Mediterranean Monk Seal 

(Monachus monachus) 

5-Year Review: 

Summary and Evaluation 

Photo Credit: MOm / A. A. Karamanlidis 

National Marine Fisheries Service
 

Office of Protected Resources
 

Silver Spring, MD
 

September 2017
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5-YEAR REVIEW 

Mediterranean monk seal 

(Monachus monachus) 

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION
 

1.1 Reviewers
 

Lead Regional or Headquarters Office:
 

Sasha Doss and Brendan Newell, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National 

Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Protected Resources, (301) 427-8403 

1.2 Methodology used to complete the review: 

A 5-year review is a periodic analysis of a species’ status conducted to ensure that the listing 

classification of a species as threatened or endangered on the List of Endangered and Threatened 

Wildlife and Plants (List) (50 CFR 17.11 – 17.12) is accurate. The 5-year review is required by 

section 4(c)(2) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) and was prepared 

pursuant to the joint National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife 5­

year Review Guidance and template (USFWS and NMFS 2006). The NMFS Office of Protected 

Resources led the 5-year review with input from NMFS regional offices and science centers. We 

relied on peer-reviewed publications, government and technical reports, conference papers, 

dissertations, and theses. We gathered information through March 2017. This review relies 

heavily on two documents: a review paper by Karamanlidis et al. (2015) and on the 2015 IUCN 

assessment (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). The information on the Mediterranean monk 

seal (Monachus monachus) biology and habitat, threats, and conservation efforts were 

summarized and analyzed in light of the ESA section 4(a)(1) factors (see Section 2.3.2.1) to 

determine whether a reclassification or delisting may be warranted (see Section 3.0). NMFS 

initiated a 5-year review of the Mediterranean monk seal and solicited information from the 

public on September 1, 2016 (81 FR 60347). NMFS received no public comments on this 

species. 

1.3 Background 

1.3.1 FR Notice citation announcing initiation of this review 

81 FR 60347, September 1, 2016 

1.3.2 Listing history 

Original Listing 

Federal Register notice: 35 FR 8491 

Date listed: June 2, 1970 

Entity listed: Species 

Classification: Endangered 

1.3.3 Associated rulemakings 

None 

1
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.3.4 Review History 

This is the first, formal 5-Year Review for the Mediterranean monk seal. 

1.3.5 Species’ Recovery Priority Number at start of 5-year review 

Not applicable 

1.3.6 Recovery Plan or Outline 

Not applicable – we determined that a recovery plan would not promote the conservation of the 

species because it exists solely in foreign waters. 

2.0 REVIEW ANALYSIS 

2.1 Application of the 1996 Distinct Population Segment (DPS) policy1 

2.1.1 Is the species under review a vertebrate? 

X Yes, go to section 2.1.2
 

____ No, go to section 2.2
 

2.1.2 Is the species under review listed as a DPS? 

____ Yes, go to section 2.1.3
 

X No, go to section 2.1.4
 

2.1.3 Was the DPS listed prior to 1996? 

____ Yes
 

____ No
 

1 To be considered for listing under the ESA, a group of organisms must constitute a "species," which is defined in 

section 3 of the ESA to include “any subspecies of fish or wildlife or plants, and any distinct population segment 

(DPS) of any species of vertebrate fish or wildlife which interbreeds when mature.” NMFS and USFWS jointly 

published a policy regarding the recognition of DPSs of vertebrate species under the Endangered Species Act (DPS 

Policy, 61 FR 4722; February 7, 1996). 

“DPS” is not a scientifically defined term; it is a term of art that is used in the context of ESA law and policy. 

Furthermore, when passing the provisions of the ESA that give us authority to list DPSs, Congress indicated that this 

provision should be used sparingly. We have discretion with regard to listing DPSs and, in order to be consistent 

with the directive of the Congressional report that followed the introduction of the DPS language in the ESA to 

identify DPSs sparingly, we will generally not, on our own accord, evaluate listings below the taxonomic species or 

subspecies level if the best available information indicates that the species or subspecies is in danger of extinction 

throughout all or a significant portion of its range. We should only identify DPSs if there is an overriding 

conservation benefit to the species. 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.1.3.1 Prior to this 5-year review, was the DPS classification reviewed to ensure it meets 

the 1996 policy standards? 

