertaken along the dedicated sighting surveys, in the early stageof the first six-year period of NEWREP-A. Because this feasibility should be conducted early in the program, it will be conducted in the
IWC Area to be covered by the sighting surveys in 2015/16, 2016/17 and 2017/18. Detailed study design will be provided in the sighting
survey plan to be presented and discussed at the annual IWC SC meetings (see details in the main text).
#4

Main Objective II
First 6 years

Flowchart of survey & analyses(i) Kril survey#8

Second 6 years

Review

Surveya) Under NEWREP-A

SurveyAnalysisAnalysis

Si multaneous s mall scale s urvey #9b) CCAMLR standard typePrep.

c) + d) Demography& Oceanography(ii) Abundancea) DISTANCE#10

Analysis

SurveySi multaneous s mall scale s urvey #9

Prep.

Surv.

SurveyAnalysis

SurveyAnalysisAnalysis

Surveyg(0) initial trial

Other spp.#1

Estimationb) DSM

Estimation

SurveyInvest. of model

Estimation(iii) Prey consumption

Estimation

Samplinga) Prey consumption

Sampling
Analysis

Prep.
#12

Trial

Continue

Continue?

Survey & Analysis

Continue?

Analysis/Assess

Isotope (baleen)

Analysis

Continue(Bioenergetics model)#11 Analysis

Tagging

Isotope (krill, skin)#13

Sampling & Analysisb) Body condition

Sampling

Continue?
Sampling
Analysisc) Chemical markers(iv) Ecosystem model#14a) Multispecies productionb) Spatial

Review

Sampling/Analysis/Assess

Modelling and Analysis

43

Analysis

Continue?
Continue

Main Objective II
First 6 years

Flowchart of survey & analyses(i) Kril survey

Surveya) Under NEWREP-A
Si multaneous s malls ca le s urveyb) CCAMLR standard typePrep.

c) + d) Demography& Oceanography(ii) Abundance
Other spp.

a) DISTANCE(iii) Prey consumptiona) Prey consumptionb) DSM

AnalysisAnalysis

SurveySurveyAnalysis

Estimationg(0) initial trial(iv) Ecosystem Model

Estimation

Invest. of model

Sampling
Analysis

Continue(Bioenergetics model) Analysis

Survey & Analysis

Tagging

Prep.

Isotope (baleen)

Analysis/Assess

Trial

Continue?

Isotope (krill, skin)Sampling & Analysisb) Body condition

Sampling
Analysisc) Chemical markers

Sampling/Analysis/Assess

Evaluation of non-lethal
methods on a wholeprogram basis

Continue?

#8

Since the NEWREP-A review workshop, progress has been made on the installation of equipments (echosounder, Norpac net and CTD) in
the research vessel that will be engaged in krill surveys under NEWREP-A. During this work the specifications made by the Review Panelfor those instruments are being taken into consideration.
#9
The proponent will consider to conduct a simultaneous survey by a krill survey vessel equipped with a frame-type trawl and echosounder,
the dedicated sighting vessel equipped with an echosounder and the whale sampling vessels within a small-scale experimental survey area
over a short time period (e.g. one week) so that comparisons among vessels/samples can be made.
#10
Identification of duplicate sightings will be also conducted for whale species other than Antarctic minke whale during NEWREP-A sighting
surveys in IO mode. To determine whether g(0) is significantly different from one, analyses on duplicate sightings will be conducted for
those whale species where sufficient data are obtained during the NEWREP-A program. Details will be provided in the sighting survey
plans to be presented to the annual meetings of the IWC SC.
#11
The proponent will make effort to build more sophisticated models adding some categories such as age, growth and maturity status basedon the energy requirement by change in blubber mass and lipid contents. Previously and newly collected data will be used. Preliminary
results of this work will be reported to the 2016 IWC SC meeting (see details in the main text).
#12
Stable isotopes analyses (δ13C and δ15N) along the edge of baleen plates will be conducted to estimate time duration of Antarctic minke
whale in the feeding grounds. Stable isotopes in baleen plates (n=10-20) of Antarctic minke whales sampled under JARPA II will beanalysed early in the research program, as an initial step. The results of the analyses will be reported to the IWC SC in 2018.
#13
As a first step in the work to compare overlap in diet amongst fin and Antarctic minke whale using stable isotope, krill samples will beanalyzed to ensure the correct determination of stable isotope baselines. This will be done during the first six-year period of NEWREP-A.
Concurrently, the proponent will examine the overlap in diet amongst fin, humpback and Antarctic minke whales using stable isotope ratios
in skin samples collected by lethal method (Antarctic minke whales) and by biopsy sampling (fin and humpback whales). This analysis
will be carried out early in the NEWREP-A program based on the information accumulated on stable isotope baselines of krill in each area.
Results will be presented to the IWC SC meeting as appropriate in the first six-year period and evaluated at the mid-term review of
NEWREP-A (see details in the main text).
#14
At first, the total lipid content % of blubber will be compared to other body condition indicators such as blubber thickness and girthmeasurements. As an initial feasibility test, the measurements of body conditions (blubber thickness, girth, total fat weight and the total
lipid content % of blubber) from Antarctic minke whales collected under NEWREP-A will be used. At least 50 whales for each sex andsub areas will be used or this analysis.

7. BACKUP PLAN FOR CONTINGENCIESAs research activities could be disrupted by both natural and human factors including dangerous
sabotage activities by an extreme anti-whaling NGO, this proposed research plan establishes acontingency backup plan in order to respond to the contingency and secure the scientific value of data
to be collected by this research for the purpose of achieving the stated scientific objectives.
The backup plan would address three aspects; (i) adjustments of research protocols at the scene of
disruption, (ii) adjustment of research plans including research period, sample size, and research areas
after the year of disruption, and (iii) consideration of analysis methods to compensate the effects of
disruptions. Possible issues arising from a disrupted research plan could be reduced sample size,
unsurveyed research areas, sampling bias and missed research periods. They could mean reduced
accuracies, reduced randomness, and other increased biases. The considerations of these aspects also
44

responds to the recommendation made at the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPA II Special
Permit Research Programme, held in Tokyo, Japan, February 24-28, 2014 (see section 12.1.2 in IWC,
2014a).
(i) Adjustments of research protocols at the scene and in the year of disruption
In case of a disruption, including sabotage activities, the head of the research (e.g. the cruise leader) will
declare to the public that lethal parts of the proposed research will be immediately suspended. Nonlethal research activities will continue as planned. If continuation of non-lethal research activities is also
disrupted, the whole research will be suspended and could be relocated to other research areas. These
adjustments including resumption of the research in other areas and periods than originally planned will
be fully recorded and made available for the analysis required in establishing adjusted research plans
and in conducting scientific considerations for compensating the effects of the disruption.
(ii) Adjustment of research plans including research period, sample size, and research areas after theyear of disruption
When the number of samples does not reach a target sample size, the reduced number could be carriedover to the latter years of the research plan and/or the whole research period could be extended whenscientific justification based on the careful analyses of the data collected is established in consultation
with the IWC SC. When this happens, effects on the sampled stock(s) will be reassessed.
Missed research periods and unsurveyed areas could also require adjustment proposed research plans.
Scientific justification for the need of adjustment research plans regarding period and areas will be
provided along with pertinent data and its analysis to the IWC SC. Such an adjustment research plan
will be established immediately after the completion of the research of the year of disruption.
A summary information on the progress of the research, on an annual basis, in terms of samples obtained
and areas and periods covered will be made public. This summary provides transparency in theimplementation of the proposed research and background for adjustment research plans if they become
necessary.
(iii) Consideration of analysis methods to compensate the effects of disruptions
Effects of disruptions will be analyzed in terms of reliability of scientific data obtained. This would
allow the consideration of analysis methods to compensate the effects of disruptions. One of the potential
problems likely caused by the disruptions is spatially and temporally imbalanced sampling outcome.
Like in the case of discussion in the abundance estimation, lack of design-unbiasedness may beovercome by introducing the model-based estimation approaches, where finding better spatial andenvironmental covariates is a crucial part for its success. So far, although such heterogeneity has been
observed to a certain degree in the JARPA and JARPAII, there is an achievement to treat such effects
through statistical methods such as random- or mixed-effect models (Konishi and Butterworth, 2013).
It is also important for the analysis that the adjustments described above in (i) and (ii) are well-plannedand executed. However, as the effects of the disruptions could vary substantially, a case-by-caseapproach might be unavoidable. A high level of transparency will be necessary for the analyticalmethods employed to address the effects of the disruptions.

8. OUTPUT OF THE RESEARCH, PARTICIPATION OF FOREIGN SCIENTISTS AND
COLLABORATION WITH OTHER RESEARCHES/ORGANIZATIONSThis proposed research program is primarily intended to contribute to the improvement of conservationand management of whale resources in the Antarctic in accordance with the ICRW as shown in its
research objectives. It follows that its scientific output will be produced first and primarily for the review
and discussion in the IWC SC. At the same time, in line with an observation by the ICJ, there will be
increased efforts to publish its scientific achievements in peer-reviewed journals outside the IWC

45

Participation of foreign scientists in the field surveys will be welcomed, so long as they meet thefollowing qualifications established by the Government of Japan: i) costs for participation, travel
expenses to and from the home ports, subsistence on board the research vessels and any other ancillarycost, will be covered by the participant; ii) indemnification and insurance for any casualty or personal
injury while on board the research vessels, will be covered by the participant; iii) participation of those
who are found to have intentionally sabotaged the implementation of the research in the field shall beterminated.
Research collaboration will be sought with relevant scientists and research institutions (national andinternational), in consideration of the objectives of the proposed research. In the case of Main Objective
I, namely ”Improvement in the precision of stock assessment and ecological information for theapplication of the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales and calculation of its catch limits”, and its subobjectives, collaboration will be made with scientists of the IWC SC, which have been heavily involved
with this type of research in the past, and with scientists from national research institutions such as theTokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, National Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries,
National Research Institute of Fisheries Science among others. On Main Objective II, namely“Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building
ecosystem models”, and its sub-objectives, collaboration will be made with national and international
research institutions involved in the research of the Antarctic ecosystem. As noted earlier, design andimplementation of the krill survey will be carried out in collaboration with CCAMLR scientists.
Analysis of data will be carried out in collaboration and consultation with scientists from CCAMLR,Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, National Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries,
National Research Institute of Fisheries Science, National Institute of Polar Research in Japan among
others.
As in the case of JARPA and JARPAII, data obtained by this new proposed research program will beshared with members of the IWC SC in accordance with the IWC SC Data Availability Agreement(DAA) (IWC, 2004). Data and samples from the research will be available for other accredited scientists
and research organizations in accordance with the protocol for access to samples/data from the ICR(http://www.icrwhale.org/pdf/appendix2.pdf).
To facilitate the collaboration and analyses, databases will be created after each survey under thisprogram conducted by the ICR, which will specify the kind of samples and data collected during its
research activities. Databases which include data from laboratory work will be created in time for the
mid-term review of the research program in line with the Annex P (IWC, 2013b). According to theAnnex P the proponent of the research program should submit a preliminary data description documentthat explains the data two months before the Annual IWC SC meeting prior to the specialist workshopthat will review the proposed program. It also specifies that the final data description document and thedata themselves will be made available in electronic format one month after the close of the Annual
IWC SC Meeting. The mid-term review is expected after the completion of the first six-year period of
the proposed research plan.
In addition, efforts will be made to respond the NEWREP-A Review Panel specific recommendations
regarding research collaboration: (1) ad hoc collaborations on specific issues; (2) the development of aformal protocol for outside scientists to express interest; and (3) the development of a strategy topromote incorporation of external Japanese and/or foreign scientists into the research (IWC, 2015app41). Regarding the recommendation (1), NEWREP-A will continue contacting potential partners, andco-operative research will be identified and arranged for specific items in due course, preferably before
research activities on such items start. As for the recommendation (2), NEWREP-A will develop andpost such a protocol on the website of the Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR) (both in Japanese andEnglish) well in advance of the first research cruise under NEWREP-A. With respect to therecommendation (3), NEWREP-A will: i) continue contacting specific potential collaborators directly;
and ii) invite co-operative research widely through the internet (e.g. ICR’s website) and at related
meetings (including those of the IWC SC) indicating specific research items for collaboration. An“annual progress report” to the IWC SC (see the next item), would also help to promote researchcollaboration with external scientists/organizations by including description on as the involvement of46

external scientists/organizations and specification of their roles in the report.
With regard to collaboration with CCAMLR, the outline of the krill surveys plan were already presented
and discussed at the WG-EMM held in July 2015. Following the recommendations by the WG-EMM15,
data and details of a plan of the whale dedicated sighting vessel-based krill survey to the next SG-ASAM
and WG-SAM in 2016.

9. PROGRAM MANAGEMENT, PERSONNEL AND LOGISTIC RESOURCES
As for the whole program management, the Fisheries Agency of Japan (FAJ) will assume responsibility,
including provision of the necessary funding. Regarding personnel resources to be engaged in the
program, scientists from the ICR will play the leading role in order to pursue research activities andachieve the research objectives of NEWREP-A in collaboration with scientists from other domestic
and/or foreign organizations, such as the Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, theNational Research Institute of Far Seas Fisheries and the National Research Institute of Fisheries Science.
In addition to collaboration with CCAMLR, further collaboration with relevant oversea researchers andresearch institutions will be sought by ICR.
The proponent intend to provide relevant information concerning program management to the IWC SC
every year in an annual progress report for the SC’s comments and suggestions to facilitate steadyprogress of the program in an open and transparent manner. This information will include progressachieved for each sub-objective as well as the involvement of external scientists/organizations and theirroles. This annual update and comment process through the IWC SC is expected to improve themanagement of the program throughout its duration.

REFERENCES
Allen, K.R. 1980. Conservation and management of whales. Washington Sea Grant Publication,
University of Washington Press. 107pp.
Anonymous. 2005. Report of the review meeting of the Japanese Whale Research Program underSpecial Permit in the Antarctic (JARPA) called by Government of Japan, Tokyo, 18-20, January
2005. Paper SC/57/O6 presented to the International Whaling Committee Scientific Committee,
May 2005 (unpublished). 24pp.
Bando, T., Zenitani, R., Fujise, Y. and Kato, H. 2006. Biological parameters of the Antarctic minke
whale based on materials collected by the JARPA survey in 1987/88 to 2004/05. Paper
SC/D06/J17 presented to the JARPA Review workshop, Tokyo, 4-8 December 2006
(unpublished). 28pp.
Bando, T., Kishiro, T. and Kato, H. 2014. Yearly trend in the age at sexual maturity of Antarctic minke
whales examined by transition phase in earplugs collected during JARPA and JARPAII surveys.
Paper SC/F14/J08 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop,
February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished). 10pp.
Bocklandt, S., Lin, W., Sehl, M.E., Sanchez F.J., Sinsheimer, J.S., Horvath, S. and Vilain, E. 2011.
Epigenetic predictor of age. PLoS ONE, 6, e14821.

47

Branch, T.A. 2007. Abundance of Antarctic blue whales south of 60°S from three complete circumpolar
sets of surveys. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 9(3): 87-96.
Butterworth, D.S. and Rademeyer, R.A. 2005. Sustainable management initiatives for the southern
African hake fisheries over recent years. Bull. Mar. Sci. 76(2): 287-319
Gales, N., Bowers, M., Durban, J.W., Friedlaender, A.S., Nowacek, D.P., Pitman, R.L., Read, A.J. andTyson, R.B. 2013. Advances in non-lethal research on Antarctic minke whales: biotelemetry,photo-identification and biopsy sampling. Paper SC/65a/IA12 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, June 2013 (unpublished). 15pp.
George, J.C., Bada, J., Zeh, H., Scott, L., Brown, S.E., O'Hara, T. and Suydam, R. 1999. Age and growthestimates of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) via aspartic acid racemization. Can. J. Zool.
77: 571-80.
Hakamada, T. and Matsuoka, K. 2014. Estimates of abundance and abundance trend of the Antarctic
minke whale in Areas IIIE-VIW, south of 60°S, based on JARPA and JARPA II sighting data
(1989/90-2008/09). Paper SC/F14/J3 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review
Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished). 41pp.
Hakamada, T., Matsuoka, K., Nishiwaki, S. and Kitakado, T. 2013. Abundance estimates and trends for
Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in Antarctic Areas IV and V for the period
1989/90-2004/05. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13(2): 123-51.
Hilborn, R. 1990. Estimating the parameters of full age-structured models from catch and abundance
data. Bull. Int. N. Pacific Fish. Comm. 50: 207-213.
International Whaling Commission 1986. Chairman’s Report of the Thirty-Seventh Annual Meeting,
Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 36: 10-29.
International Whaling Commission 1987. “Report of the Special Meeting of the Scientific Committee
on Planning for a Comprehensive Assessment of Whale Stocks”. Rep. int. Whal. Commn 37:
147-157.
International Whaling Commission 1988. Chairman’s Report of the Thirty-Ninth Annual Meeting, Rep.
Int. Whal. Commn 38: 10-31.
International Whaling Commission 1990. Chairman’s Report of the Forty-First Annual Meeting, Rep.
Int. Whal. Commn 40: 11-37.
International Whaling Commission 1992. Report of the Scientific Committee. Rep. int. Whal Commn
42: 51-79.
International Whaling Commission 1994. Report of the Scientific Committee. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn
44: 41-67.
International Whaling Commission 1998a. Report of the Intersessional Working Group to review data
and results from special permit research on minke whales in the Antarctic, Tokyo, 12-16 May
1997. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 48: 377-412.
International Whaling Commission 1998b. Chairman’s Report of the Forty-Ninth Annual Meeting. Rep.
Int. Whal. Commn 48: 17-51.
International Whaling Commission 2004. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex T. Report of thedata availability working group. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 6 (Suppl.): 406-408.
International Whaling Commission 2008. Report of the Intersessional Workshop to review data andresults from special permit research on minke whales in the Antarctic, Tokyo, 7-8 December
2006. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 10 (Suppl.): 411-445.

48

International Whaling Commission 2012a. Requirements and Guidelines for Implementations under the
Revised Management Procedure (RMP). J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (Suppl.): 497-505.
International Whaling Commission 2012b. The Revised Management Procedure (RMP) for baleen
whales. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (Suppl.): 485-94.
International Whaling Commission 2012c. Requirements and guidelines for conducting surveys andanalysing data within the Revised Management Scheme. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (Suppl.):509-17.
International Whaling Commission 2013a. Report of the Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res.
Manage.14 (Suppl.): 1-86.
International Whaling Commission 2013b. Revised “Annex P”. Process for the Review of the Special
Permit Proposals and Research Results from Existing and Completed Permits. J. Cetacean Res.
Manage. 14 (Suppl.): 465-468.
International Whaling Commission 2014a. Report of the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPA II Special Permit Research Programme. Paper SC/65b/Rep2 submitted to IWC ScientificCommittee (unpublished). 62pp.
International Whaling Commission 2014b. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex I. Report of theWorking Group on Stock Definition. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 15(Suppl.): 271-288.
International Whaling Commission 2014c. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex G. Report of the
Sub-Committee on In-depth Assessments. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 15 (Suppl.): 233-249.
International Whaling Commission 2014d. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex K1. Report of
the Working Group on Ecosystem Modelling. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 15 (Suppl.): 331-344.
International Whaling Commission 2014e. Report of the Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res.
Manage. 15 (Suppl.): 1-75.
International Whaling Commission. 2014f. Report of the Scientific Committee. Paper IWC/65/Rep1
presented to the 2014 International Whaling Commission Meeting.
International Whaling Commission. 2015a. Report of the Expert Panel to review the proposal by Japan
for NEWREP-A. Paper SC/66a/Rep6 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2015
(unpublished). 62pp.
International Whaling Commission. 2015b. Report of the Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res.
Manage. 16 (Suppl.):1-87.
Kitakado, T. 2015. Further comparison of the trajectories of SCAA-estimated CV for recruitment rates
and recruitment estimates. 2015 Report of the Scientific Committee Annex Q2.
Kanda, N., Goto, M., Oikawa, H. and Pastene, L.A. 2014. Note on sampling and laboratory procedure
protocols of the genetic work at the Institute of Cetacean Research. Paper SC/F14/J27 presented
to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan(unpublished). 4pp.
Kato, H. 1982. Some biological parameters for the Antarctic minke whale. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 32:
935-45.
Kitakado, T., Murase, H., Tamura, T. and Yonezaki, S. 2014a. An attempt to ecosystem modelling forspecies in Area IV in the Antarctic Ocean using JARPA and JARPAII data. Paper SC/F14/J26
presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit Research
Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 15pp.
Kitakado, T., Schweder, T., Kanda, N., Pastene, L.A., Walløe, L. 2014b. Dynamic population
segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales. Paper SC/F14/J29

49

presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo,
Japan (unpublished). 20pp.
Kitakado, T., Schweder, T., Kanda, N., Pastene, L.A. and Walløe, L. 2014c. Dynamic population
segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales (SC/F14/J29rev). Paper
SC/65b/IA13 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 25pp.
Kobayashi, C. 2010. The feeding ecology of baleen whales based on the DNA analysis of the colon
content. Master Thesis, Nippon University. 52pp.
Koch, C.M. and Wagner, W. 2011. Epigenetic-aging-signature to determine age in different tissues.
Aging, 3, 1018.
Konishi, K. and Butterworth, D.S. 2013. Further investigation of whether correlations amongst data areinvalidating the conclusion of a statistically significant trend in Antarctic minke body condition
over time. Paper SC/65a/EM4 presented to IWC Scientific Committee June 2013 (unpublished).
3pp.
Konishi, K. and Walløe, L. 2014. Time trends in the energy storage in the Antarctic minke whales during
the JARPA and JARPA II research periods. Paper SC/F14/J13 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, February 2014 (unpublished). 21pp.
Konishi, K., Tamura, T., Zenitani, R., Bando, T., Kato, H. and Walløe, L. 2008. Decline in energy storage
in the Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Southern Ocean. Polar Biol.
31: 1509-20.
Konishi, K., Hakamada, T., Kiwada, H., Kitakado, T. and Walløe, L. 2014. Decrease in stomach contents
in the Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Southern Ocean. Polar Biol.
37:205-215.
Laws, R. M. 1977. Seals and whales of the Southern Ocean. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 279: 81-96.
Laws, R. M. 1985. The Ecology of the Southern Ocean. Am. Sci. 73: 26-40.
Lockyer, C. 1984a. Review of baleen whale (Mysticeti) reproduction and implications for management.
Rep. Int. Whal. Commn (special issue) 6: 27-50.
Lockyer, C. 1984b. Age determination by means of the earplug in baleen whales. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn
34: 692-696.
Lotka, A.J. 1910. Contribution to the Theory of Periodic Reaction, J. Phys. Chem., 14 (3): 271–274.
Maegawa, S., Hinkal, G., Kim, H.S. et al. 2010. Widespread and tissue specific age-related DNA
methylation changes in mice. Genome Research 20: 332–340.
Matsuoka, K. and Hakamada, T. 2014. Estimates of abundance and abundance trend of the blue, fin andsouthern right whales in Areas IIIE-VIW, south of 60ºS, based on JARPA and JARPAII sighting
data (1989/90-2008/09). Paper SC/F14/J5 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit
Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished). 27pp.
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.
Matsuoka, K., Hakamada, T., Kiwada, K., Murase, H. and Nishiwaki, S. 2011. Abundance estimates andtrends for humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in Antarctic Areas IV and V based on
JARPA sightings data. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (special issue) 3: 75-94.

50

Mikaelian I, Labelle P, Kopal M, De Guise S, Martineau D. 2003. Adenomatous hyperplasia of the
thyroid gland in beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) from the St. Lawrence Estuary andHudson Bay, Quebec, Canada. Vet. Pathol. 40(6): 698-703.
Mori, M. and Butterworth, D.S. 2006. A first step towards modelling the krill – predator dynamics of
the Antarctic ecosystem. CCAMLR Science 13, 217–277.
Morishita, J. 2013. The truth about the commercial whaling moratorium. Senri ethnological studies 84:
337-353.
Murase, H., Matsuoka, K., Hakamada, T. and Kitakado, T. 2014. Preliminary analysis of changes inspatial distribution of Antarctic minke and humpback whales in Area IV during the period of
JARPA and JARPAII from 1989 to 2006. Paper SC/F14/J18 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII
Special Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished). 17pp.
Nicol, S., Pauly, T., Bindoff, N.L., Strutton, P.G. 2000. “BROKE” a biological/oceanographic survey
off the coast of East Antarctica (80–150°E) carried out in January–March 1996. Deep Sea Res.
II 47: 2281-97.
Nicol, S., Meiners, K., Raymond, B. 2010. BROKE-West, a large ecosystem survey of the South West
Indian Ocean sector of the Southern Ocean, 30°E-80°E (CCAMLR Division 58.4.2). Deep Sea
Res. II 57: 693-700.
Okamura, H and Kitakado, T. 2012. Abundance estimates of Antarctic minke whales using the OK
method. Paper SC/64/IA2 submitted to IWC Scientific Committee, June 2012 (unpublished).
24pp.
Pastene, L. A. 2006. What do we know about the stock structure of the Antarctic minke whale? Asummary of studies and hypotheses. Paper SC/D06/J12 presented to the JARPA Review
workshop, Tokyo, 4-8 December 2006.
Pastene, L.A. and Kanda, N. 2005. Temporal and spatial changes in stock structure of baleen whale
species in the Antarctic feeding grounds. Appendix 3 of paper SC/57/O1 submitted to IWC
Scientific Committee meeting, 2005, (unpublished). 4pp.
Pastene, L.A., Fujise, Y. and Hatanaka, H. 2014a. The Japanese Whale Research Program under Special
Permit in the Antarctic - Phase II (JARPAII): origin, objectives, research progress made in the
period 2005/06-2010/2011 and relevance for management and conservation of whales and theecosystem. Paper SC/F14/J01 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPAII Special Permit Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 76pp.
Pastene, L.A., Goto, M. and Kanda, N. 2014b. An update of the genetic study on stock structure of the
Antarctic minke whale based on JARPAII samples (SC/F14/J28rev). Paper SC/65b/SD1
presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 14pp.
Pauly, D., Christensen, V. and Walters, C. 2000. Ecopath, ecosim, and ecospace as tools for evaluating
ecosystem impact of fisheries. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 57: 697-706.
Plagányi, É.E. 2007. Models for an ecosystem approach to fisheries. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper.
477, 1–126.
Plagányi, É.E., Punt, A.E, Hillary, R., Morello, E.B., Thébaud, O., Hutton, T., Pillans, R.D., Thorson,
J.T., Fulton, E.A., Smith, A.D.M., Smith, F., Bayliss, P., Haywood, M., Lyne, V. and Rothlisberg,
P.C. 2012. Multispecies fisheries management and conservation: tactical applications using
models of intermediate complexity. Fish and Fisheries. DOI: 10.1111/j.14672979.2012.00488.x
Polanowski, A.M., Robbins, L., Chandler, D. and Jarman, S.N. 2014. Epigenetic estimation of age inhumpback whales. Molecular Ecology Resources. doi: 10.1111/1755-0998.12247. 12pp.
51

Punt, A. 2014a. A summary history of the application of statistical Catch-At-Age Analysis to Antarctic
minke whales. Paper SC/F14/O01 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPAII Special Permit Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 17pp.
Punt, A. 2014b. Assessment of Antarctic minke whales using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper
SC/F14/O02 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit
Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 99pp.
Punt, A. 2014c. Additional applications of the statistical catch-at-age analysis for Southern Hemisphereminke whales. Paper SC/65b/IA03 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014
(unpublished). 15pp.
Punt, A.E. and Polacheck, T. 2005. Application of statistical catch-at-age analysis for Southern
Hemisphere minke whales in Antarctic Areas IV and V. Paper SC/57/IA9 presented to the IWC
Scientific Committee, June 2005 (unpublished). 71pp.
Tamura, T. and Konishi, K. 2014. Prey composition and consumption rate by Antarctic minke whales
based on JARPA and JARPA II data. Paper SC/F14/J15 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, February 2014 (unpublished). 20pp.
Trathan, P.N., Watkins, J.L., Murray, A.W.A., Brierley, A.S., Everson, I., Goss, C., Priddle, J., Reid, K.,
Ward, P. 2001. The CCAMLR-2000 Krill Synoptic Survey: A description of the rationale anddesign. CCAMLR Sci. 8: 1-23.
Thomson, R. B., Butterworth, D. S. and Kato, H. 1999. Has the age at transition phase of southernhemisphere minke whales declined over recent decades?. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 15(3): 661-682.
Volterra, V. 1931. Variations and fluctuations of the number of individuals in animal species living
together in Animal Ecology. Pp. 409-48. In: Chapman, R.N., (eds.) Animal Ecology, McGrawHill, New York, i-x+464 pp.
Yasunaga, G., Bando, T. and Fujise, Y. 2014. Preliminary estimation of the age of Antarctic minke
whales based on aspartic acid racemization. Paper SC/F14/J12 presented to the IWC SC
JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished). 10pp.
Yodzis, P. and Innes, S. 1992 Body Size and Consumer-Resource Dynamics. Am. Nat. 139: 1151-1175.
Zenitani, R. and Kato, H. 2006. Temporal trend of age at sexual maturity of Antarctic minke whales
based on transition phase in earplugs obtained under JARPA surveys from 1987/88-2004/05.
Paper SC/D06/J15 presented to the JARPA Review workshop, Tokyo, 4-8 December 2006.
Zenitani, R., Fujise, Y. and Kato, H. 1997. Biological parameters of southern minke whales based onmaterials collected by the JARPA survey under special permit in 1987/88 to 1995/96. Paper
SC/M97/12 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee JARPA review meeting, Tokyo, May
1997 (unpublished). 19pp.

52

Appendix 1
Process for development of this research plan
1. Background --- “scientific research” under the framework of the ICRW and other international
conventions/agreements concerning conservation and management of marine living resources
The International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) prescribes that amendments of the
Schedule, by adopting regulations with respect to the conservation and utilization of whale resources,
shall be based on scientific findings (Article V, paragraph 2 (b)). Therefore, the International Whaling
Commission (IWC), established under the ICRW, shall use “scientific findings” as the fundamental basis
in adopting conservation and management measures for whale resources concerned, and its decisions
depend on research programs with clear objectives of providing such “scientific findings”. In this regard,
it should be noted that, among the three broad categories of objectives for special permit research
proposals under Article VIII of the ICRW, which are identified in the “Annex P” review process adopted
by the IWC, the first one is “[to] improve the conservation and management of whale stocks” (IWC2014).
The principle of “science-based conservation and management” is not unique to the ICRW/IWC, but iscommon in regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) established under international
conventions/agreements 1 , which are responsible for conservation and management of marine living
resources. It is also a common practice that research programs to provide such “scientific findings”, areplanned and implemented by research institutions (of member governments in most cases) which are
directly responsible for research concerning the conservation and management of marine living
resources concerned, on their own initiatives, in consultation or collaboration with the competent
RFMOs.

2. Nature of this scientific research programThis research plan is developed as a scientific research program of which main objectives, includes
possible contribution to improving the conservation and management of whale resources under theframework of the ICRW. In other words, this special permit research program intends to provide“scientific findings” mentioned in Article V, paragraph 2 (b) of the ICRW, with a view primarily toproviding the basis for amending the Schedule to the ICRW and improving the Revised Management
Procedure used to calculate sustainable catch limits for whale stocks, and thus resuming commercial
whaling in a sustainable manner in the Antarctic Ocean in accordance with the ICRW. This proposed
research program can be characterized as a program of “scientific research” under the framework of the
ICRW, in light of the text of the ICRW and the “Annex P” review process, while it is not intended to bea research program for purely academic purposes.

1e.g. International Convention for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (“The Commission may, on the basis ofscientific evidence, make recommendations designed to maintain the populations of tuna and tuna-like fishes
that may be taken in the Convention area at the levels which will permit the maximum sustainable catch”(Article VIII, paragraph 1.(a))); Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (“[theCommission shall] formulate, adopt and revise conservation measures on the basis of the best scientificevidence available, subject to the provision of paragraph 5 of this Article” (Article IX, 1.(f))); and Convention
on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fisheries Resources in the North Pacific Ocean (“[In giving
effect to the objective of this Convention, the following actions shall be taken individually or collectively as
appropriate:] adopting measures, based on the best scientific information available, to ensure that fisheries
resources are maintained at or restored to levels capable of producing maximum sustainable yield, taking into
account fishing patterns, the interdependence of stocks and any generally recommended international minimum
standards, whether subregional, regional or global” (Article 3, (b)(adopted in February 2012, but yet to enter
into force as of October 2014))).

53

3. The judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and Japan’s response
The judgment delivered by the ICJ on March 31, 2014 in the case concerning Whaling in the Antarctic(Australia v. Japan: New Zealand intervening) states that the decision to grant special permits under
Article VIII, paragraph 1 of the ICRW “cannot depend simply on that State’s perception” (paragraph61). Japan has taken this finding of the ICJ into consideration, and with respect to the process fordevelopment of this proposed research plan and it is determined to “follow an internationally open andhighly transparent process through securing the participation of renowned scientists from Japan andabroad, and through other processes including discussion at the IWC Scientific Committee’s workshop
and coordination with other institutions conducting relevant studies”. This was announced on April 18,
2014 by the then Minister of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries in a policy statement concerning thefuture whale research programs.
Following the Minister’s statement, and taking account of the observations described in 1 and 2 above,
Japan decided to have first and second drafts of the new research plan reviewed by external scientists
with a wide range of expertise to get comments and suggestions before it is submitted to the IWC
Scientific Committee (i.e. in addition to the official review process in accordance with the “Annex P”).
Specifically, it was planned to go through a “voluntary” review process open to external experts to obtain
valuable inputs, including constructive criticisms, for improving the draft research plan through: 1) email correspondence in early September; and 2) a meeting held in Tokyo, Japan in October.

4. Chronology of the actual process for development of this research plan
On August 29, 2014, approximately 160 external experts in the following categories were invited toparticipate in Japan’s “voluntary” review process of the new research plan, by an e-mail sent fromJapanese scientists participating in the IWC Scientific Committee:
Members of the IWC Scientific Committee (Participants in the 2014 meeting of the Committee andother regular participants in the past); External expert panel members for the past special permit research reviews held by the IWC
Scientific Committee;
 External expert reviewers for the 2004 IWC review of the Southern Ocean Sanctuary; Experts who appeared in the ICJ case; Chair of the Scientific Committee of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine
Living Resources (SC-CAMLR) and conveners of its related working groups;
 Chairs of scientific subsidiary bodies (and panel members) of RFMOs which covers the waters
adjacent to the Antarctic Ocean (i.e. CCSBT, SPRFMO, SEAFO and ICCAT); Director and ex-Directors of Fisheries Resources Management and Research Division, Food andAgriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO); and Other experts who have good insights into the biology of marine mammals, the Antarctic marine
ecosystem and the conservation or sustainable use of marine living resources.
By early September, ten (10) external experts from nine (9) countries (including one (1) from Japan)
had confirmed their interest in reviewing (or in just receiving) the initial draft of the proposed researchplan. One (1) external expert confirmed his interest in receiving the draft at the beginning of October.
Consequently, eleven (11) experts from ten (10) countries expressed his/her interest in the new researchplan at that stage. On the other hand, three (3) experts from two (2) countries expressed their view that
it was not appropriate to participate in the review process mentioning the implication of the ICJ
Judgment to the special permit whaling under the ICRW etc.
On September 6, 2014, the first draft of the new research plan was sent by e-mail to the ten (10) external
experts who had confirmed his/her interest in the new research plan by that time. The first draft was also
sent to the other expert in early October by e-mail.

54

By late September, comments on the first draft had been received from six (6) experts. One (1) expert
indicated that he had no comment on the first draft. The received comments were considered by the
proponent and taken into account as much as possible in developing the second draft of the researchplan.
On October 22, 2014, a meeting to review and discuss the second draft was held in Tokyo, Japan withthe participation of three (3) external experts from three (3) countries and one (1) local scientist. On thefollowing day, the second draft was sent out by e-mail to all external experts participating in the process,including three (3) additional experts who had agreed by the middle of October to review the second
draft, for their review and comments. In total, fourteen (14) external experts from eleven (11) countries(including three (3) from Japan) received the second draft, and four (4) experts (including two (2) experts
who attended the meeting on October 22) provided their comments on it by early November.
The comments provided at the meeting and through the e-mail correspondence were considered by the
proponent and taken into account as much as possible in developing the final draft of the research plan.

5. The Transparency of the whole process
The process applied for developing this proposed research plan is intended to be more transparent
compared with scientific research programs conducted for marine living resources under the competenceof other RFMOs, which involve lethal sampling of such resources. Most of those research programs do
not usually go through a review process open to external experts when they are being developed,
especially in the initial stages of their development.
Given the nature of scientific discussions under this proposed plan, this process was only open toexternal experts who have expertise in the specific related fields of science. This is considered as
appropriate in order to secure and facilitate objective and science-based discussion. More open
opportunities for discussing the plan are secured in the later stage of the whole review process, i.e. after
the proposed research plan is submitted to the IWC Scientific Committee, including its review process
in accordance with the “Annex P.” Japan plans to have this proposed research plan circulated by the
IWC Secretariat to all Contracting Governments to the ICRW, for their review and comments in orderto improve and then finalize the substance of the proposed plan so that the research program cancontribute more effectively to improving the conservation and management of whale resources in the
Antarctic.
Reference
International Whaling Commission 2014. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex P. Process for the
Review of Special Permit Proposals and Research Results from Existing and Completed Permits.

55

Appendix 2
Clarification of research objectives in the proposed research plan
The previous JARPAII program had four main research objectives: 1) Monitoring of the Antarctic
ecosystem, which involved several research items; 2) Modeling competition among whale species; 3)
Elucidation of temporal and spatial changes in stock structure; and 4) Improving the management
procedure for Antarctic minke whale. The relationship among these four JARPAII objectives, is shownin the figure below.