____ Yes, provide citation and go to section 2.1.4
 

____ No, go to section 2.1.3.2
 

2.1.3.2 Does the DPS listing meet the discreteness and significance elements of the 1996 

DPS policy? 

____ Yes, discuss how it meets the DPS policy, and go to section 2.1.4 

No, discuss how it is not consistent with the DPS policy and consider the 5­

year review completed. Go to section 2.4., Synthesis. 

2.1.4 Is there relevant new information for this species regarding the application of the DPS 

policy? 

X Yes, See section 4.0 Recommendations for Future Actions. 

No, go to section 2.2., Recovery Criteria 

2.2 Recovery Criteria 

2.2.1 Does the species have a final, approved recovery plan containing objective, 

measurable criteria? 

____ Yes
 

X No
 

2.2.2 Adequacy of recovery criteria. 

2.2.2.1 Do the recovery criteria reflect the best available and most up-to date information 

on the biology of the species and its habitat? 

____ Yes
 

____ No
 

2.2.2.2 Are all of the 5 listing factors that are relevant to the species addressed in the 

recovery criteria (and is there no new information to consider regarding existing or new 

threats)? 

____ Yes
 

____ No
 

2.2.3 List the recovery criteria as they appear in the recovery plan, and discuss how each 

criterion has or has not been met, citing information 

Not applicable 

3
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.3 Updated Information and Current Species Status 

2.3.1 Biology and Habitat 

2.3.1.1 New information on the species’ biology and life history: 

Mediterranean monk seals Monachus monachus are phocids or true (earless) seals and are 

one of the few pinniped species, along with members of the closely related genus 

Neomonachus, to reside in tropical and subtropical waters (Gilmartin and Forcada 2002). 

The Mediterranean monk seal is considered the rarest and most endangered pinniped and 

exists primarily as three geographically and genetically isolated subpopulations in the 

eastern Mediterranean Sea, off the coasts of the Cabo Blanco peninsula (on the borders of 

Mauritania and Western Sahara), and throughout the archipelago of Madeira (Karamanlidis 

et al. 2015). 

The average adult monk seal ranges from 7 to 9 feet (2.3 to 2.8 meters) nose to tail 

(Gilmartin and Forcada 2002), and typically weighs between 530 and 660 pounds (240 and 

300 kilograms). Females are generally smaller than males (Johnson et al. 2006). Maximum 

weights of 881 and 665 pounds (400 and 302 kg) have been reported for adult male and 

pregnant female monk seals respectively (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). Monk seal pups are 

typically 2.9 to 3.4 feet in length (0.9 to 1.0 meters) and weigh between 33 and 44 pounds 

(15 and 20 kilograms) (Johnson et al. 2006). The average length of a pup at birth in the 

Cabo Blanco and eastern Mediterranean subpopulations is 3.3 feet (1 meter) (Marchessaux 

1989, Samaranch and González 2000, Dendrinos 2011). 

Several morphological differences characterize the different developmental stages of the 

monk seal (González et al. 1996, Samaranch and González 2000). Newborn pups have a 

black or dark brown, woolly coat called “lanugo” (Figure 1a). The coat is interrupted by a 

white, sometimes spotted, patch on the ventral side (i.e., the belly) of the seal. The shape, 

size, spot-pattern, and position of the patch varies between seals and can be used to identify 

individual seals and their gender prior to the first molting (Badosa et al. 1998). When the 

pup is approximately four to eight weeks old, the first molt occurs, and short, glossy, grey 

hair replaces the long, black lanugo (Figure 1b). A seal’s first molt may last between one 

and three weeks (Mursaloglo 1986, Androukaki et al. 2002, Dendrinos 2011), and is not 

associated with weaning as it is in other seal species (Badosa et al. 2006). Molting in 