In JARPAII, several parameters considered ‘indicators’ of changes in the ecosystem were studied andmonitored under the Objective I, and several of those parameters were used as input data for thedeveloping of ecosystem models focusing competition among whale species (Objective II), e.g. whale
abundance, krill biomass, stomach contents and body condition of whales; and for improving themanagement of Antarctic minke whale (Objective IV) e.g. biological parameters such as the MSYR andnatural mortality. Elucidation of the stock structure of this species stands as a separate objective(Objective III), which would contribute to improving the management of the species under the RMP(Objective IV). Results of the modeling work under Objective II, would also be used to incorporate theeffect arising from the inter-species relationship among whale species into the RMP (Objective IV).
Therefore Objective IV depended on the results obtained under the other three objectives.
The four research objectives of JARPAII were not judged as unreasonable by the ICJ. They remain
relevant and have been taken into account in the development of this proposed plan.
The two main research objectives of the new research plan are, 1) Improvements in the precision of
biological and ecological information for the application of the RMP to the Antarctic minke whales tocalculate catch limits; and 2) Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine
ecosystem through building ecosystem models. Sub-objectives were explained in section 2 of the maintext.
The previous JARPAII research objectives and items are incorporated into the two objectives of the newplan through the establishment of sub-objectives.
The two main objectives of the new research plan are directly relevant for the conservation andsustainable use of marine living resources, especially whales, in the Antarctic.
56

On the first main objective: The RMP is the rigorously-tested mechanism that the IWC SC has developed
to allow it to provide advice on safe, risk-averse catch limits for commercial whaling of baleen whales,
should the Commission ever decide to reinstate such whaling. The RMP comprises all of the rules anddata requirements associated with the provision of advice for particular species in particulargeographical areas. The RMP was adopted by the Commission in 1994. Because of the moratorium oncommercial whaling the RMP has not been applied, with the exception of operations carried out by
Norway and Iceland that have lodged an objection or reservation to the commercial whaling moratorium.
However the IWC SC continues to work on several issues on how the RMP could be implemented.
Specifically every year, the IWC SC discusses general issues of the RMP as well as Implementationrelated matters. On the latter, the IWC SC has carried out RMP Implementations on western North
Pacific minke and Bryde’s whales and North Atlantic minke and fin whales, each of which took at least
two years and involved a huge amount of scientific endeavor. In summary, the RMP is a powerful andimportant management tool developed by the IWC SC.
On the second main objective. Ecosystem modeling is important not only to investigate and understandthe structure and dynamics of the Antarctic ecosystem but also it can be useful for the objectives ofconservation and management. There is a growing disillusion with the predictive capacity of single
species assessment methods and the management approaches they support, and this has been the primary
driver for the development of ecosystem-based approaches. The principle of multi-species management
has been discussed, accepted, adopted, and recommended by many international organizations or fora,
including the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO, 2003) and the 2002 World
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD, 2002). Recognizing the importance of the ecosystemapproach, the IWC SC discussed multi-species management approaches under its Standing Group on
Environmental Concerns until 2006. Since 2007 a Working Group on Ecosystem Modeling has been
discussing prototype ecosystem models. On the other hand the CCAMLR have been developing
ecosystem models to evaluate management strategies for the Antarctic krill fisheries. The importancethat both organizations (IWC and CCAMLR) give to ecosystem modeling is reflected in a joint
workshop on this topic conducted in 2008, and new joint workshops are being programmed for the near
future. The recent workshop to review JARPAII research strongly encouraged further work on
ecosystem modeling.
The new research plan is, therefore, based on two objectives that reflect research need amply recognized
by international organizations in charge of conservation and management of marine living resources.
The new Antarctic research plan integrates the previous JARPAII research objectives and research items
into these two main objectives, in a coherent and more sensible way. For example the stock structure of
Antarctic minke whale did stand as a separate research objective in JARPAII. In the new Antarctic
research plan it became a sub-objective under Objective I which make more sense since the stock
structure of Antarctic minke whale is conducted for- and is essential information of- the RMP
Implementation.
On the other hand this new structure will facilitate the understanding and evaluation by the IWC SC
because objectives and sub-objectives are specified, as well the time frame for producing results within
them.

References
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2003. Report of the twenty-fifth session of
the Committee on Fisheries. FAO Fisheries Report No. 702: pp. 14-15, paras. 85-94.
UN World Summit on Sustainable Development. 2002. Plan of Implementation of the World Summit
on Sustainable Development. p.16, para.30(d) and p.18, para.32(c).

57Appendix 3
Objective I(i)Abundance estimates for Antarctic minke whale taking account of g(0) and additional variance estimate
1. Background and objectives
Absolute abundance estimates by direct methods such as sighting surveys and their precision are
required for catch limit calculations under the Revised Management Procedure (RMP) (IWC, 2012a).
In addition to the requirements, data and methods for analyzing them that are used in the application of
the RMP should meet the minimum standards described in Requirements and Guidelines for Conducting
Surveys and Analyzing Data within the Revised Management Scheme (IWC, 2012a).
There have been two sources of abundance estimates based on sighting data and the Line Transect
Method in the Antarctic, IDCR/SOWER (1978/79-2009/10) (Matsuoka et al., 2003) and JARPA/JARPA
II (1987/88-2013/14). Based on the former, Antarctic minke whale abundance estimates that tookaccount of g(0) estimates were obtained for CPII (1985/86-1990/91) and CPIII (1991/92-2003/04)(Okamura and Kitakado, 2012). These estimates were agreed by the IWC/SC (IWC, 2013). As for thelatter, abundance estimates for Areas IV and V were obtained and the results accepted by the JARPAII
review workshop. Dedicated sighting surveys during JARPAII have been subject to oversight since
2010/11 but the survey could not be conducted due to external violent interference by an anti-whaling
group. The most recent estimates for Antarctic minke whales in Areas IV and V by JARPA/JARPAII
cannot be used for RMP since the phase-out rule would be applied because ten years have passed since
the year of the most recent abundance estimate (IWC, 2012a).
In order to attain Objective I(i), four sub-objectives are set: i) estimate g(0) based on sighting datacollected during the surveys, ii) estimate abundance during JARPA/JARPAII considering the g(0)estimates, iii) estimate inter-annual variation (additional variance), and iv) interpret and understand timeseries of abundance estimate for Antarctic minke whales.
2. Methods
2.1 Survey methods
Sighting surveys are planned to be conducted by the Line Transect Method following the survey
protocols set out in the Requirements and Guidelines for Conducting Surveys and Analyzing Data within
the Revised Management Scheme (IWC, 2012b) so that sighting surveys are conducted under oversightof IWC/SC. Sighting protocols are the same as those used in the IDCR/SOWER surveys (Matsuoka etal., 2003). Survey areas are planned to cover one IWC Management Area (one of Areas III, IV, V andVI) in a year. It is planned to survey in Areas III and VI twice and Areas IV and V three times in twelve
years. In other two years, ecological survey and sighting survey in waters north of 60oS will be conducted.
In this way, it is planned to produce abundance estimates in these Management Areas every six years
which can be used in application of RMP for the Antarctic minke whale. In case that sighting surveys
cannot be conducted due to external violent interference, there would be possibility that the survey area
will be changed from original plan.
Survey mode
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.
Passing with IO mode are to be conducted as follows. Two topmen observe from the barrel at all times
and a third topman is stationed in the independent observer platform (IOP). The topmen report
information to upper bridge observers but no information exchange between the barrel and the IOP(Matsuoka et al., 2003). In closing mode, vessels approaches to detected school to confirm its species
and school size and therefore observed school size data are more reliable that those obtained during IO
58

mode. By adopting both closing and passing with IO mode, the merits of both surveys for abundance
estimation of Antarctic minke whales are utilized.
Tracking experiment
In order to obtain further information on dive time of the minke whales, tagging methods for data loggers(TDR) and satellite tagging transmitters will be developed. These tagging methods will be also used for
ecological surveys (Objective 2(iii)). Observation experiment could be a candidate method for thispurpose. Mean dive-time was a key parameter for estimation of g(0) using the OK model as the case ofabundance estimate of the minke whales based on IDCR/SOWER (IWC, 2013). Mean dive-time
estimate and its precision could be improved by the further information on dive time of Antarctic minke
whales.
2.2 Analytical methods
Abundance estimation
The OK model (Okamura and Kitakado, 2012) is applied to estimate abundance taking g(0) estimate
into account using sighting data obtained in closing and IO mode. The OK model can examine the effectof covariates such as school size estimate and weather condition on the g(0) estimate. Detection
probability function is modeled using Hazard probability model (Schweder et al., 1997) and inter-cue
interval. The OK model will be applied treating inter-cue interval as an input parameter. In case thatmean dive time should not be obtained successfully by the tracking experiment, it could be estimatedusing OK model.
Correction of previous abundance estimates
In OK model, detection probability function can be modeled with covariates such as perpendicular andforward distance, school size and weather conditions, which are available for JARPA and JARPA II data.
Applying the model above using data obtained by sighting vessels (SVs) in this survey, g(0) can be
estimated that considers the effect of the covariates for each sightings of the Antarctic minke whale.
This use of g(0) can improve the abundance estimates during JARPA and JARPA II period from thoseusing the ad hoc approach in Hakamada et al., (2013).
Inter-annual variance (Additional variance)
The approach in Kitakado and Okamura (2005; 2008; 2009) will be used to estimate yearly variation inabundance levels due to inter-annual change in distribution of the Antarctic minke whale population
same as the case that OK model was applied to estimate the Antarctic minke whales abundance basedon IWC-IDCR/SOWER. By considering the inter-annual variance, underestimating the variance of theabundance estimate can be avoided. In order to estimate inter-annual variance with more precision, notonly the abundance estimate based on this survey but also the JARPA and JARPAII abundance estimates
adjusted by g(0) estimate can be used. Abundance trend can be also estimated by the approach in
Kitakado and Okamura (2005; 2008; 2009).

3. Expected outcomes
By following the method proposed above, abundance estimates for the Antarctic minke whale taking
g(0) estimate and additional variance into account will be obtained for JARPA, JARPAII and the newresearch program proposed. These estimates can contribute to interpret and to understand the time seriesof abundance estimate of the minke whales from the start of JARPA. These abundance estimates willcontribute to construct/develop population dynamics model of Antarctic minke whales (e.g. SCAA (Puntet al., in press)) and ecosystem modeling (e.g. Kitakado et al., 2014). These estimates can also be used
for application of the RMP to Antarctic minke whales.

594. Others
The plan of the dedicated sighting survey for each austral summer season, including details of thesurvey design, will be presented to the corresponding annual IWC SC meetings. The survey design
will take into account the specific research activities planned for a particular Area and austral summer
season, and will follow the recommendations or suggestions provided by the NEWREP-A Review
Panel (IWC, 2015a pp.14-15), including incorporating detailed track lines. NEWREP-A researchers
will work closely with the IWC SC before finalizing the survey approaches and to ensure that future
survey plans fully follow the IWC SC guidelines for such survey plans.
The survey design for the first two-three years will include feasibility studies on biopsy sampling of andtelemetry for Antarctic minke whales, on which the NEWREP-A Review Panel made specificrecommendations. It will also include krill and oceanographic surveys. See Document SC/66a/SP08 forthe plan of the dedicated sighting survey in the 2015/16 season.

References
Hakamada, T., Matsuoka, K., Nishiwaki, S. and Kitakado, T. 2013. Abundance estimates and trends for
Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in Antarctic Areas IV and V for the period
1989/90-2004/05. J. Cetacean Res Manage. 13(2): 123-51.
International Whaling Commission 2012a. The Revisement Management Procedure (RMP) for baleen
whales. J. Cetacean Res. Manage.13 (Suppl.): 485-94.
International Whaling Commission 2012b. Requirements and Guidelines for conducting surveys andanalysing data within the Revised Management Scheme. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (Suppl.):509-17.
International Whaling Commission 2013. Report of the Scientific Committee, J. Cetacean Res. Manage.
14(Suppl.): 26-29.
Kitakado, T. and Okamura, H. 2005. Estimation methods of the additional variance for Antarctic minke
whales. Paper. SC/57/IA5 presented to IWC Scientific Committee (unpublished). 7pp.
Kitakado, T. and Okamura, H. 2008. Some issues on the additional variance. Paper. SC/F08/A11
presented to the SOWER Abundance Workshop (unpublished). 5pp.
Kitakado, T. and Okamura, H. 2009. Estimation of additional variance for Antarctic minke whales basedon the abundance estimates from the revised OK method. Paper SC/61/IA8 presented to IWC
Scientific Committee (unpublished). 11pp.
Kitakado, T., Murase, H., Tamura, T. and Yonezaki, S. 2014. An attempt to ecosystem modelling forspecies in Area IV in the Antarctic Ocean using JARPA and JARPAII data. Paper SC/F14/J26
submitted to the Expert Workshop to review JARPAII (unpublished). 15pp.
Matsuoka, K., P. Ensor, T. Hakamada, H. Shimada, S. Nishiwaki, F. Kasamatsu, 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.
Okamura, H and Kitakado, T. 2012. Abundance estimates of Antarctic minke whales using the OK
method. IWC Doc. SC/64/IA2 submitted to IWC Scientific Committee, June 2012 (unpublished).
24pp.
Punt, A., Hakamada, T., Bando, T. and Kitakado, T. In press. Assessment of Antarctic Minke Whales
using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. J. Cetacean Res. Manage.
Schweder, T., Skaug, H. J., Dimakos, X. K., Langaas, M. and N. Oien. 1997. Abundance of northern
Atlantic minke whales, estimates for 1989 and 1995. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 47: 453-83

60

Appendix 4
Objective I(ii)
Improvement of precision of biological and ecological parameters
Part 1: Improvement of age data precision
Physical age is one of the life history parameters required for management of large whale stocks(Zenitani and Kato, 2006). Various methods have been applied for age estimation of baleen whales suchas counting growth layer groups (GLGs) accumulated in the earplug, decoding oscillation patterns ofbaleen plate surface, recording the number of corpora, examining ossification of vertebra, and examining
accumulation patterns of several advanced glycation end products (Ohsumi, 1967; 1977; Singh et al.,2001). Long-term tracking of an identified individual at the breeding area is a direct method to identify
true age of the individual, but this method cannot be applied for Antarctic minke whales because thesewhales have few distinct morphological characteristics for individual identification (Gabriele, et al.,2010; Ohsumi et al., 2007). During the JARPA and JARPAII programs, the method of counting GLGs
was adopted for age estimation of Antarctic minke whales, and the obtained data have been used forstatistical catch-at-age (SCAA) analysis, which is a population dynamics model used by the IWC/SC(Punt et al., 2013).
In the JARPA and JARPAII programs, the age of each whale was estimated from counting GLGs at thebisected surface of the earplug under a stereoscopic microscope. The advantages of this method are thatit requires no specific apparatus, and the dataset obtained using this method have been accumulated
since the commercial whaling period. The latter allows us to conduct long term analysis of population
dynamics using the SCAA. However, disadvantages of the method are that it requires extensive training
for a reader, it often involves inter-reader variability, and some whales, especially younger individuals,
have unreadable earplugs.
Recently, the inter-reader variability has been evaluated under suggestions and guidance from the
IWC/SC, and after that evaluation, the estimated ages with this variability was incorporated into the
SCAA analysis (IWC, 2012; Kitakado et al., 2013, Punt et al., 2013). Although ages of whales withunreadable earplugs were estimated applying age-length-key to be tentatively incorporated into the
SCAA, the SCAA analysis will be definitely improved if the ages of those whales are obtained more
precisely using alternative methods.
Under this proposed research program, estimation of biological and ecological parameters will be
carried out using the SCAA model (see Appendix 5), which is based on age and abundance data. Agedata will be then obtained from counting of GLGs as this is the accepted procedure by the IWC/SC. In
addition, new methods for age estimation will be explored to improve precision of the data. Ratio of
aspartic acid enantiomers in the lens nucleus, and level of DNA methylation will be examined forevaluating its potential use in age estimation of Antarctic minke whales. These chemical methods havehigh reproducibility compared to age estimated from earplugs. Furthermore, DNA methylation analysis
will allow us to pursue age estimation from a small amount of skin sample collected by biopsy sampling.

1. Improving the age estimation system of Antarctic minke whales based on ratio of aspartic acidenantiomers in the lens nucleus
1.1 Backgrounds and objectives
It is well known that the amino acids, such as aspartic acid, in the protein of eye lens of mammals change
from L-form to D-form very slowly (Masters et al., 1977). Some authors have applied the racemizationof aspartic acid in lens protein for the estimation of age of baleen whales (Nerini, 1983, George et al.,1999). During the age estimation process, however, these authors did not derive two importantparameters from the species in question but extrapolated from other whale species and/or animals. In
61

our preliminary study on Antarctic minke whales, we were able to determine these parameters fromlaboratory experiments (Yasunaga et al., 2014) using samples of Antarctic minke whales taken from
JARPA II.
The objective of this proposed research is to verify the age estimation equation based on aspartic acidenantiomers in the lenses of Antarctic minke whales. Furthermore, this age estimation system will be
improved with other statistical methods and biological data.
1.2 Methods
Enantiomers of aspartic acid in lens of whales are measured using high performance liquid
chromatography (Yasunaga et al., 2014). The new statistical methods, such as the Delta method (George
et al., 1999), are applied to estimate the precision of age estimation with the enantiomers. In addition,
theriogenological data, such as number of corpora for both ovaries, is applied to verify the accuracy ofthe estimated ages (Rosa et al., 2013).

2. Feasibility study of the age determination method based on DNA methylation
2.1 Backgrounds and objectives
Recent evidence suggests that epigenetic changes are both directing the process of ageing and beingcaused by it. The best studied class of epigenetic change in vertebrates is the methyl group presence orabsence at the C5 position of Cytosine residues that are adjacent to Guanidine residues. For cetacean
species, Polanowski et al. (2014) applied this method to estimate ages of humpback whales. The authors
examined age-induced changes in DNA methylation on humpbacks genes that were identified ashomologous regions to human and mouse.
It should be noted that this technique does not provide the chronological age of the individuals but rather
a physiological age that can be used as a proxy for chronological age (IWC, 2015a pp16). The
physiological age change with constant biological processes. Furthermore this technique may requirecalibration not only by species but by population and period. There is as yet no experience on this regard,
because it has been applied to a single population of a single species of cetacean, i.e. humpback whales,
due to the novelty of the technique (IWC, 2015a pp16).
This proposed study will evaluate the feasibility of an age-determining method based on DNA
methylation analysis for Antarctic minke whales. This study will examine the correlation between DNA
methylation levels and whale ages determined by counting GLGs.
2.2 Methods
Following the recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel, at first, the stock effect on the DNA
methylation (DNA-M) technique will be examined using 50 highly readable earplugs each from I-stock
animals sampled in Area IVW and P-stock animals sampled in Area VE under JARPA II, ideally fromwhales sampled in a same year in each Area. In the next step the effect of the period will be examinedby using a similar number of samples from different austral summers. DNA methylation changes willbe identified at the Antarctic minke whale genes homologous to the humpback whales. The procedurefor identification of age-related DNA methylation site and measurement of methylation level will follow
previous studies (Maegawa et al., 2010; Bocklandt et al., 2011; Polanowski et al., 2014). The proponent
has already contacted a specialized laboratory and a university in Tokyo so that this study can be
conducted in collaboration with experts. Preliminary results will be reported at the 2017 IWC SC
meeting and final results at the 2018 IWC SC meeting. In this way the proponent will respond to the
NEWREP-A Review Panel recommendation that this feasibility study be conducted early in the
NEWREP-A program. The proponent will also address the issue of inter-laboratory calibration in
consultation with the IWC SC.
62

References
Bocklandt, S., Lin, W., Sehl, M.E., Sanchez F.J., Sinsheimer, J.S., Horvath, S. and Vilain, E. 2011.
Epigenetic predictor of age. PLoS ONE, 6, e14821.
Gabriele, C.M., Lockyer, C., Straley, J.M., Jurasz, C.M. and Kato, H. 2010. Sighting history of anaturally marked humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) suggests ear plug growth layer groups
are deposited annually. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 26(2): 443-450.
George, J.C., Bada, J., Zeh, H., Scott, L., Brown, S.E., O'Hara, T. and Suydam, R. 1999. Age and growthestimates of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) via aspartic acid racemization. Can. J. Zool. 77:
571-80.
International Whaling Commission 2012. Report of the Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res. Manage.
13 (Suppl.): 1-73.
International Whaling Commission. 2015a. Report of the Expert Panel to review the proposal by Japan
for NEWREP-A. Paper SC/66a/Rep6 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2015
(unpublished). 62pp.
Kitakado, T., Lockyer, C. and Punt, A.E. 2013 A statistical model for quantifying age-reading errors andits application to the Antarctic minke whales. J. Cetacean Res. and Manage. 13(3): 181–190.
Maegawa, S., Hinkal, G., Kim, H.S. et al. 2010. Widespread and tissue specific age-related DNA
methylation changes in mice. Genome Research 20: 332–340.
Masters, P.M., Bada, J.L. and Zigler, J.S. 1977. Aspartic acid racemization in the human lens during
aging and in cataract formation. Nature 268: 71-3.
Nerini, M.K. 1983. Age determination of fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus) based upon aspartic acidracemization in the lens nucleus. Rep. Int. Whaling Commn 34: 447-8.
Ohsumi, S. 1967. Age determination of Cetacea. Bull. Jpn. Soc. Sci. Fish. 33(8): 788-799 (in Japanese).
Ohsumi, S. 1977. Age determination and growth of Cetacea. Mamm. Sci. 34: 54-65 (in Japanese).
Ohsumi, S., Goto, M. and Otani, S. 2007. Necessity of combining lethal and non-lethal methods forwhale population research and their application in JARPA. Paper SC/59/O2 presented to the IWC
Scientific Committee, 2007 (unpublished). 7pp.
Polanowski, A.M., Robbins, J., Chandler, D. and Jarman, S.N. 2014. Epigenetic estimation of age inhumpback whales. Mol. Ecol. Resour. DOI: 10.1111/1755-0998.12247.
Punt, A.E., Bando, T., Hakamada, T. and Kishiro, T. 2013. Assessment of Antarctic Minke Whales using
Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper SC/65a/IA01 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee,
June 2013 (unpublished). 48pp.
Rosa, C., Zeh, J., George J.C., Botta, O., Zauscher, M., Bada, J., O’Hara, T. M. 2013. Age estimates
based on aspartic acid racemization for bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) harvested in 1998–
2000 and the relationship between racemization rate and body temperature. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 29(3):424-445.
Singh, R., Barden, A., Mori, T. and Beilin, L. 2001. Advanced glycation end-products: a review.
Diabetologia 44: 129-146.
Yasunaga, G., Bando, T. and Fujise, Y. 2014. Preliminary estimation of the age of Antarctic minke
whales based on aspartic acid racemization. Paper SC/F14/J12 presented to the IWC Sponsored
Meeting to Review Data and Results from the Japanese Whale Research Program under Special
Permit in the Antarctic Phase II (JARPA II) (JARPA II Review Meeting), February 2014
(unpublished). 10pp.

63

Zenitani, R. and Kato, H. 2006. Temporal trend of age at sexual maturity of Antarctic minke whales
based on transition phase in earplugs obtained under JARPA surveys from 1987/88-2004/05. Paper
SC/D06/J15 presented to the intersessional workshop to review data and results from special permit
research on Minke Whales in the Antarctic. Tokyo. 4-8 December 2006. 9pp.

64

Appendix 5
Objective I(ii)
Improvement of precision of biological and ecological parameters
Part 2: Refinement of the SCAA model and estimation of biological parameters

Background and Objectives
Under Main Objective I, drawing information on certain biological and ecological parameters is one of
key issues for the specification of trials. Although some parameters like the ASM are directly obtainable
in the observation, there are several parameters which can only be derived from the results of stock
assessment. The IWC has spent a decade for its discussion (see. Punt, 2014a, b, Punt and Polacheck,
2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, Punt et al. 2013), and now the SCAA model is 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 to the results.
Among these parameters, M is reasonably well estimated including its age-dependence, while theestimate of MSYR is still unrealistically high in view of knowledge for other baleen whales. The
estimated changes in the recruitment rate (the number of recruited whales divided by that of mature
females) and carrying capacity over years were clear so far, but estimating and monitoring such likely
changes in the future are of scientific importance given consideration of various changes in theecosystem and environment in the Antarctic Ocean. Therefore, the biological parameters including thesewhich will be estimated from data collected by this program will contribute to the trials structure in the
RMP ISTs. That is why “refinement of the SCAA model and estimation of biological parameters” is oneof the research sub-objectives.

Methods
Models used in this sub-objective are mostly similar with the current SCAA models developed in Punt(2014a). The basic assumption is same as that in Punt (2014a).
For each breeding stock, the following basic population dynamics is considered.

Pt ,ga,b : the number of animals of age a and sex g for breeding stock b at the beginning of year t
Rtb : the number of birth for breeding stock b in year t

0.5 R b
for a = 0
t

g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
for 1 ≤ a ≤ A+ − 1=
Pt ,a ( Pt −1,a −1 − Ct −1,a −1 ) S a −1
 g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
g ,b
for a =A+
( Pt −1, A+ −1 − Ct −1, A+ −1 ) S A+ −1 + ( Pt −1, A+ − Ct −1, A+ ) S A+  P b  z 2
F ,b b 
R= f Pt 1 + A 1 −  t ,1b+   eut −σ /2 ,K  

 


b
t

b

γ g ,b Pt ,ga,b

Ctg,a,b = A a

∑γ
a =0

=
S ab

ut ~ N (0, σ 2 )Ctg ,bg ,b g ,b
a
t ,a

P

exp( − M ab ) : annual survival probability of animals of breeding stock b and age a65

γ ab : selectivity (depends on period)f b : pregnancy rate
Ab : resilience

K tb : carrying capacity for 1+ population in year t for breeding stock b
APt F ,b = ∑ β a Pt ,Fa,b : the number of mature female animals for breeding stock b at the beginning of year t
a =1

=
P
b
t ,1+

A

∑ (P
a =1

M ,b
t ,a

+ Pt ,Fa,b ) : 1+ population size for breeding stock b

β a : maturity rate for animals of age a
The following points will be taken into account in the proposed programs:

Apply longer time-series of newly available abundance estimates with g(0) correctionConsider a possible change in the age-at-sexual maturity in the modelConsider any new age-reader’s bias and variance in age-reading error matrices



Extend the existing SCAA models to incorporate updated assumption of population structures for
the Antarctic minke whales (time-varying stock boundary and mixing pattern)

It is expected that the results of SCAA analyses will provide improvement in the precision of key
biological and ecological parameters as was the case in the previous programs although the extent of
improvement cannot be evaluated given recent time-varying parameters such as carrying capacity andproductivity etc.
Of course, outcomes based on the new SCAA analyses will contribute to the specification of the
Implementation Simulation Trials.
Table 1. Key points in specification
Parameter/Structure in the model

Assumption

Stock structure (# stocks)

2 (I/P) or additional stocks?

Mixing pattern

Base: Hard boundary as in Punt et al.
(2014a)Extension: soft, time-varying, sex, maturity

MSYR1+

Estimated

MSYL1+

0.6 (given)

Mortality rate (M) (Immat, Mat)

Age-specific and time-varying

Initial year and initial depletion

D (=1) at 1930

Carrying capacity K1+

Time-varying

Reproduction

Deviation in the recruitment
66

Parameter/Structure in the model

Assumption

Growth curve

Time-varying

Selectivity

Time-varying

Additional variance (inter-annual distributional
Some numbers assumed
change)Age-reading errors

AssumedReferences
International Whaling Commission 2014. Report of the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPA II Special Permit Research Programme. Paper SC/65b/Rep2 submitted to IWC ScientificCommittee (unpublished). 62pp.
Punt, A. 2014a. A summary history of the application of statistical Catch-At-Age Analysis to Antarctic
minke whales. Paper SC/F14/O01 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPAII Special Permit Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 17pp.
Punt, A. 2014b. Assessment of Antarctic minke whales using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper
SC/F14/O02 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit
Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 99pp.
Punt, A.E. and Polacheck, T. 2005. Application of statistical catch-at-age analysis for Southern
Hemisphere minke whales in Antarctic Areas IV and V. Paper SC/57/IA9 presented to the IWC
Scientific Committee, June 2005 (unpublished) 71pp.
Punt, A.E. and Polacheck, T. 2006. Further statistical catch-at-age analyses for Southern Hemisphereminke whales. Paper SC/58/IA2 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June 2006
(unpublished) 40pp.
Punt, A.E. and Polacheck, T. 2007. Further development of statistical catch-at-age models for southernhemisphere minke whales. Paper SC/59/IA4 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June2007 (unpublished) 42pp.
Punt, A.E. and Polacheck, T. 2008. Further analyses related to application of statistical catch-at-age
analysis to Southern Hemisphere minke whales. Paper SC/60/IA2 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, June 2008 (unpublished) 46pp.
Punt, A.E., Bando, T., Hakamada, T. and Kishiro, T. 2013. Assessment of Antarctic Minke Whales using
Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper SC/65a/IA1 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee,
May 2013 (unpublished) 48pp.

67

Appendix 6
Objective I(iii)
Refinement of stock structure hypotheses of Antarctic minke whale in Areas III-VI for the
implementation of the RMP

Background
The most recent results of the research on stock structure of Antarctic minke whales were based on
JARPA and JARPAII samples, genetics based on mtDNA control region sequencing and microsatellite
DNA, and morphometrics based on ten body measurements. Results were presented and discussed at
the JARPAII review workshop, and subsequently at the 2014 IWC Scientific Committee (IWC SC)
Meeting (Pastene et al., 2014; Kitakado et al., 2014; IWC, in press a;b).
The hypothesis accepted by the IWC SC is the occurrence of at least two stocks in the JARPAII researcharea (35°E-145°W), with the cores of these stocks distributed in the western (Indian or ‘I’ stock) andeastern (Pacific or ‘P’ stock) sectors of the research area (Figure 1). There is a soft boundary between
these stocks in Areas IVE and VW with the mixing proportion between stocks in these sectors changing
by year and sex (Kitakado et al., 2014).
Furthermore the JARPAII review workshop noted that ‘management procedure considerations on stock
structure focus on developing plausible interpretations of available data, not simply the single ‘best’interpretation when examining uncertainty’ (IWC, in press a). In this spirit, at the JARPAII review
workshop, an alternative hypothesis was proposed: a single stock that exhibits one-dimensional isolation
by distance along a longitudinal gradient (IWC, in press a).
The following sub-objectives were identified, all of them aimed to refine the current stock structure
hypotheses. Plausible hypotheses can then be used to develop Implementation Simulation Trials (ISTs)
during the RMP Implementation process, which are aimed to span the uncertainty in different aspects,
in this case the uncertainty in stock structure.
Sub-objectivesa)Investigation of the stock structure in Areas IIIW (0-35E) and VIE (120-145W)

The JARPAII review workshop commented that ‘Antarctic minke whales are more-or-less continuously
distributed around the Antarctic continent and that in contrast the JARPAII research area represents justunder half of the circumpolar area’. They further noted that ‘the lack of information provided for areas
outside the programme’s research area presents some inherent difficulties in fully meeting the objective
to elucidate spatial and temporal variation in stock structure, even though the information developed
under JARPAII is probably sufficient for the purposes of developing trials to evaluate RMP variants
within the area of sampling’ (IWC, in press a).
The examination of the stock structure of Antarctic minke whales in the areas immediately contiguous
to the JARPAII area, e.g. Areas IIIW and VIE is considered useful to refine the current hypothesis on
stock structure. This will allow the investigation of the longitudinal expansion of the I and P stocks, tothe west and east, respectively. If abundance information also becomes available from those sectors thenthe combined new information of stock structure and abundance will contribute to sound ISTs, and tothe optimization in the use of this whale resource as larger catch levels can be estimated without
depleting the resource (in the case that the I stock extends till Area IIIW and the P stock until Area VIE).
In addition, longitudinally-extended data sets would probably facilitate the analyses of the second
hypothesis on isolation by distance proposed by the JARPAII review workshop.
Samples and data
Genetic samples and morphometric data for studies on stock structure are available from JARPA and
JARPAII for Areas IIIE (35°-70°E) and VIW (170°-145°W). As explained above, under this sub68

objective there is a need for acquiring additional samples and data from Areas IIIW and Areas VIE torefine the stock structure hypotheses. There are some genetic samples available for those sectors fromthe time of commercial whaling, which could be used for this purpose.
The quality of the historical samples for DNA analysis should be investigated first. Genetic samples
from the period of commercial whaling in Areas IIIW and VIE involve different kinds of tissues such as
blood and liver. These were collected in the 70’s. There is a total of 58 samples from Area IIIW (57blood and 1 liver) and 175 (liver) from Area VIE. A feasibility study is required to investigate whether
these samples are useful for extracting and analyzing DNA.
The geographic distribution of the historical samples are restricted to the southern part of Areas IIIW
and VIE, probably concentrated around the ice-edge (Figure 2). Considering the study of Goto et al.
(1998), which showed that samples collected exclusively near the ice-edge are not informative of the
mtDNA heterogeneity, samples from commercial whaling in Areas IIIW and VIE alone could not be
sufficient for studies on stock structure, and additional samples are required from the offshore areas inthose sectors.
As noted above, the analyses on stock structure have involved genetics and non-genetics (morphometric)
methods. Both markers have been informative of the stock structure (Kitakado, et al., 2014). Therefore,
it is proposed that the research take planned alternatively in Areas IV-IIIE and V-VIW, be expanded atleast in two years to cover sectors IIIW and VIE, respectively. This will allow the collection of otherinformation useful for stock structure in addition to DNA, e.g. detailed body measurements.
The feasibility study on biopsy sampling in Antarctic minke whale will be undertaken along with the
dedicated sighting surveys, at an early stage of the first six-year period of NEWREP-A (Section 6 andSC/66a/SP08). As the program develops, the design of the feasibility study on biopsy sampling will takeaccount of the four specific recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel [1) involve people withexpertise in successfully biopsy sampling common minke whales in the North Atlantic; 2) mimic thesampling strategy developed for lethal sampling; 3) record information on time taken, sea state, swell,etc. to enable a plausible measure of effort required to be developed; and 4) consider the amount oftissue and nature of tissue required (for each analysis and in total)], as far as practicable. In planningand implementing the feasibility study, the program will make use of experiences obtained by foreign(e.g. colleagues working with North Atlantic minke whale) and Japanese (e.g. colleagues working with
North Pacific minke whale) experts. The “ideal” framework of the study suggested by the NEWREP-A
Review Panel (e.g. representativeness of the entire area and time period as well as, random samplingtechniques) will be considered as a second step after examining the practicability of the samplingtechnique itself in the initial stage. It should be noted that the value of biopsy samples for the NEWREPA research objectives should be evaluated in parallel with the results of feasibility studies of analytical
approaches that potentially use biopsy samples (e.g. DNA-M, stable isotopes, hormones).
Design of the feasibility biopsy experiments in offshore waters will take into consideration the previous
experience of the IDCR/SOWER (Ensor et al., 2001; 2004) and JARPN/JARPA (Nishiwaki, 2000)
surveys.
Laboratory work and analytical procedure
The routine procedure for mtDNA control region sequencing and genotype with a number ofmicrosatellite loci, will be used. In the case of mtDNA the first 500bp at the 5’ end of the control region
will be sequenced. In the case of microsatellite DNA a set of 12 loci are used: AC045, AC082, AC087,
AC137, CA234, DlrFCB14, EV1, EV104, GT23, GT129, GT195 and GT211. Details of the laboratory
procedure for those two markers can be found in Kanda et al. (2014a).
Regarding morphometrics, up to 10 body measurements will be used, as in the past studies (e.g. Figure
2 in Kitakado et al., 2014).
Analysis will be based on hypothesis testing (e.g. Pastene et al., 2014).

69b) Investigation of the spatial and temporal pattern of mixing between the I and P stocks in Areas IVE
and VW
As reported above modeling work based on genetic and morphometric data showed an area of mixing
between the I and P stocks in Areas IVE and VW, with the area of mixing and mixing proportion
changing by year and by sex (‘soft boundary’).
The concept of a ‘soft boundary’ is a new one within the RMP Implementation process. A long-term
data series of spatial and temporal pattern of mixing in Areas IVE and VW would be required to capture
the uncertainty in stock structure and mixing during the ISTs.
Samples and data
Research take will be conducted alternatively in Areas IV and V. At least in two years of the total
research period sampling will be designed to cover both Area IVE and VW.
Morphometric and genetic data obtained from the whales sampled can be examined in conjunction withthe relevant data from JARPA (16-year period) and JARPAII (6-year period) to create a long-term data
series to examine temporal and spatial pattern of stock mixing in the relevant longitudinal sectors.
Analytical procedure
The method developed by Schweder et al. (2011), improved following suggestions from the IWC SC(Kitakado et al., 2014), will be used.
c) Investigation of the pattern of movement of Antarctic minke whales within the feeding grounds andbetween feeding grounds and putative breeding grounds
Movement within the feeding ground
Kato et al. (1993) examined all available marks (2,864 mark release and 110 recoveries of Discoverytag) in the Antarctic. Through their analyses it was revealed that: the average distance of longitudinal
movement is about 30 degree, recaptured animals showed no preferential east or west movement in the
Antarctic and no significant difference was found between sexes in terms of distance moved. Marked
movement of whales was observed through 130E, the boundary between Areas IV and V. Regarding
boundaries they noted that the absence of mark crossing at 80E and 160E suggest the possibility ofseparate feeding stocks. Following an examination of mark distribution and catching effort they
concluded that discontinuity at 80E could be more suggestive of a boundary between stocks than at
160E.
These results are broadly consistent with the current hypothesis on stock structure, notably theinterchange of animals through 130E, the transition area of the current hypothesis, and the possibility ofadditional structure west of Area IV. This provides support to the idea of additional sampling in Area
IIIW under the first short-term objective above.
Movement between feeding grounds and breeding grounds
There is an assumption that the I and P stocks are related to breeding areas in the eastern Indian Ocean
and western South Pacific, respectively, where high sighting density areas of minke whales have been
identified in October (Kasamatsu et al., 1995) (Figure 1). However there is no direct evidence of thislink, and no genetic samples are currently available for Antarctic minke whales in low latitude areas.
The IWC SC has recommended on several occasions that research should be conducted to investigate
the location of breeding grounds of this species in the Southern Hemisphere, and the collection of genetic
samples (IWC, 2008; in press a).
Therefore the migratory destination of Antarctic minke whales of the I and P stock in autumn and winteris another important research topic to address. Are minke whales from the I stock migrating in winter tothe high density areas in the eastern Indian Ocean? Are minke whales from the P stock migrating in
winter to the high density areas in the western South Pacific Ocean?
Method70

Further studies on movement of whales within the feeding grounds and movement of whales between
high and low latitudes areas can be investigated through satellite tracking. The latter topic should havepriority as there is already some information on movement of whales within the feeding grounds.
Some experiments on satellite tagging were conducted on Antarctic minke whales around the pack-ice(Gales et al., 2013). The following kinds of tags were used by those authors: blubber penetrating satellitetags, Wildlife Computers, SPOT 177N; dorsal fin mounted satellite tags, Wildlife Computers, SPOT
240C; dorsal fin mounted satellite, Wildlife Computers, SPLASH 292A.
As noted above the priority at this stage should be the searching for breeding areas, and for this particularaim, long-term monitoring tags should be considered. In the next step the priority should be changed toobtain genetic samples from the putative breeding areas.
Satellite tagging should be carried out at the end of the feeding season for the I and P stocks in their‘core areas’, IVW and VE, respectively. If biopsy sampling is conducted at the same time of the satellite
tagging in the feeding grounds, some genetic information for whales migrating into potential breeding
grounds will be obtained.
d) Application of new genetic techniques to assist the analyses and interpretation of results in the threesub-objectives above
The IWC SC has welcomed the development of alternative analytical procedure in addition to thestandard hypothesis testing approach. For example the paternity analysis presented to the JARPAII
review workshop (Kanda et al., 2014b) was welcomed by the Review Panel as such method could
contribute not only for the development of genetic-based abundance estimate but in the assistance of theinterpretation of stocks structure (IWC, in press a).
At the 2014 IWC SC meeting, the development of close-kin mark recapture methods for a number of
species, including North Atlantic minke whales and Antarctic blue whales, was welcomed. For example
Tiedemann et al. (2014) reported a method for finding relatives among North Atlantic common minke
whales based on microsatellite data. They investigated the relationship between false discovery rate anddetection power. This method could be used for investigating relatives among Antarctic minke whales,
and this information will be very valuable for the interpretation of the hypothesis on stock structure.
These techniques will be applied to assist the analyses and interpretations under the three sub-objectives
above, and both JARPA/JARPAII and new samples will be used.