Mediterranean monk seals has a consistent pattern, beginning at the head and progressing 

anteriorly and distally on the body (Androukaki et al. 2002). Female pups tend to molt 

earlier and more quickly than male pups, although the resulting gray dorsal and white 

ventral pelage is similar. Molting of juvenile and adult seals occurs throughout the year with 

pre- and post-molt phases (Androukaki et al. 1999, Güçlüsoy and Savaş 2003, Pastor and 

Aguilar 2003). Mediterranean monk seals also shed large layers of epidermis during the 

molting process, and molting can occur partially in the water (Badosa 1998). At the adult 

and juvenile stages, the seal’s coat becomes short and bristly (i.e., hair length of about 0.5 

cm; Ling 1970). Adult males have a black pelage and usually retain the white ventral patch 

(Figure 1c). In contrast, adult females typically exhibit a brown or gray pelage with a lighter 

belly (Figure 1d; Karamanlidis et al. 2015). The development of the adult male pelage takes 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

approximately four years with two molts per year (Badosa et al. 2006). Once the seals reach 

sexual maturity, it is also common to find scarring on the throats and hind flippers of males 

and on the backs of females from mating and other social interactions (Grau et al. 1994, 

Forcada and Aguilar 2000, Samaranch and González 2000). 

Figure 1. The various morphologies exhibited by different developmental stages of the Mediterranean monk 

seal: (a) newborn pup with lanugo and the white ventral patch, (b) older pup going through the first molt, (c) 

adult male with the white ventral patch and scarring on throat, flippers, and back, and (d) adult female with a 

lighter belly and scarring on the back. Sources: Eduardo Saiz; Kıraç and Güçlüsoy (2008). 

Male Mediterranean monk seals mature later in life than females. Female Mediterranean 

monk seals typically reach sexual maturity between 5 and 6 years of age, while the earliest 

age males have been observed mating is 7 (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). Over the last 30 years, 

however, female monk seals have been observed mating earlier at 2.5 and 2.1 years of age 

(Gazo et al. 2000, unpublished data, Fundación para la Conservación de la Bioversidad y su 

Hábitat [CBD-Habitat])—the lowest age band for any phocid species. Gestation lasts 9-11 

months (Karamanlidis et al. 2015), and females give birth to one pup (King 1956). Female 

monk seals can give birth in consecutive years (Pastor and Aguilar 2003), and often give 

birth within the same few days each year (Pastor and Aguilar 2003). Mating of 

Mediterranean monk seals takes place in the water (Pastor et al. 1998). 

Although pups may be born year-round, most pupping takes place in autumn (Karamanlidis et al. 

2015). In the Cabo Blanco subpopulation, births have been concentrated from April-November 

with a peak in September (Cedenilla et al. 2007). Throughout the rest of the species’ range, 

where monitoring data are available, pupping usually occurs between October and November 

with 2-3 pups born annually in Madeira (Pires et al. 2008) and about 40 pups born annually in 

Greece (unpublished data, Hellenic society for the Study and Protection of the Monk Seal 

[MOm]). During lactation, females may leave their pups unattended to forage (Gazo and Aguilar 

2005). On average, these foraging trips last about nine hours, although trips as long as 17 hours 

have been recorded (Gazo and Aguilar 2005). Fostering of unrelated pups and milk-stealing are 

common (Karamanlidis et al. 2015), and long-term fostering has been observed in the Cabo 

Blanco subpopulation (Aguilar et al. 2007). Pups are weaned and begin to independently forage 

at about 4-5 months (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

5
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Historically, monk seals hauled out on open beaches for resting and pupping, but due to 

centuries of human persecution and disturbance, they have been extirpated from much of 

their original habitat (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015, Karamanlidis et al. 2015). Now in 

response to anthropogenic pressures, females tend to give birth in remote, marine caves. 