References
Ensor, P., Matsuoka, K., Marques, F., Miura, T., Murase, H., Pitman, R., Sakai, K. and Van Waerebeek,
K. 2001. 2000-2001 International Whaling Commission-Southern Ocean Whale and Ecosystem
Research (IWC-SOWER) Circumpolar Cruise, Areas V, VI and I. Paper SC/53/IA5 presented to
the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2002 (unpublished).
Ensor, P., Matsuoka, K., Komiya, H., Ljungblad, D., Miura, T., Morse, L., Olson, P., Olavarria, C., Mori,
M. and Sekiguchi, K. 2004. 2003-2004 International Whaling Commission-Southern Ocean
Whale and Ecosystem Research (IWC-SOWER) Circumpolar Cruise, Areas V. Paper
SC/56/IA13 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2004 (unpublished).
Gales, N., Bowers, M., Durban, J.W., Friedlaender, A.S., Nowacek, D.P., Pitman, R.L., Read, A.J. andTyson, R.B. 2013. Advances in non-lethal research on Antarctic minke whales: biotelemetry,photo-identification and biopsy sampling. Paper SC/65a/IA12 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, June 2013 (unpublished). 15pp.
Goto, M., Zenitani, R., Fujise, Y. and Pastene, L.A. 1998. Examination of mitochondrial DNA
heterogeneity in minke whale from Area IV considering temporal, longitudinal and latitudinal
factors. Paper SC/50/CAWS7 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 1998
(unpublished). 10pp.
71

International Whaling Commission 2008. Report of the Intersessional Workshop to review data andresults from special permit research on minke whales in the Antarctic, Tokyo, 7-8 December
2006. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 10 (Suppl.): 411-445.
International Whaling Commission In press a. Report of the expert workshop to review the Japanese
JARPAII special permit research programme (JCRM).
International Whaling Commission In press b. Report of the Scientific Committee (JCRM).
Kanda, N., Goto, M., Oikawa, H. and Pastene, L.A. 2014a. A note on sampling and laboratory procedure
protocols of the genetic work at the Institute of Cetacean Research. Paper SC/F14/J27 presented
to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan(unpublished). 4pp.
Kanda, N., Goto, M. and Pastene, L.A. 2014b. Paternity analysis on Antarctic minke whales using
JARPA and JARPAII samples. Paper SC/F14/J7 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special
Permit Review Workshop, February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished), 4pp.
Kasamatsu, F., Nishiwaki, S. and Ishikawa, H. 1995. Breeding areas and southbound migrations ofsouthern minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata. Mar. Eco. Prog. Ser. 119: 1-10.
Kato, H., Tanaka, E. and Sakuramoto, K. 1993. Movement of southern minke whales in the Antarctic
feeding grounds from mark-recapture analyses. Rep. Int. Whal. Commn 43: 335-348.
Kitakado, T., Schweder, T., Kanda, N., Pastene, L.A. and Walløe, L. 2014. Dynamic population
segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales (SC/F14/J29rev). Paper
SC/65b/IA13 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 25pp.
Nishiwaki, S. 2000. Performance of biopsy skin sampling for minke whales during the JARPN and
JARPA surveys using the ICR air gun. Paper SC/52/O5 presented to the IWC ScientificCommittee, May 2000 (unpublished). 8pp.
Pastene, L.A., Goto, M. and Kanda, N. 2014. An update of the genetic study on stock structure of the
Antarctic minke whale based on JARPAII samples (SC/F14/J28rev). Paper SC/65b/SD1
presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 14pp.
Schweder, T., Kitakado, T., Kanda. N., Pastene, L. A. and Walløe, L. 2011. Dynamic population
segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales. Paper SC/63/IA7
presented to IWC Scientific Committee, June 2011 (unpublished). 20pp.
Tiedemann, R., Tiedemann, M.R., Gunnlaugsson, B., Pampoulie, C. and Vikingsson, G.A. 2014.
Finding relatives among North Atlantic common minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata)
based on microsatellite data: the relationship between false discovery rate (FDR) and detection
power. Paper SC/65b/RMP05 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014
(unpublished). 8pp.

72

Australia

Figure 1. Hypothesis on stock structure of the Antarctic minke whale (lower figure) and sighting density
in low latitudes in October (upper figure) (Kasamatsu et al., 1995).

Figure 2. Geographical distribution of genetic samples in Areas III and VI obtained during the period ofcommercial whaling. There is a total of 58 genetic samples in Area IIIW (0-35E) (57 blood samples
obtained in 1973/74; 1 liver sample obtained in 1979/80), and 175 in Area VIE (145-120W) (175 liver
samples taken in 1981/82).

73

Appendix 7
Objective I(iv)
Specification of RMP ISTs for the Antarctic minke whales
This appendix briefly outlines the specification of the RMP Implementation Simulation Trials (ISTs)
planned under the proposed research plan. This corresponds to one of the sub-objectives under Main
Objective I. More details of relevant information are provided in the main text of the research plan. .
The models assumed in the trials are basically same as those used in the existing Statistical Catch-at Age
Analysis (SCAA) (Punt, 2014), and the parameter values estimated and used in the SCAA will be
provided as sets of plausible ranges of parameters. Results of new SCAA runs (see Appendix 5) as wellfrom other sub-objectives under Main Objective I (see Appendices 3, 4 and 6), will contribute to thespecification. The kind of parameter/structure in the model and potential contribution from the newresearch is shown in Table 1. Also, some implication or results from Main Objective II (investigation of
ecosystem in the Antarctic Ocean), will also be taken into account for specifying the trial structures.
Note that Small Areas will be defined based on the updated information on stock structure (see Appendix
6) and possible whaling operations.
Table 1. Template of trial specification
Parameter/Structure in the model

Source of information

MSYR1+

Existing range/outcomes from this new researchplan

MSYL1+

0.6 (given)

Stock structure

Existing hypotheses/outcomes from this new
research plan

Mixing pattern

Outcomes from this new research plan

Mortality rate

Outcomes from this new research plan

Max pregnancy rate

Outcomes from this new research plan

K1+

Outcomes from this new research plan

Time varying K

Outcomes from this new research plan

Additional variance (inter-annual distributional Existing range/outcomes from this new researchchange)plan
Several variants will proposed withconsideration of stock stucture hypotheses andpossible whaling operations

Small Areas and Management Variants

Reference
Punt, A.E. 2014. Assessment of Antarctic Minke Whales using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper
SC/F14/O02 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit
Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). (99pp).

74

Appendix 8
Objective II(i)Plan for ecological research(krill abundance estimation and oceanographic observation)

1. Background and objectives
The Southern Ocean can be considered as a wasp-waist ecosystem featuring many species at the bottom
and top trophic levels, and few dominant species at the mid-level. Unlike other wasp-waist ecosystems
where small pelagic, planktivorous fish such as sardine and anchovy are dominant at the mid-level, aplankton species, the Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba), is dominant at that level in the Southern
Ocean (Bakun, 2006; Atkinson et al., 2014). The mid-trophic level species are also called forage species
which play a pivotal role in marine ecosystem and economics by sustaining many predators and fisheries
directly and indirectly (Pikitch et al., 2014). Abundance and demography of Antarctic krill isfundamental information to understand the Southern Ocean ecosystem. In addition, monitoring ofoceanographic conditions in the Southern Ocean is important as decadal scale changes in oceanographic
properties have been reported around the Antarctic (Jacobs and Giulivi, 2010; Meredith et al., 2014; van
Wijk and Rintoul, 2014).
The main objective of this survey is to estimate the abundance of Antarctic krill acoustically in thesurvey area by applying a standard survey design similar to those developed and implemented for
CCAMLR 2000 (Trathan et al., 2001), BROKE (Nicol et al., 2000a) and BROKE-West (Nicol et al.,2010). The estimates will be used as an important input parameter of ecosystem models. Demographyof Antarctic krill in the survey area will also be studied to understand its ecology. Spatial interactions
among baleen whales and krill will also be investigated using the obtained data. The second objective
is to collect oceanographic data to test whether oceanographic conditions in the Southern Ocean arechanging.

2 Methods
2.1 Research under this program (Sighting survey-based krill survey)
2.1.1 Abundance estimation of Antarctic krill by an echosounder
Simple surveys for krill abundance by using echosounder and net-tow are planned with R/V. The typeof R/V may be modified based on logistical reasons.
2.1.2 Demography of Antarctic krill
Simple surveys for estimating of demography of Antarctic krill by using sampling net would be planned.
The type of sampling net may be modified based on logistical reasons.
2.1.3 Oceanographic observation
The expendable conductivity-temperature-depth profilers (XCTD) will also be used as a supplementary
instrument. The XCTD would be deployed on an opportunistic basis. Information on water temperatureand salinity is required to estimate sound velocity and absorption coefficient for correction ofechosounder data.
2.2. Research outside of this program (CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey)
2.2.1 Abundance estimation of Antarctic krill by an echosounder
Area IV overlaps with the CCAMLR management areas 58.4.1 and 58.4.2. Area V overlaps with the
CCAMLR management areas 58.4.1, 88.1 and 88.2. The survey area and design which was used in75

BROKE and BROKE-West would be proposed when the survey is conducted in Area IV. Oceanographic
observations will also be conducted along with the krill survey. Detailed survey plans would bepresented to the IWC/SC, CCAMLR-EMM and SC-CAMLR in advance of the surveys to receive theircomments. The R/V Kaiyo Maru is a desirable candidate research vessel for this survey since it would
be capable of conducting a krill survey that fulfills the requirements of the CCAMLR. The vessel would
be available for at least one austral summer season in the first six-year period
2.2.2 Net sampling
A frame-type trawl net would be towed at either predetermined or targeted station. Targeted tows would
be conducted to identify the species and size compositions of biological backscattering detected by thequantitative echosounder. The purpose of the predetermined tows would be to estimate the abundanceand distribution of planktons independently from the echosounder. The nets would be run down to 1,000m or near the sea bottom at the predetermined stations. Either a rectangular midwater trawl (RMT) withnominal mouth areas of 8 and 1 m2 (1 + 8) and mesh sizes of 4.5 and 0.33 mm (Baker et al., 1973), an
Isaacs-Kidd Midwater Trawl (IKMT) or a Matsuda-Oozeki-Hu-Trawl (MOHT) (Oozeki et al., 2004)
would be proposed. As the main objective of this exercise is the estimation of Antarctic krill using theechosounder, priority would be given to targeted tows. Length frequency data of Antarctic krill obtainedby the net sampling is required to estimate abundance of Antarctic krill by using the echosounder.
Species compositions and size structure of net samples would be analyzed.
2.2.3 Demography of Antarctic krill
Length frequency distribution and maturity stage of Antarctic krill will be constructed using samples
from stomachs of Antarctic minke whales in JARPA and JARPAII periods in addition to samples (bothfrom stomachs and net haul) obtained in upcoming surveys. Regional and temporal difference of
demography will be investigated. Comparison between samples from stomach and net will also be
attempted.
Construction of population dynamics models will be considered using the above mentioned demography
data. Modeling approaches similar to the past studies (Reid et al., 1999, 2002, 2006, 2010; Murphy andReid, 2001) will be applied with modifications whenever these are appropriate.
Information on population genetic structure of Antarctic krill is important for an appropriate
interpretation of the results of the demographic analyses. Therefore stock structure of Antarctic krill
within Areas IV and V will be examined using samples obtained by this research.
2.2.4 Oceanographic observation
The conductivity-temperature-depth profilers/Rosette Multi-bottle Samplers (CTD/RMS) would be
used as the primary oceanographic observation instrument. The XCTD would also be used as asupplementary instrument. The CTD would be deployed at predetermined and targeted stations down to3,500 m or near the sea bottom while water samples would be collected by the RMS for the purpose of
studying physical, chemical and biological oceanography. The XCTD would be deployed on an
opportunistic basis. Information on water temperature and salinity is required to estimate sound velocity
and absorption coefficient for correction of echosounder data.
2.3 Response to recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel
The latter CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey will apply a standard survey design similar to thosedeveloped and implemented for CCAMLR 2000 (Trathan et al., 2001), BROKE (Nicol et al., 2000) and
BROKE-West (Nicol et al., 2010).
The proponent will respond to recommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel (IWC, 2015a pp2023) in the following way.

76

i)

Ship(s) and echosounder system(s) will be tested before steaming to the Antarctic todetermine the likely effective acoustic sampling range (signal-to-noise by depthcharacterization) and potential for detecting krill.
ii) Cross-calibration between both types of krill surveys vessels will be carried out the inwaters around Japan, in a near synchronous way, as the first priority. However, theproponent might conduct the calibration in the survey area as well if conditions are met.
iii) Simultaneous survey by the dedicated krill survey vessel equipped with a frame-type trawl
and echosounder, and that by the dedicated whale sighting vessel equipped with anechosounder and the whale sampling vessels will be conducted within a small-scale
experimental survey area over a short time period (e.g. one week) so that comparisonsamong vessels/samples can be made.
iv) Sufficient time will be allocated for net sampling of krill, by following a survey design
similar to those developed and implemented for CCAMLR 2000, BROKE and BROKEWest. Approximately 2.5-3 hauls per day will be a standard for net sampling frequency
under the proposed CCAMLR-type dedicated krill survey.

Recommendation i) above will be conducted in the 2015/16 season. The other recommendations will beconsidered in future surveys.

3. Distinctive features and expected outcome
The abundance estimates and the size structure of krill would be used as an important input parameterof ecosystem models. Spatial interactions among baleen whales and krill would also be investigatedusing the obtained data. The estimated abundance would be reported to the IWC/SC and CCAMLREMM. The obtained data would contribute to not only management of cetaceans but also managementof krill. Only two krill abundance estimates accepted by the CCAMLR were available in Areas IV and
V. BROKE was conducted in the area between 80°E and 150°E south of 62°S in 1996 (Nicol et al.,2000a). BROKE-West was conducted in the area between 30°E and 80°E south of 62°S in 2006 (Nicolet al., 2010). The R/V Kaiyo-maru conducted a krill survey in the Ross Sea in 2004/2005 although theabundance estimate was not accepted by the CCAMLR (Naganobu et al., 2010). The new krill
abundance estimates obtained by this research and other researches outside of the program would
enhance our knowledge on krill in the survey area where data are scarce.
Though several demographic studies on Antarctic krill in the survey area have been reported (Nicol etal., 2000b; Pakhomov, 2000; Sala et al., 2002; Taki et al., 2008; Kawaguchi et al., 2010;) the informationis scarce in comparison with that of the Antarctic Peninsula region. The obtained data would contributeto understanding the ecology of Antarctic krill in the survey area. This study would potentially provide
information on population dynamics of Antarctic krill in the survey area where no population dynamics
study on Antarctic krill has been carried out. Stock structure studies at a circumpolar scale (Zane et al.,1998) and sub-regional scales in the Western Antarctic Peninsula region (Batta-Lona et al., 2011) havebeen carried out. However, no such studies have been carried out in the survey area. The results ofcombination of this study and other studies outside of the program would potentially provide new
information on stock structure of Antarctic krill in the survey area, which is important for interpreting
demographic results.
Oceanographic data would provide us information on the current status of oceanography in the survey
area. The data would be sent to the appropriate data depository for further analysis integrating dataobtained by JARPA, JARPAII and other surveys.
Preliminary results of the analysis would be reported to the IWC/SC and CCAMLR-EMM within 2
years after the completion of each survey. The analysis would be completed within 4 years after thecompletion of each survey and submitted to peer review journals.
The overall research plan may be modified based on the type of R/V available.
77References
Atkinson, A., Hill, S.L., Barange, M., Pakhomov, E.A., Raubenheimer, D., Schmidt, K., Simpson, S.J.,
Reiss, C. 2014. Sardine cycles, krill declines, and locust plagues: revisiting ‘wasp-waist’ foodwebs. Trends Ecol. Evol. 29: 309-16.
Baker, A.d.C., Clarke, M.R., Harris, M.J. 1973. The N.I.O. combination net (RMT 1 + 8) and further
developments of rectangular midwater trawls. J. Mar. Biol. Ass. U.K. 53: 167-84.
Bakun, A. 2006. Wasp-waist populations and marine ecosystem dynamics: navigating the “predator pit”
topographies. Prog. Oceanogr. 68: 271-88.
Batta-Lona, P.G., Bucklin, A., Wiebe, P.H., Patarnello, T., Copley, N.J. 2011. Population genetic
variation of the Southern Ocean krill, Euphausia superba, in the Western Antarctic Peninsula
region based on mitochondrial single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Deep Sea Res. II 58:
1652-61.
International Whaling Commission. 2015a. Report of the Expert Panel to review the proposal by Japan
for NEWREP-A. Paper SC/66a/Rep6 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2015
(unpublished). 62pp.
Jacobs, S.S., Giulivi, C.F. 2010. Large Multidecadal Salinity Trends near the Pacific–Antarctic
Continental Margin. J. Clim. 23: 4508-24.
Kawaguchi, S., Nicol, S., Virtue, P., Davenport, S.R., Casper, R., Swadling, K.M., Hosie, G.W. 2010.
Krill demography and large-scale distribution in the Western Indian Ocean sector of theSouthern Ocean (CCAMLR Division 58.4.2) in Austral summer of 2006. Deep Sea Res. II 57:
934-47.
Meredith, M.P., Jullion, L., Brown, P.J., Garabato, A.C.N., Couldrey, M.P. 2014. Dense waters of theWeddell and Scotia Seas: recent changes in properties and circulation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. AMath. Phys. Eng. Sci. 372: 11.
Murphy, E.J., Reid, K. 2001. Modelling Southern Ocean krill population dynamics: biological processes
generating fluctuations in the South Georgia ecosystem. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 217: 175-89.
Naganobu, M., Murase, H., Nishiwaki, S., Yasuma, H., Matsukura, R., Takao, Y., Taki, K., Hayashi, T.,
Watanabe, Y., Yabuki, T., Yoda, Y., Noiri, Y., Kuga, M., Yoshikawa, K., Kokubun, N., Iwami,T., Itoh, K., Goto, M., Isoda, T., Matsuoka, K., Tamura, T., Fujise, Y. 2010. Structure of marine
ecosystem of the Ross Sea, Antarctica – overview and synthesis of the results of the Japanesemultidisciplinary study by Kaiyo-Maru and JARPA –. Bull. Japan. Soc. Fish. Oceanogr. 74: 112.
Nicol, S., Pauly, T., Bindoff, N.L., Strutton, P.G. 2000a. “BROKE” a biological/oceanographic survey
off the coast of East Antarctica (80–150°E) carried out in January–March 1996. Deep Sea Res.
II 47: 2281-97.
Nicol, S., Kitchener, J., King, R., Hosie, G., de la Mare, W.K. 2000b. Population structure and conditionof Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba) off East Antarctica (80–150°E) during the Australsummer of 1995/1996. Deep Sea Res. II 47: 2489-517.
Nicol, S., Meiners, K., Raymond, B. 2010. BROKE-West, a large ecosystem survey of the South West
Indian Ocean sector of the Southern Ocean, 30°E-80°E (CCAMLR Division 58.4.2). Deep Sea
Res. II 57: 693-700.
Oozeki, Y., Hu, F.X., Kubota, H., Sugisaki, H., Kimura, R. 2004. Newly designed quantitative frame
trawl for sampling larval and juvenile pelagic fish. Fish. Sci. 70: 223-32.
Pakhomov, E.A. 2000. Demography and life cycle of Antarctic krill, Euphausia superba, in the Indian78

sector of the Southern Ocean: long-term comparison between coastal and open-ocean regions.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 57: 68-90.
Pikitch, E.K., Rountos, K.J., Essington, T.E., Santora, C., Pauly, D., Watson, R., Sumaila, U.R., Boersma,
P.D., Boyd, I.L., Conover, D.O., Cury, P., Heppell, S.S., Houde, E.D., Mangel, M., Plagányi, É.,
Sainsbury, K., Steneck, R.S., Geers, T.M., Gownaris, N., Munch, S.B. 2014. The global
contribution of forage fish to marine fisheries and ecosystems. Fish. Fish. 15: 43-64.
Reid, K., Watkins, J., Croxall, J., Murphy, E. 1999. Krill population dynamics at South Georgia 19911997, based on data from predators and nets. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 117: 103-114.
Reid, K., Murphy, E.J., Loeb, V., Hewitt, R.P. 2002. Krill population dynamics in the Scotia Sea:
variability in growth and mortality within a single population. J. Mar. Syst. 36. 1-10.
Reid, K., Murphy, E.J., Croxall, J.P., Trathan, P.N. 2006. Population dynamics of Antarctic krill
Euphausia superba at South Georgia: sampling with predators provides new insights. pp.24961 In: I.L. Boyd, S. Wanless, C.J. Camphuysen (Eds.), Top Predators in Marine Ecosystems:
Their Role in Monitoring and Management. Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge.
Reid, K., Watkins, J.L., Murphy, E.J., Trathan, P.N., Fielding, S., Enderlein, P. 2010. Krill population
dynamics at South Georgia: implications for ecosystem-based fisheries management. Mar. Ecol.
Prog. Ser. 399: 243-52.
Sala, A., Azzali, M., Russo, A. 2002. Krill of the Ross Sea: distribution, abundance and demography of
Euphausia superba and Euphausia crystallorophias during the Italian Antarctic Expedition(January-February 2000). Sci. Mar. 66: 123-33.
Taki, K., Yabuki, T., Noiri, Y., Hayashi, T., Naganobu, M. 2008. Horizontal and vertical distribution anddemography of euphausiids in the Ross Sea and its adjacent waters in 2004/2005. Polar Biol.
31: 1343-56.
Trathan, P.N., Watkins, J.L., Murray, A.W.A., Brierley, A.S., Everson, I., Goss, C., Priddle, J., Reid, K.,
Ward, P. 2001. The CCAMLR-2000 Krill Synoptic Survey: A description of the rationale anddesign. CCAMLR Sci. 8: 1-23.
van Wijk, E.M., Rintoul, S.R. 2014. Freshening drives contraction of Antarctic Bottom Water in theAustralian Antarctic Basin. Geophys. Res. Lett. 41: 1657-64.
Zane, L., Ostellari, L., Maccatrozzo, L., Bargelloni, L., Battaglia, B., Patarnello, T. 1998. Molecularevidence for genetic subdivision of Antarctic krill (Euphausia superba Dana) populations.
Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences 265: 2387-91.

79Appendix 9
Objective II(ii)Abundance estimate of some cetacean species as input data for ecosystem modeling
1. Background and objectives
Abundance estimates for humpback, fin and blue whales have shown significant increase based on
JARPA and JARPA II sighting surveys (Matsuoka et al., 2011; Matsuoka and Hakamada, 2014). In otherstudies, significant increase of the humpback whales (e.g. Noad et al., 2011; Hedley et al., 2011; Branch2011) and blue whales (Branch et al., 2004) was reported. Result of the assessment for breeding stock
D (BSD) humpback whales showed that the abundance in 2012 was about 90% of the initial population
size (IWC, 2014a). Like the Antarctic minke whale these baleen whales feed on krill. Population
dynamics of these baleen whales could affect that of the minke whales and therefore it is necessary to
examine abundance estimates and trends for these species. Such abundance estimates and trends will be
used for input of ecosystem modeling (Kitakado et al., 2014) especially multi-species-production typemodels.
Sighting surveys for the Antarctic minke, humpback and blue whales probably cover the peak of theirdistribution in the austral summer. However, for other species such as fin whales, this is not the case.
The Expert Workshop to review JARPA II reiterated that considerable care should be given to theinterpretation of abundance and trends of fin whales (IWC, 2014b).
Information on spatial distribution of cetaceans in finer scales can be derived by spatial modeling. The
updated requirements and guidelines for conducting surveys and Implementations (Hedley andBravington, 2014) include the guideline for abundance estimation in spatial modeling approach. At the
JARPAII review workshop, the existence of competition amongst baleen whales in spatial context was
discussed and but no final conclusion on this was reached. Given the important management
implications such competition would have, it is important to gather data to assist in resolving this issue.
Spatial abundance estimates derived from the spatial modeling approach that follows the guideline
agreed by IWC/SC could facilitate such further investigations of cetacean interactions. Such estimates
can be used to estimate occupied area indices (e.g. Murase et al, 2014)
In order to attain Objective II(ii), two sub-objectives are set: i) produce abundance estimates of somecetacean species as input data for ecosystem models, and ii) produce abundance estimates using the
spatial modeling approach based on the updated IWC/SC guidelines, for investigation of cetaceaninteractions in a spatial context (Objective II(iv)).

2. Methods
2.1 Survey methods
Sighting surveys
Survey protocols follow the ‘Requirements and Guidelines for conducting surveys and analyzing data
within the Revised Management Scheme’ (IWC, 2012). Sighting protocols are the same as those usedin IWC-IDCR/SOWER (Matsuoka et al., 2003). Survey areas are planned to cover one IWC
Management Area (Areas III, IV, V and VI) in a year. Following the recommendation at the Expert
Workshop to review JARPAII (IWC, 2014b), if an initial sighting occurs near to a vessel, effort will bemake in identifying the ecotype of killer whale.
Sighting survey in northern area
To examine distribution and abundance of fin whales, a sighting survey will be conducted in one year
out of 12 years in the latitudinal band of 55-60oS. It should be recognized that this band is not sufficient
to cover all of the distribution in summer as suggested by JSV data (Miyashita et al., 1995), but it is80what can be covered in a single year. The longitudinal area will be decided considering the distribution
pattern of the species and logistics.
Acoustic survey
Acoustic survey would be used as an alternative method for situations when sighting survey cannot be
conducted (e.g. during night, within pack ice, bad weather, etc.). There were some previous studies using
acoustic devices to collect the data for (relative) abundance estimation. For example, combination of
towed hydrophone and visual surveys (Barlow and Taylor, 2005), using two towed acoustic devices withvisual surveys (Kimura et al., 2014), and setting passive acoustic devices at fixed site (Van Opzeeland
et al., 2014). It remains to be examined how often baleen whales make sounds and how correctly the
species can be differentiated from the recorded sound. The acoustic survey should be considered as afeasibility survey at this stage.

2.2 Analytical methods
Abundance estimation
The Standard methodology of line transect surveys (e.g. Branch and Butterworth, 2001) will be applied
to estimate abundance. For abundance estimation, recommendations made at the Expert Workshop to
review JARPA II should be considered; (1) present a more thorough description of methods andassumptions used: (2) highlight the issues related to small sample size and the recommendations madeat the JARPA review meeting; (3) identify more clearly the differences between ideal and realised
tracklines by year including percentage achieved coverage; (4) explain more fully the treatment ofadditional variance components in the estimation of rates of increase; (5) include more extensive
discussion than at present of the results including interpretation of the results with respect to stock
structure and proportion of range covered; and (6) include an updated power analysis of the effects ofsurvey interval and estimation of trend to inform consideration of levels of effort and survey design inthe future. (IWC, 2014b). These recommendations will be considered on drafting whale abundance
estimation papers. Recommendation (2) will be considered by investigating appropriate stratification ofdata to estimate abundance, especially in case that sample size of detected whales is too small to estimate
abundance for each stratum. Recommendation (6) will be considered taking into account abundance
estimates and trends considering recommendations (1)-(5). Candidates for abundance estimates are
humpback, fin, blue, southern right, sperm, southern bottlenose and killer whales. Abundance estimate
for species such as sperm and southern bottlenose whales may need to be treated as relative because
g(0) was estimated less than 1 for these species (Kasamatsu and Joyce, 1995).
In response to the NEWREP-A Review Panel recommendation regarding the g(0) estimation (IWC,
2015a pp13), identification of duplicate sightings will be also conducted for whale species other thanthe Antarctic minke whale during NEWREP-A sighting surveys in IO mode. In order to determine
whether g(0)is significantly different from one, analyses on duplicate sightings will be conducted for
those whale species given that sufficient data will be obtained under the NEWREP-A program.
Spatial modeling
Density Surface Modeling (DSM) (Miller et al., 2013) will be used, which is one of the packages in the
DISTANCE grogram (Thomas et al., 2010). But there is a room for trying other options (e.g. smoother,modeling framework, variance estimation method etc.) to improve abundance estimates. Furthermore,
the utility of using environmental covariates in the spatial modeling for improving the abundance
estimates will be investigated.

3. Features and expected outcome
Abundance estimate for the species listed above can be used as input data for the ecosystem modeling,
especially multi-production type, and for management purposes. Preliminary analysis of spatial
81

modeling using the sighting data can contribute to discussion on the guideline for abundance estimation
using spatial modeling approach by providing the example to check whether the proposed guidelines
are appropriate. If acceptable spatial abundance estimates are obtained, they can contribute to theinvestigation of interactions among cetaceans in a spatial context

References
Barlow, J. and Taylor, B. L. 2005. Estimates of abundance in the Northeastern temperate Pacific fromcombined acoustic and visual surveys. Mar. Mamm. Sci., 21(3): 429-445
Branch, T.A. 2011. Humpback abundance south of 60°S from three complete circumpolar sets of surveys.
J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (SPECIAL ISSUE) 3: 53-69.
Branch T.A. and Butterworth, D.S. 2001. Estimates of abundance south of 60oS for cetacean species
sighted frequently on the 1978/79 to 1997/98 IWC/IDCR-SOWER sighting surveys. J. Cetacean.
Res. Manage. 3(3): 251-270.
Branch, T.A., Matsuoka, K. and Miyashita, T. 2004. Evidence for increases in Antarctic blue whales
based on Bayesian modelling. Mar. Mamm. Sci. 20(4): 726-754.
Hedley, S.L., Dunlop, R.A. and Bannister J.L. 2011. Evaluation of WA Humpback surveys 1999, 2005,
2008: Where to from here? Report to the Australian Marine Mammal Centre. Project 2009/23.
Hedley, S. and Bravington, M. 2014. Comments on design-based and model-based abundance estimates
for the RMP and other contexts. Paper SC/65b/RMP11 submitted to IWC Scientific Committee(unpublished). 33pp.
International Whaling Commission 2012. Requirements and Guidelines for conducting surveys andanalysing data within the Revised Management Scheme. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 13 (Suppl.):509-17.
International Whaling Commission 2014a. Report of the Scientific Committee. Annex H. Report of the
sub-committee on the other Southern Hemisphere whale stocks. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 15(Suppl.): 250-270.
International Whaling Commission 2014b. Report of the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPA II Special Permit Research Programme. Paper SC/65b/Rep2 submitted to IWC ScientificCommittee (unpublished). 62pp.
Kasamatsu, F. and Joyce, G.G. 1995. Current status of Odontocetes in the Antarctic. Antarctic Science
7 (4): 365-379.
Kimura, S., Akamatsu, T., Dong, L., Wang, K., Wang, D., Shibata, Y. and Arai, N. 2014. Acoustic
capture-recapture method for towed acoustic surveys of echolocating porpoises. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 135 (6): 3364-70.
Kitakado, T., Murase, H., Tamura, T. and Yonezaki, S. 2014. An attempt to ecosystem modelling forspecies in Area IV in the Antarctic Ocean using JARPA and JARPAII data. Paper SC/F14/J26
submitted to the Expert Workshop to review JARPAII (unpublished). 15pp.
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.
Matsuoka, K., Hakamada, T., Kiwada, H., Murase, H. and Nishiwaki, S. 2011. Abundance estimates andtrends for humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in Antarctic Areas IV and V based on
JARPA sighting data. J. Cetacean Res. Manege. (SPECIAL ISSUE) 3: 75-94.
Matsuoka, K and Hakamada, T. 2014. Estimates of abundance and abundance trend of the blue, fin andsouthern right whales in the Antarctic Areas IIIE-VIW, south of 60oS, based on JARPA and82

JARPAII sighting data (1989/90-2008/09). Paper SC/F14/J5 submitted to the Expert Workshop
to Review the Japanese JARPA II Special Permit Research Programme (unpublished). 27pp.
Miller, D.L., Burt, M.L., Rexstad, E.A. and Thomas, L. 2013. Spatial models for distance sampling data:
recent developments and future directions. Methods in Ecology and Evolution 4: 1001-10.
Miyashita, T., Kato, H. and Kasuya, T., 1995. Worldwide Map of Cetacean Distribution based onJapanese Sighting Data (Volume 1). 140pp.
Murase, H., Matsuoka, K., Hakamada, T. and Kitakado, T. 2014. Preliminary analysis of changes inspatial distribution of Antarctic minke and humpback whales in Area IV during the period of
JARPA and JARPA II from 1989 to 2006. Paper SC/F14/J18 submitted to the Expert Workshop
to review JARPAII (unpublished). 17pp.
Noad, M.J., Dunlop, R.A., Paton, D. and Kniest, H. 2011. Abundance estimates of the east Australian
humpback whale population: 2010 survey and update. Paper SC/63/SH22 presented to the IWC
Scientific Committee, June 2011, Tromsø, Norway (unpublished). 12pp.
Thomas, L., Buckland, S.T., Rexstad, E.A., Laake, J.L., Strindberg, S., Hedley, S.L., Bishop, J.R.B.
Marques, T.A. and Burnham, K.P. 2010. Distance software: design and analysis of distancesampling surveys for estimating population size. Journal of Applied Ecology 47: 5-14.
Van Opzeeland, I.C., Samaran, F., Staffort, K.M., Findlay, K., Gedamke, J., Harris, D.J. and Miller, B.
2014. The Southern Ocean Hydrophone Network (SOHN): Circum-Antarctic passive acoustic
monitoring of Antarctic blue and fin whales. Polarforschung.

83

Appendix 10
Objective II(iii)
Estimation of prey consumption by Antarctic minke whale and its nutritional condition
1. BackgroundThe krill surplus hypothesis (Laws, 1977) is based on the concept of species interactions between krill
predators and was investigated using population dynamics models by Mori and Butterworth (2006).
Looking toward the conservation and sustainable use of whale resources in the future, the IWC needs toconsider multi-species management approaches in the Antarctic Ocean where the world's largest whale
resources exist. Since the Antarctic minke whale plays an important role in the Antarctic ecosystem asa predator with its abundance estimated at over 500,000 individuals (IWC, 2013), estimation andmonitoring of prey consumption by the Antarctic minke whale and its nutritional condition will be usefulfor verification of the Multi-production model (objective II(iv) Part 2).
The Scientific Committee of IWC (SC65b) agreed that a decline in blubber thickness and in fat weightthat was statistically significant at the 5% level had occurred in JARPA period. It also agreed that themodel presented in SC65b would benefit from extension to determine whether the trends identified
showed any indication of change over time. It was noted that, even if not statistically significant at the
5% level, estimates of changes in trends would ultimately be important to take into account in fitting
multi-species models. Furthermore Japanese whaling surveys have been conducted for more than 20
years in the Antarctic and have collected body condition data that are a unique example that can be usedas described above (IWC, 2014a). Taking into consideration this situation, body condition studies
including its monitoring are important for whale studies in the Antarctic.

2. Objectives
2.1 Estimation of prey consumption
The total krill consumption by the Antarctic minke whale was estimated to be approximately 2.7-18.9 %of krill biomass in IWC management Areas IV and V (Tamura and Konishi, 2009), however the
precision of the estimate should be increased by accounting for some uncertainties of daily and seasonal
prey consumptions (Leaper and Lavigne, 2007; Tamura et al., 2009; IWC, 2014b). Although the daily
feeding pattern and the duration of feeding days are important parameters to estimate consumption, little
information is available for these. The main objective is, therefore, to increase the precision of estimatesof consumption by the Antarctic minke whale by analysis of data from night-time sampling of stomach
contents and by the tagging studies.
2.2 Body condition
One of the objectives for examining body condition is to monitor any trend of body condition as anindication of possible ecosystem change and to verify the results of ecosystem models to see whether aselected scenario fits the reality. Besides this monitoring purpose, the proposed research will assess the
body condition indicators to examine the whales’ biological condition by comparing these to the amountof total fat storage. Additionally other chemical body condition markers will be tested to examine theirusability.