Pupping females prefer caves where they and their pups cannot be seen, that have some 

light, that have multiple entrances/escape routes, are not easily accessible to humans, that 

have a low risk of pup washout, and that have interior beaches with soft substrate 

(Dendrinos et al. 2007). The size of caves and the density of seals within caves used for 

pupping varies throughout the species’ range. In Cabo Blanco, the entire monk seal 

population uses less than five large, neighboring marine caves (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

The Madeira and eastern Mediterranean subpopulations use dozens or hundreds of small 

caves (Karamanlidis et al. 2004, Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

In contrast to other pinniped species, information on the diving behavior of the Mediterranean 

monk seal is scarce. Generally, Mediterranean monk seals are thought to dive and feed in 

shallow, nearshore waters (Gazo and Aguilar 2005). However, there is some evidence to suggest 

that some seals will travel more than 20 km offshore to forage (Gazo and Aguilar 2005). Dive 

durations are short compared to other phocids; the average dive is only about five to seven 

minutes, with a maximum-recorded dive time of 18 minutes (Kıraç et al. 2002). There are some 

regional variations in diving behavior. Seals at Cabo Blanco typically make more shallow dives 

than their eastern Mediterranean counterparts. However, this is likely because the seals at Cabo 

Blanco are constrained by local topographic features. Pups often enter the water within their first 

week of life and increase their diving capacity with age. By the end of lactation, pups are capable 

of spending approximately three minutes at depths greater than 10 meters (Karamanlidis et al. 

2015). Seals in the Mediterranean have been observed to occasionally travel long distances 

(~288 km in three months) (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). 

Mediterranean monk seals are considered opportunistic predators (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

They exploit a variety of forage including, bony fishes, cephlapods (mainly the common octopus 

Octopus vulgaris), and crustaceans. Over 530 prey species were found in the stomachs of 

deceased seals in Greece (Pierce et al. 2011). Cephlapods dominate the diet of seals in the 

Aegean Sea (Salman et al. 2001), and are the most important prey item for seals residing along 

the Greek coast in terms of number and biomass consumed (Pierce et al. 2011). Data from 

multiple sources and methods suggest that Mediterranean monk seals primarily feed along the 

continental shelf (Marchessaux 1989, Salman et al. 2001, Pierce et al. 2011, Karamanlidis et al. 

2014). 

6
 
 

 

 

2.3.1.2 Abundance, population trends (e.g. increasing, decreasing, stable), demographic 

features (e.g., age structure, sex ratio, family size, birth rate, age at mortality, mortality 

rate, etc.), or demographic trends: 

The current distribution of the Mediterranean monk seal encompasses the eastern Mediterranean 

and the Northeast Atlantic (i.e., the peninsula of Cabo Blanco on the coasts of Western Sahara 

and Mauritania and the archipelago of Madeira) (Figure 2). Each location supports an isolated 

subpopulation of seals. Historically, the species was present throughout the Mediterranean and 

Black seas and throughout North Atlantic waters from Cabo Blanco to Spain (Figure 2; Johnson 

et al. 2006). 

Figure 2. Current and historical distributions of the Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus. In the figure, 

Cabo Blanco is referred to as “Cap Blanc.” Source: Matthias Schnellmann/The Monachus Guardian 2016 

The Mediterranean monk seal is thought to have been abundant throughout this historical range 

as there was extensive exploitation of the species for oil and pelts (Marchessaux 1989). Fifteenth 

century Portuguese hunters reported as many as 5,000 animals in the Western Sahara region 

(Monod 1932). The current population of Mediterranean monk seals is limited to 600 or 700 

individuals with 350 to 450 mature individuals (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015, Karamanlidis 

et al. 2015), and in the Cabo Blanco subpopulation the abundance of Mediterranean monk seals 

is estimated to represent about 3% of its historic abundance (Pastor et al. 2004). 

Conservation efforts initiated over the past few decades seem to have at least partially stymied 

the population’s decline, as the current overall abundance of seals is substantially higher than the 

7
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

350 to 450 monk seals estimated in 2010 (Aguilar and Lowry 2010).2 It is unclear when this 

increasing trend began and if it will continue (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). 