3. Research methods
3.1 Improvement of estimation of prey consumption
The prey consumption will be calculated by the time change of stomach content weights and basal
metabolism using the Monte-Carlo simulations to increase the precision (Leaper and Lavigne, 2007;
IWC, 2014b; Tamura and Konishi, 2014). The plan includes samplings whales during the night in the84feeding area of the Antarctic minke whale with plankton net surveys to examine the of qualitative
vertical migration patterns of krill in the same area.
To consider the uncertainties in calculation of consumption, the tagging and satellite tracking thatrecords the position of whales for a long period will be conducted for the Antarctic minke whale toexamine the migration patterns and duration of stay in the Antarctic waters. The tagging of sensor datalogger (depth and acceleration) will be conducted for the Antarctic minke whale to examine its daily
feeding patters.
In theory, daily consumption can be estimated by the number of lunge feeding and krill density and somebiological and environmental parameters only if examined simultaneously (IWC 2014a), this estimationis going to be done after some successful bio-logging attachments with simultaneous krill surveys. For
this calculation, the mouth volume of the whales is necessary, therefore measurement of the mouth
volume of the sampled whales will be conducted on board the mother research vessel.
3.2 Body conditions
The measurements of body condition (blubber thickness, girth, total fat weight) and stomach contents
will be conducted in this research program in the same manner as in JARPA and JARPA II for the
sampled whales (Konishi et al., 2008, 2014a, 2014b). The blubber, ventral groove and intestinal fat will
be weighed respectively. Then, for chemical analyses, blubber and internal fat are sampled from theentire body of the whales and the lipid content % of samples will be analyzed to calculate total lipid
contents per individual. The total lipid content will be compared to body condition indicators, such as
blubber thickness, girth measurements and chemical marker described below to assess their efficiency.
Analyses on body condition will be based on the inner and outer layers of the blubber. As an initial
feasibility test, the measurements of body conditions (blubber thickness, girth, total fat weight and somechemical markers) from Antarctic minke whales collected from this new research program will be used.
Based on the Texel pollution workshop (IWC, 1999) the sample sizes would need to be at least 50 ineach ‘cell’ where the cell will vary by important variables. At least 50 whales would be required for eachsex and area.
3.3 Chemical assessment of body condition indicators
The body condition indicators such as blubber thickness, length of girth and total fat weight that can beobtained by lethal sampling have been used throughout JARPA and JARPA II periods (Konishi et al.,2014, Konishi and Walløe, 2014). These data will continue to be collected as they will contribute to theMain Objective II. In 2014 the IWC SC agreed that the body condition and stomach content trends ofAntarctic minke whales were decreasing significantly during the JARPA period (IWC, 2015 pp46).
In response to the suggestion by the NEWREP-A Review Panel, instead of retinol, the proponent plansto analyse the lipid content % of blubber throughout NEWREP-A research. At first, the total lipid
content % of blubber from mid lateral position (near the position used in JARPA and JARPAII for the
point measurement of blubber thickness), will be analysed since this position has been informative ofchanges of blubber thickness in relation to feeding season (Konishi et al., 2008). The lipid content % of
blubber will be compared to other body condition indicators such as blubber thickness and girthmeasurements. As an initial feasibility test, the measurements of body condition (blubber thickness,girth, total fat weight and the lipid content % of blubber) obtained from Antarctic minke whales collectedunder NEWREP-A will be used. At least 50 whales for each sex and sub area will be used for thisanalysis.
References
International Whaling Commission 1999. Proposal to the IWC on furthering the recommendation of the
Pollution Workshop. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. (special issue) 1: 1-42.
International Whaling Commission 2013. The Report of the Scientific Committee from its Annual
Meeting in 2012. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 14 (suppl.): 1-339.
85

International Whaling Commission 2014a. Report of the Working Group on Ecosystem Modelling.
Paper SC/65b/Rep01 Annex K1 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June 2014
(unpublished). 17pp.
International Whaling Commission 2014b. Report of the Expert Panel Review of the results from JARPA
II. Paper SC/65b/Rep02 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June 2014 (unpublished).
62pp.
International Whaling Commission. 2015b. Report of the Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res.
Manage. 16 (Suppl.):1-87.
Konishi, K., Tamura, T., Zenitani, R., Bando, T., Kato, H. and Walløe, L. 2008. Decline in energy storage
in the Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Southern Ocean. Polar Biol. 31:
1509-20.
Konishi, K. and Walløe, L. 2014a. Time trends in the energy storage in the Antarctic minke whales
during the JARPA and JARPA II research periods. Paper SC/F14/J13 presented to the IWC
Scientific Committee, February 2014 (unpublished). 21pp.
Konishi, K., Hakamada, T., Kiwada, H., Kitakado, T. and Walløe, L. 2014b. Decrease in stomach
contents in the Antarctic minke whale (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Southern Ocean. Polar Biol.
37: 205-215.
Laws, R.M. 1977. Seals and whales of the Southern Ocean. Phil Trans R Soc. Lond., Ser., B279: 81-96.
Leaper, R. and Lavigne, D. 2007. How much do large whales eat? J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 9(3): 179188.
Tamura, T. and Konishi, K. 2009. Feeding habits and prey consumption of Antarctic minke whale(Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in the Southern Ocean. Journal Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Science
42: 13-25.
Tamura, T., Konishi, K., Isoda, T., Okamoto, R., Bando, T. and Hakamada, T. 2009. Some examinationsof uncertainties in the prey consumption estimates of common minke, sei and Bryde’s whales in
the western North Pacific. Paper SC/61/JR2 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, June 2009
(unpublished). 24pp.
Tamura, T. and Konishi, K. 2014. Prey composition and consumption rate by Antarctic minke whales
based on JARPA and JARPA II data. Paper SC/F14/J15 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee,
February 2014 (unpublished). 20pp.

86

Appendix 11
Objective II(iv)
Ecosystem modelingPart 1: Spatial interaction among baleen whales

1. Backgrounds and objectives
Spatial distribution of cetaceans have been widely studied using empirical (statistical) models in recent
years such as generalized additive models (GAMs) (Beekmans et al., 2010; Friedlaender et al., 2006;
Hedley et al., 1999; Murase et al., 2013; Williams et al., 2006), maximum entropy models (MaxEnts)(Ainley et al., 2012; Ballard et al., 2012; Bombosch et al., 2014; Friedlaender et al., 2011) and Getis–
Ord G statistics and spatial regression models (Santora and Reiss, 2011). These empirical models arecommonly termed as species distribution models (SDMs). However, it was recognized that SDMs could
be complex and often difficult to formulate, and development of guidelines and recommendations formodeling steps for cetaceans are now considered in the IWC/SC (IWC, 2014). Furthermore, interaction
among cetaceans and krill in spatial context has not been studied extensively in the Antarctic with few
exceptions (Friedlaender et al., 2011; Murase et al., 2014).
Though results of SDMS provide insight into the relationship between spatial distribution of cetaceans
and their environment, mechanisms which drive the spatial distribution can be derived from them andthe necessity of use of mechanistic models are recognized (Palacios et al., 2013). Spatially explicit
ecosystem models can be considered as spatial mechanistic models. Several types of spatially explicit
ecosystem models have now been developed such as Atlantis (Fulton et al., 2011), Ecospace module of
Ecopath with Ecosim (EwE) (Steenbeek et al., 2013), NEMURO and NEMURO.FISH (Kishi et al.,2011) and a spatial ecosystem and populations dynamics model (SEAPODYM) (Lehodey et al., 2008).
However, there has been no attempt to construct spatially explicit ecosystem models in the Antarctic
specifically mainly targeting cetaceans.
The objectives of this proposed research are (1) constructing appropriate SDMs of cetaceans as well as
krill based on the guidelines developed by the IWC/SC, (2) developing appropriate methods to measureinteractions among cetaceans and krill in a spatial context using output from SDMs and (3) constructing
spatially explicit ecosystem models which mainly focus on cetaceans.

2. Methods
2.1 Species distribution models (SDMs)
A various types of SDMs such as a generalized linear model (GLM), GAM, Ecological Niche Factor
Analysis (ENFA), Random Forest (RF), Boosted regression tree (BRT) and MaxEnt will be tested using
data obtained by upcoming surveys. Data of the IDCR/SOWER, JARPA and JARPAII will also be usedin the analysis. Appropriate methods to formulate and compare results among models will be consideredthroughout the exercise. The results will also be compared with the results obtained by model basedabundance estimation methods which are currently underdeveloped in the IWC/SC (IWC, 2014).
Development of appropriate methods to measure interaction among cetaceans and krill in a spatial
context will be considered using the results of SDMs. Both estimated abundance and presence/absenceof cetaceans will be considered in the proposed research. The magnitude of interactions among cetaceans
and krill will then be measured using the results.
2.2 Spatially explicit ecosystem models
Construction of a spatially explicit ecosystem model using Ecospace module of EwE will be attempted
as we have already constructed an initial EwE model in Area IV (Kitakado et al., 2014). The output of87

SDMs will be considered as input data of the ecosystem models. Construction of other spatially explicit
ecosystem models will be considered once modeling of Ecospace module of EwE is completed. The
results of the spatially explicit ecosystem models will be compared with the results of multi-speciesproduction ecosystem models.
Initially, we will start to design EwE-Ecospace models in Area IV and V using available data mainly
obtained from the literature. The models will be updated once data from the ecological research areavailable. Environmental factors such as global warming and ocean acidification which are poeticallyaffect Antarctic marine ecosystem (Constable et al., 2014) will be considered in the updated models as
external forces as in the case of Ainsworth et al. (2011). Coupling EwE-Ecospace and lower trophic
models such as NEMURO (Kearney et al., 2012) will be considered as an ambitious attempt.
3. Distinctive features and expected outcome
The proposed research will contribute the development of guidelines for SDMs and model basedabundance estimation method which are actively considered in the IWC/SC. The results of SDMs willcontribute to understand temporal changes of spatial distributions of cetaceans in the survey area. SDMs
will contribute to development of more advanced spatially explicit ecosystem models as the output of
former models will be used as input of latter models. Comparisons between results of spatially explicit
ecosystem models multi-species-production ecosystem models will contribute to refine ecosystemmodels in the Antarctic. Overall results under this research will provide fundamental information on the
Antarctic marine ecosystem and contribute to management of cetaceans as well as other living species.
References
Ainley, D., Jongsomjit, D., Ballard, G., Thiele, D., Fraser, W., Tynan, C. 2012. Modeling the relationshipof Antarctic minke whales to major ocean boundaries. Polar Biol. 35: 281-90.
Ainsworth, C.H., Samhouri, J.F., Busch, D.S., Cheung, W.W.L., Dunne, J., Okey, T.A. 2011. Potential
impacts of climate change on Northeast Pacific marine foodwebs and fisheries. ICES J. Mar.
Sci. 68: 1217-29.
Ballard, G., Jongsomjit, D., Veloz, S.D., Ainley, D.G. 2012. Coexistence of mesopredators in an intact
polar ocean ecosystem: The basis for defining a Ross Sea marine protected area. Biol. Conserv.
156: 72-82.
Beekmans, B.W.P.M., Forcada, J.F., Murphy, E.J., de Baar, H.J.W., Bathmann, U.V., Fleming, A.H. 2010.
Generalised additive models to investigate environmental drivers of Antarctic minke whale(Balaenoptera bonaerensis) spatial density in austral summer. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 11:
115-29.
Bombosch, A., Zitterbart, D.P., Van Opzeeland, I., Frickenhaus, S., Burkhardt, E., Wisz, M.S., Boebel,
O. 2014. Predictive habitat modelling of humpback (Megaptera novaeangliae) and Antarctic
minke (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) whales in the Southern Ocean as a planning tool for seismic
surveys. Deep Sea Res. I 91: 101-14.
Constable, A.J., Melbourne-Thomas, J., Corney, S.P., Arrigo, K.R., Barbraud, C., Barnes, D.K.A.,
Bindoff, N.L., Boyd, P.W., Brandt, A., Costa, D.P., Davidson, A.T., Ducklow, H.W., Emmerson,
L., Fukuchi, M., Gutt, J., Hindell, M.A., Hofmann, E.E., Hosie, G.W., Iida, T., Jacob, S.,
Johnston, N.M., Kawaguchi, S., Kokubun, N., Koubbi, P., Lea, M.-A., Makhado, A., Massom,
R.A., Meiners, K., Meredith, M.P., Murphy, E.J., Nicol, S., Reid, K., Richerson, K., Riddle,
M.J., Rintoul, S.R., Smith, W.O., Southwell, C., Stark, J.S., Sumner, M., Swadling, K.M.,
Takahashi, K.T., Trathan, P.N., Welsford, D.C., Weimerskirch, H., Westwood, K.J., Wienecke,
B.C., Wolf-Gladrow, D., Wright, S.W., Xavier, J.C., Ziegler, P. 2014. Climate change andSouthern Ocean ecosystems I: how changes in physical habitats directly affect marine biota.
Glob. Change Biol. 20: 3004-25.
88

Friedlaender, A.S., Halpin, P.N., Qian, S.S., Lawson, G.L., Wiebe, P.H., Thiele, D., Read, A.J. 2006.
Whale distribution in relation to prey abundance and oceanographic processes in shelf watersof the Western Antarctic Peninsula. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 317: 297-310.
Friedlaender, A.S., Johnston, D.W., Fraser, W.R., Burns, J., Patrick N, H., Costa, D.P. 2011. Ecologicalniche modeling of sympatric krill predators around Marguerite Bay, Western Antarctic
Peninsula. Deep Sea Res. II 58: 1729-40.
Fulton, E.A., Link, J.S., Kaplan, I.C., Savina-Rolland, M., Johnson, P., Ainsworth, C., Horne, P., Gorton,R., Gamble, R.J., Smith, A.D.M., Smith, D.C. 2011. Lessons in modelling and management ofmarine ecosystems: the Atlantis experience. Fish. Fish. 12: 171-88.
Hedley, S.L., Buckland, S.T., Borchers, D.L. 1999. Spatial modelling from line transect data. J.
Cetacean Res. Manage. 1: 255-64.
International Whaling Commission 2014. Report of Scientific Committee. J. Cetacean Res. Manage. 16(suppl.): (in press).
Kearney, K.A., Stock, C., Aydin, K., Sarmiento, J.L. 2012. Coupling planktonic ecosystem and fisheries
food web models for a pelagic ecosystem: Description and validation for the subarctic Pacific.
Ecol. Model. 237: 43-62.
Kishi, M., Ito, S.-i., Megrey, B., Rose, K., Werner, F. 2011. A review of the NEMURO andNEMURO.FISH models and their application to marine ecosystem investigations. J. Oceanogr.
67: 3-16.
Kitakado, T., Murase, H., Tamura, T., Yonezaki, S. 2014. An attempt to ecosystem modelling for species
in Area IV in the Antarctic Ocean using JARPA and JARPAII data. Paper SC/F14/J26 presented
to the JARPA II special permit expert panel review workshop, Tokyo, February 2014
(unpublished). 15pp.
Lehodey, P., Senina, I., Murtugudde, R. 2008. A spatial ecosystem and populations dynamics model(SEAPODYM) - Modeling of tuna and tuna-like populations. Prog. Oceanogr. 78: 304-18.
Murase, H., Kitakado, T., Hakamada, T., Matsuoka, K., Nishiwaki, S., Naganobu, M. 2013. Spatial
distribution of Antarctic minke whales (Balaenoptera bonaerensis) in relation to spatial
distributions of krill in the Ross Sea, Antarctica. Fish. Oceanogr. 22: 154-73.
Murase, H., Matsuoka, K., Hakamada, T., Kitakado, T. 2014. Preliminary analysis of changes in spatial
distribution of Antarctic minke and humpback whales in Area IV during the period of JARPA
and JARPAII from 1989 to 2006. Paper SC/F14/J18 presented to the JARPA II special permit
expert panel review workshop, Tokyo, February 2014 (unpublished). 17pp.
Palacios, D.M., Baumgartner, M.F., Laidre, K.L., Gregr, E.J. 2013. Beyond correlation: integrating
environmentally and behaviourally mediated processes in models of marine mammal
distributions. Endang. Species Res. 22: 191-203.
Santora, J.A., Reiss, C.S. 2011. Geospatial variability of krill and top predators within an Antarctic
submarine canyon system. Mar. Biol. 158: 2527-40.
Steenbeek, J., Coll, M., Gurney, L., Mélin, F., Hoepffner, N., Buszowski, J., Christensen, V. 2013.
Bridging the gap between ecosystem modeling tools and geographic information systems:
Driving a food web model with external spatial–temporal data. Ecol. Model. 263: 139-51.
Williams, R., Hedley, S.L., Hammond, P.S. 2006. Modeling distribution and abundance of Antarctic
baleen whales using ships of opportunity. Ecol. Soc. 11.

89

Appendix 12
Objective II(iv)
Ecosystem modelling
Part 2: Investigation of ecosystem dynamics in the Antarctic Ocean

1. Background and objectives
This exercise was intended to refine the earlier approach by Mori and Butterworth (2006) and Kitakado
et al. (2014), but some twists were added into their basic system of equations for multiple predators(some baleen whales and seals) and single prey species (krill). Although the multi-species production
model is simpler than the approach of whole-of-ecosystem modelling, it still has many unknown
parameters. To reduce the number of parameters to be estimated, some bioenergetic and allometricreasoning by Yodzis and Innes (1992) were incorporated for the predator species. The maximum
consumption is linked to the body weight of the predators.
This sort of model has the potential to estimate the extent of competition between the baleen whales.
For example, since the population sizes of other larger baleen whales such as blue, fin and humpback
whales declined through commercial harvesting, there may have been a state of krill surplus in the
Antarctic. This surplus could be utilized by the Antarctic minke whales, and since that time the minke
whales may be still above their pre-exploitation level.
The works on ecosystem modelling is primarily to model competition among whale species andinteraction with the krill, but it would also contribute to development of management objective andprocedures. In the existing RMP implementation, any species interaction is not explicitly taken into
account. However, some multispecies adjustment would contribute to improvement of operating models
and harvest controls to make more effective use of this resource. The multi-species production model,
which development is undergoing now in the Antarctic Ocean, must be a good tool to precede suchprocess.
For example, the model could give some information on changes in carrying capacity and provide a
scenario for running "RMP" simulation to see if the current single species CLA may or may not work
under the changes in carrying capacity. This was a reason for our further development of multi-species
production models. In this regard, it might be possible to extend our research objective toward work forlinking ecosystem modelling with management with consideration on species interaction etc.
In this sub-objective, the following ancillary research items are handled:(a) Elucidation of history of the ecosystems in the Antarctic using multi-species production models(b) Future projection of ecosystem using multi-species production models(c) Contribution to the RMP trial specification using ecosystem models(d) Examination of performance of the current RMP under ecosystem interactions

2. Specification of multi-production models: an example
One of basic models to be used for multiple predators (some baleen whales and seals) and a single preyspecies (krill) is given as follows:
Pt +1,i =Pt ,i − M i Pt ,i + Ei f i ( Bt ) Pt ,i − α i Pt ,2i − Ct ,i , (i =1, 2,..., n)fi ( Bt ) = cmax,iBtθ
,H i + Btθ(1)θ

 B  nBt +1 =Bt + r Bt 1 − t  − ∑ fi ( Bt ) Pt ,i ,K  i =190

where Pt ,i and

Bt are respectively the population sizes for predators and prey species, and M i , Ei

and α i are the natural mortality rate, the energy conversion factor and a parameter for the density
dependence for predator species i, respectively. The function "f" is a so-called functional response, which
is used to link the predator with prey. The parameters, cmax,i and

H i , are respectively a maximum

consumption per the i-th predator in the feeding season and the prey biomass when the consumption of
the i-th predator drops to a half of cmax,i . These become the Type II and Type III functional responses
for cases of θ = 1 and 2, respectively. The parameters r and K in the prey dynamics are the ones usedin the usual logistic production model.
As shown above, Mori and Butterworth (2006) assumed a density-dependence within each species, butthere may be some other density dependence by other predator species. It may not be a useful way tosimply include all other predators’ effects in each species dynamics. Instead, one possible way is tomodify the available prey abundance by considering a food competition among the predators as follows:

Pt +1,i =Pt ,i − M i Pt ,i + Ei cmax,i(ωt ,i Bt )θ
H iθ + (ωt ,i Bt )θ

Pt ,i − α i Pt ,2i − Ct ,i ,θ(ω B )
 B  nBt +1 =Bt + r Bt 1 − t  − ∑ cmax,i θ t ,i t
Pt ,i ,
H i + (ωt ,i Bt )θ
 K  i =1
where ωt ,i =si Pt ,i Wi 0.75

∑s P Wj t, j

0.75
j

(2)

.

j

Here, si is a selectivity of the i-th predator to the prey species, and it is assumed to be 1 for all the
predators in this application.
This model is further developed to incorporate the species-internal completion (density dependence)
into the functional response itself as in the following formula:Pt +1,i =Pt ,i − M i Pt ,i + Ei cmax,i(ωt ,i Bt )θ
H iθ + (ωt ,i Bt )θ + φi Pt ,i

Pt ,i − Ct ,i .

(3)This model can be regarded as an extension of Beddington (1975)’s model. The carrying capacity forthe krill and the parameters for the density dependence for the predators are solved through anassumption of an equilibrium condition to reduce the number of parameters to be estimated.
Though the multi-species production model is simpler than other ecosystem modelling approaches likewhole-of-ecosystem modelling, it still has lots of unknown parameters. To reduce the number ofparameters to be estimated, some bioenergetic and allometric reasoning by Yodzis and Innes (1992) was
incorporated over predator species. The maximum consumption and the rate of increase are linked withthe masses of predators ( W ) as

cmax,i = β Wi 0.75 ,(4)µi = γ Wi −0.25 .
Then the energy conversion factor was calculated as

=
Ei

µi
γ Wi −0.25==
δ Wi −1.
0.75
cmax,i β Wi

(5)

91

Note that the exponent in the rate of increase “-0.25” may not be suitable for marine mammals (Duncan
et al. 2007). Using a dataset of Duncan et al. 2007, the exponent for cetaceans is roughly estimated as 0.0315 and this was used as a proxy value for predators.
The past and newly available data on time series of abundance for all the component species andnutrition indices for the Antarctic minke whales are used for the estimation of the parameters using the
maximum likelihood method.

log Pt , s + ε t , s ,=log Pˆt , s

ε t , s ~ N (0, cvˆt2, s ).

log ( nutrition index )t =loga + log f Minke ( Bt ) + vt ,vt ~ N (0, σ 2 )Table 1. Summary of estimated and fixed parameters in the model (EC: equilibrium condition)
Parameter

Treatment

Initial population size in 1900/01 (P0)

Estimated separately for predators

Predators

Natural mortality (M)Fixed at some values(5 species)

Energy conversion (E)Estimated as a common coefficient (δ)

Density dependence (α or φ)

Solved by EC

Prey

Initial population size in 1900/01(B0)

Estimated(krill)Intrinsic rate of increase (r)Fixed at 0.5

Carrying capacity (K)Solved by EC

Maximum consumption (cmax)

A fixed common coefficient (β)

Functional
response

Prey biomass at which a half ofEstimated separately
predator consumption attains (H)Exponent (θ)

Fixed at 1 or 2

Constant coefficient (a)Estimated

Model errors variance

Estimated

Nutritional
indicators

3. Some remarks
This proposed research program includes the two Main Objectives I and II, but these are not necessarily
separated. The Main Objective I intends to contribute scientifically to the future application of the ISTsfor the Antarctic minke whales through the improvement of biological and ecological parameters andupdate of its stock structure hypotheses. The Main Objective II of this program also includes therelevance to the management through investigation of possibility of building ecosystem models. Those
works constitutes an important bridge between the two Main Objectives. More specifically, in theexisting RMP Implementation, species interactions are not taken into account explicitly neither in thetrials not for the catch limit. However, some adjustment to reflect this multispecies aspect would
contribute to improvement of operating models and harvest controls. For example, the ecosystem model
could give some information on changes in carrying capacity and provide a scenario for running "RMP"
simulation to see if the current single species CLA may or may not “work” (e.g. may fail to allow
harvests levels that are perfectly possible without putting a population at risk) under the changes in92

estimated carrying capacity. In this regard, this research objective could contribute to the future
improvement of the RMP in terms of species interactions.

References
Beddington, J.R. (1975) Mutual interference between parasites or predators and its effect on searchingefficiency. J. Animal Ecol., 44: 331–340
Duncan, R.P., Forsyth, D.M. and Hone, J. (2007) Testing the metabolic theory of ecology: allometricscaling exponents in mammals.. Ecology 88:324–333.
Kitakado, T., Murase, H., Tamura, T. and Yonezaki, S. 2014. An attempt to ecosystem modelling forspecies in Area IV in the Antarctic Ocean using JARPA and JARPAII data. Paper SC/F14/J26
presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit Research
Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 15pp.
Mori, M. and Butterworth, D.S. (2006) A first step towards modelling the krill – predator dynamics of
the Antarctic ecosystem. CCAMLR Science 13, 217–277.
Yodzis, P. and Innes, S. (1992) Body Size and Consumer-Resource Dynamics. Am. Nat. 139: 1151-1175.

93

Appendix 13
A: Schematic chart showing the nested structure of models, basic analyses and data/samples required toaccomplish the Main Objective II of NEWREP-A. Analyses added to NEWREP-A or adjusted based onrecommendations by the NEWREP-A Review Panel are red flagged. Analyses requiring methodologicaldevelopment to compare lethal and non-lethal methods are blue flagged. Redundant child nodes (e.g.
maturity status) are hidden (hidden nodes are indicated as circles). ASM: age at sexual maturity; AMW:
Antarctic minke whale; DSM: density surface model; SDM: species distribution model.

94

B: A schematic flow chart showing the steps from required samples and data to modeling exercises toachieve the Main Objective II in NEWREP-A. Samples and analyses recommended by the NEWREPA Review Panel have been included (italic and bold letters). Non-lethal methods will be evaluated in the
NEWREP-A program. The absence (as yet) of established analyses or sampling is illustrated by dottedlines.

95

C: Investigation of the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building
ecosystem models under the Main Objective II in NEWREP-A.

96

Appendix 14
Sample size calculation based on detectability of changes in the age-at-sexual maturity

1. Introduction
The age-at-sexual maturity (ASM) is an important indicator of ecological and nutritional conditions forwhale populations. Examination for the Antarctic minke whales based on the transition phase in the ear
plugs has shown that the ASM declined by around 3 years old from 1955 to 1970, when nutrition is
likely to have been better than in the past, because of the lowest food competition with the other baleen
whales which were highly depleted over that period. However, since then the trend has become stableor slightly increasing (Bando et al. 2014). This might be attributed to the increased food competition
and reflected to the decline of carrying capacity for the Antarctic minke whales (Pastene et al., 2014,
Punt, 2014), possibly due to the recent recovery of other competing species. The ASM has an impact on
the number of mature animals (especially females), and therefore possible future increases in the ASM
would affect the productivity and population dynamics of the Antarctic minke whales, which in turn has
implications for management.
Here, first analyses are conducted to see if the changes in the ASM have taken place over the last two
decades using maturity data taken from past JARPA and JARPA II samples. Secondly based on somespecified values for the change in ASM, simulation studies are performed to indicate the sample size
needed to detect the changes.

2. Conditioning: estimation of ASM50 using past JARPA and JARPAII data
Materials and Methods
The data employed are the maturity status of whales taken during the JARPA and JARPA II programsas determined from examination of the reproductive organs. The cohorts which are considered in thisanalysis are those from 1980 to 2000 (which are well sampled in the data available). Let Yta be theobserved number of female mature animals aged as a among the total sample size of age a animals in

N ta ). Yta is assumed to be distributed as a binomial distribution Bin( N , p ) ,where pta is the maturity probability. The maturity pta is further assumed to be a logistic function of
the t-year cohort (saytataage, in which the function’s point of symmetry corresponds to the age at 50% sexual maturity (sayASM50). The ASM50 is also considered to be cohort-specific or a function of cohort, where thisdifference is just a way of handling cohort as a continuous or categorical variable in terms of ageneralized linear model.
More specifically, the following three models are applied:

Model 1: logit pta =α + β t + γ a,(common intercept, cohort as a continuous variable)

Model 2: logit pta =α + βt + γ a,(common intercept, cohort as a categorical variable)

Model 3: logit pta =α t + βt + γ a,(cohort specific intercept, cohort as a categorical variable)

where the intercept α t controls the range of maturity, β or β t is a coefficient for cohort t anddetermines the ASM50, and γ is a coefficient for the continuous value of age a. The estimate of ASM50
is calculated by the usual transformation:

97

α β
ASM 50t =− t − t,γ γand its standard error is computed by the delta method.
For the model with continuous cohort values, the identification or otherwise of a yearly change in the
ASM50 is determined simply by whether or not the value estimated is significantly different from zero.
In contrast, for the model with categorical cohort dependence, a further linear regression analysis needs
to be conducted using the estimated ASM50 values. In this case, a linear model with inverse-varianceweighting is employed.

Figure 1-(a). Plots of the proportion of mature female minke whales against age for Area IV. Filled
circles are observed mature proportions, and the red (solid) and blue (dotted) lines are estimatedproportion mature curves with 95% confidence intervals, respectively, based on Model 3 with yearspecific ASM50 and slope.

98As shown in Figure 1-(a) and 1-(b), the range of ages which affect the analysis is narrower than therange covered by the plots. In fact, parameter estimates are not changed if data for a shorter range fromages 4 to 13 are used (see Figure 2 for an example).

Figure 1-(b). Plots of the proportion of mature female minke whales against age for Area V.

99

Figure 2. Comparison of ASM50 estimates in Area IV derived from the age range 4-13 against thosefrom the age range 1-30. The model applied is a categorical cohort model with a common intercept foreach set of data.

Results
In Area IV,. the estimated year effects were positive and significant for all the cases. The range of recent
incrase over 1980-2000 cohorts is from 0.038 (/year) to 0.076 (/year). On the other hand, In Area V,
negative year effects were evident. In addition, in each case the SE is roughtly 0.02, and therefore theeffect was not significant. In Area V, there is a mixture of the two putative stocks (I- and P- stocks) andthe boundary between them may have been changing over time (e.g. Kitakado et al. 2014). Furthermore,
although the maturity status of female whales does depend on the latitude in the Ross Sea, the habitatand ice conditions also change year by year. In this sense, it is not easy to infer the potential effect size
from Area V at this stage.

100

Table 1. Results for the estimation of year effect for the ASM50. The numbers in parentheses are thestandard errors. The values of comparable AIC are shown.
Area IV
Model

Year effectNo. parameters in GLM

AIC in GLM

1 (full data)
2 (full data)

0.0385 (0.0173)
0.0380 (0.0231) *3
22127.34122.411 (partial data)
2 (partial data)

0.0440 (0.0178)
0.0431 (0.0170)*

3
17

90.00
104.153 (full data)
3 (partial data)

0.0759 (0.0130)*

42
14

-

AreaV
Model
1 (full data)
2 (full data)

Year effect-0.0344 (0.0206)-0.0347 (0.0257)*

No. parameters in GLM
322

AIC in GLM
188.18191.181 (partial data)
2 (partial data)-0.0331(0.0221)-0.0331(0.0215)*317157.71160.633 (full data)
3 (partial data)-0.0255(0.0497)*

42
24

-

*Note that the year effect in Model 2 is estimated by the linear model based on the ASM50 estimated by the GLM
model. No year effect was estimated for the Model 3 with the full data beceause most of point estimates have large
uncertainty. Rather, results with a partial data set with SE less than 1 is meaningful.

101

Figure 3. Estimated ASM50 for Area IV for each of the three models. For Models 1 and 2, results basedon only cohort years with proportion mature indices greater than 0 and less than 1 are also shown because
essentially only those cohorts contribute to the estimate of the year effect. In Model 3, a similar treatment
with a criterion of the standard error less than 1 was applied.

102

Figure 4. Estimated ASM50 for Area V for two models.

103

Simulation for investigation of sample size
In the conditioning process for simulation setting, the potential effect size, a yearly change in the ASM50,
ranged from 0.038 to 0.076 in Area IV. These values are slightly smaller than those provided by thetransition phase analysis. Figure 5 showed time series of the mean age at sexual maturity for I-stock andP-stock female animals (Bando et al. 2014). Although it has been suggested that a fringe effect should
be considered in the analysis, even after allowing for this coarsely, it is clear that the ASM declined byat least around 3 years from 1955 to 1970, which means that the yearly change was -0.2 per year. The
extent of change observed in the past is greater than for recent estimated values, but if such a relatively
fast change were to happen again, this would have implications in a management context and would
also warrant further investigation of species competition and habitat utilization for prey. However, it
may not be plausible that the change starts in the rate of 0.2 per year. Rather it seems to start more slowly.
Here, target effect sizes are set as the maximum value of estimates of recent yearly changes (c.a. 0.075
per year) and a half value of the past extent (0.10). As a reference, another effect size, 0.05 (/year) is
also considered.

(I-stock)(P-stock)

Figure 5. Time series of the mean age at sexual maturity for I- and P- stocks female animals (extracted
from Bando et al. 2014). Open circles are the point estimates and the error bars are ranges of one sigma(SD).

In the simulation for this sample size investigation, it is assumed that female age composition in eachcohort is observed. Given the current sampling plan, in which sampling is conducted 2nd year in eachArea, maturity statuses for odd ages are observed in the odd year classes, and those for even ages in theeven year classes. It is also assumed that the age composition of sampled whales is stable and same as
the average of 1980-2000 cohorts (see Figure 6).
In the simulation, the following scenarios, with sample size for age range 4-13, and the performancemeasures indicated below are considered.

104

Figure 6. An assumed stable age composition of the year class (calculated from cohorts of 1980-2000)

Simulation scenarios
1) The effect size (yearly change in age-at-50%-sexual maturity, ASM50) is assumed to be 0.05, 0.075
or 0.10. ASM50 for the initial year class is 7.5 and it increases by the effect size under considerationfor each successive year under consideration.
2) Maturity range (MR=75%-25%) is assumed to be constant at 1.5, which is similar with the value
estimated
3) A total of simulation 1,000 replicas are generated.

Sample size
Female animals of age from 4 to 13 are used as the sample size in the simulation. The total sample size
required is a reciprocal of the sampling rate of female whales of age from 4 to 13. The proportion of
females with age range 4-13 years old in the yearly total catch varied from 0.10 to 0.19 during JARPA
and JARPA II period in area IV (Table 2). The mean value was 0.15. Therefore, the sampling rate of
0.15 was used for calculation of the total sample size.

105

Table 2. Number and proportion of female Antarctic minke whales with age range 4-13 years old
sampled during JARPA and JARPA II surveys in Area IV.
Research year
1987/88
1988/89
1989/90
1990/91
1991/92
1992/93
1993/94
1994/95
1995/96
1996/97
1997/98
1998/99
1999/2000
2000/01
2001/02
2002/03
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/102010/11

Number of
total samples
272

Number of femaleswith age range 4-13
46

Proportion of femaleswith age range 4-13
0.17

326

48

0.15

288

43

0.15

330

44

0.13

330

40

0.12

328

33

0.10

330

51

0.15

330

52

0.16

330

51

0.15

573

99

0.17

235

35

0.15

101

19

0.19

Mean

0.15

Performance measures
1) RRMSE (relative root mean squared error, a proxy for CV because the ASM50 can take negativevalues)RRMSE =

(θ − θ )
1 ∑
n

θ

i =1

2

i

n

,



where θ is the true parameter (ASM50, here), and θ i is the i-th estimate among the n replications
in each sample size.
2) Power of the statistical test for a null hypothesis of no year effect in age-at-sexual maturity

106

Results of simulation and conclusion
The simulation results are shown in Figure 7 (a)-(c). Of course, for the larger the effect size, the smaller
sample size is required to detect it. In the case of the smallest effect size (0.05), detection probability isquite small unless a larger sample size is made. However, such an effect may not be very urgent change
to detect within next 12 years’ research plan. In contrast, a bigger change has a larger implication if wemiss to detect. In case of the case with effect size = 0.10, in which result is shown in Fig 7-(c), a (female)sample size of 50 is a reasonable size in terms of the RRMSE (about 0.2 and less improvement if thesample size is increased) and statistical power (over 90% if 5% significance level is applied). This
sample size also guarantees a reasonable statistical power (close to 80% for 5% significance level) and
precision for the case of effect size 0.075 as shown in Figure 7(b).

Figure 7-(a). Simulation results for the effect size 0.05 (/year). In the top left panel, 1000 estimates of
ASM50 are plotted against the sample size of 4-13 female animals. Blue points are the mean of estimatesin 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.

107

Figure 7-(b). Simulation results for the effect size 0.075 (/year).

Figure 7-(c). Simulation results for the effect size 0.10 (/year).

108

It should be noted that no ageing errors were considered in the conditioning and simulation analyses. As
studies on the age-determination errors have been conducted (e.g. Kitakado et al. 2013), it might bepossible to take this into account in the sample size investigation. The age-reading error matrix isestimated as conditional probabilities for the expected observed ages given a true age. However, toaccount for this error in this study, an inverse transformation consisting of a conditional distribution fortrue ages given an observed age is performed. This transformation causes large uncertainty because thetrue age distribution is unknown in practice. The current age-reader has been in charge of age-reading
since JARPAII, and the same person will continue to provide age readings in this program, so thatconsistent age-reading performance will be maintained.

Figure 8. Age-reading errors estimated in Kitakado et al. (2013)

Conclusion
Based on the simulation above, an annual sample size of 50 female animals of age from 4 to 13 issuggested as appropriate. Therefore, taking account of the average sampling rate of those animals (i.e.
0.15), the total sample take required is calculated as 50/0.15=333.
The calculation is based on the estimated effect size from the direct observation of maturity in Area IV
as well as the past knowledge based on the longer time series from the transition phase for both thestocks. While the analysis of the past ASM data has shown that its changes could be varied by stock interms of the magnitude and direction, it could be assumed that it is biologically not plausible for different
stocks of the Antarctic minke whale to have radically different responses to external stimulus such asenvironmental fluctuations and food availability, especially when those stocks have diverged only
recently as in the case of the Antarctic minke whale stocks. Therefore it is not unreasonable tohypothesize that the sample size calculated from I-stock can be used as a proxy to P-stock or any otherstock that could occur in Areas IIIW and VIE at this stage. The result of the calculation itself remains
applicable to other Areas covered by this research program to detect whether a substantial change in the
ASM50 has occurred. It should be noted that, however, the change in the ASM must essentially be
pursued stock-wise. This proposed research program assumes that the samples will alternately be takenfrom areas IV (or IV+III) and V (or V+VI), and the annual sample size may be adjusted based on theacquired/updated knowledge on the stock structure after the first 6 years of this research for investigating
a better allocation of sample sizes.
109References
Bando, T., Kishiro, T. and Kato, H. 2014. Yearly trend in the age at sexual maturity of Antarctic minke
whales examined by transition phase in earplugs collected during JARPA and JARPAII surveys.
Paper SC/F14/J08 presented to the IWC SC JARPAII Special Permit Review Workshop,
February 2014, Tokyo, Japan (unpublished) 10pp.
Kitakado, T., Lockyer, C. and Punt, A.E. 2013 A statistical model for quantifying age-reading errors andits application to the Antarctic minke whales. J. Cetacean Res. and Manage. 13(3): 181–190.
Kitakado, T., Schweder, T., Kanda, N., Pastene, L.A. and Walløe, L. 2014. Dynamic population
segregation by genetics and morphometrics in Antarctic minke whales (SC/F14/J29rev). Paper
SC/65b/IA13 presented to the IWC Scientific Committee, May 2014 (unpublished). 25pp.
Pastene, L.A., Fujise, Y. and Hatanaka, H. 2014. The Japanese Whale Research Program under Special
Permit in the Antarctic - Phase II (JARPAII): origin, objectives, research progress made in the
period 2005/06-2010/2011 and relevance for management and conservation of whales and theecosystem. Paper SC/F14/J01 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese
JARPAII Special Permit Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 76pp.
Punt, A. 2014. Assessment of Antarctic minke whales using Statistical Catch-at-age Analysis. Paper
SC/F14/O02 presented to the Expert Workshop to Review the Japanese JARPAII Special Permit
Research Programme, February 2014 (unpublished). 99pp.

110