The eastern Mediterranean subpopulation is currently the largest with fewer than 350 adult seals 

(Güçlüsoy et al. 2004). Prior to 1997, Cabo Blanco represented the largest subpopulation of the 

species with about 300 individuals, but a mass mortality event starting in the spring of 1997 

reduced the population by more than 67% (Forcada et al. 1999, Gazo et al. 1999, Forcada and 

Aguilar 2000). The archipelago of Madeira has the fewest seals at approximately 40 individuals 

(Pires et al. 2008, Pires 2011). Each of the subpopulations have shown recent small increases and 

signs of recovery. The Cabo Blanco subpopulation was estimated at 159 adult seals in 2013 and 

at 220 adult seals in 2016 (Martinez-Jauregui et al. 2012, Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

Additionally, seals in the Madeira archipelago have begun recolonizing the main island of 

Madeira with some possible indications of pupping (Pires 2011, Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 

2015). 

These small, localized recoveries are likely the result of four factors (Notarbartolo di Sciara and 

Kotomatas 2016). First, the importance of artisanal fishing in many economies has declined. As 

the costs of the profession increase, more people, particularly younger generations, opt for other 

employment. Over time, this likely has reduced the number of negative interactions between 

fisheries and monk seals. Second, a shift in public opinion regarding environmental stewardship 

and animal welfare has created substantial opposition to the killing of monk seals. In Greece, the 

public now places substantial nonuse value on the monk seal (e.g., finding inherent value in its 

existence; Langford et al. 2001). Third, the work of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) has 

greatly improved monk seal conservation via seal rehabilitation, research on the species biology, 

managing marine protected areas (MPAs), and generally building public support for the species. 

Finally, monk seal habitat is often inaccessible to humans, and this refuge may have enabled the 

population to avoid extinction. 

Furthermore, there may be another subpopulation of seals in eastern Morocco/Algeria, but there 

has not been systematic monitoring to discern the status of this population (Mo et al. 2011, 

Karamanlidis et al. 2015). Vagrant individuals have also been recently sighted throughout the 

Mediterranean in areas where the species was thought to be extinct (e.g., in Albania, Croatia, 

Israel, Lebanon, Spain, etc.) (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

The subpopulation in Cabo Blanco and the seals around Gyaros Island (Greece) are the only 

groups of monk seals to preserve the social structure of a colony (Martinez-Jauregui et al. 2012, 

Karamanlidis et al. 2013). The function of the colony structure in monk seals, and thus the 

conservation implications of retaining colony structure, are not well understood (AcevedoGutiérrez 2009). Although monk seals are thought to be primarily solitary animals, they do on 

occasion aggregate into small colonies—such as those mentioned above—and interact with other 

individuals (Karamanlidis et al. 2013). Generally, the gathering of individuals into colonies has 

2 Although there have been improvements in the methodologies used to study monk seals (e.g., the remote use of 

infrared photo cameras in caves), it is unlikely that the estimated increase in population size was substantially 

influenced by differences in methodology as the methods used to calculate abundance (although different by 

location) have been largely similar across time (e.g., Pires and Neves 2001, Pires et al. 2008 and Karamanlidis et al. 

2009). 

8
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

been hypothesized to provide several benefits, including improved reproduction and breeding 

success, higher pup survival, and reduced predation (Acevedo-Gutiérrez 2009). For instance, the 

formation of colonies can benefit breeding success via access to and competition for mates, and 

pup survival when milk-stealing and/or fostering are common, both of which have been observed 

in the Mediterranean monk seal. The formation of colonies in all pinniped species 

seems to be highly dependent on the distribution of females and suitable habitat (AcevedoGutiérrez 2009). 

Defining demographic parameters of the various monk seal subpopulations has been fraught with 

difficulty given the inaccessibility of their habitat. However, the development of novel methods 

involving the attachment of video cameras to cave entrances has improved our ability to monitor 

seals, identify individuals, and estimate pup survival (e.g., Gazo et al. 2000). Current estimations 

of abundance and annual pup production can be found in Table 1. 

2.3.1.3 Genetics, genetic variation, or trends in genetic variation (e.g., loss of genetic 

variation, genetic drift, inbreeding, etc.): 

Genetic analyses of both nuclear and mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acids (DNAs) show that 

each subpopulation retains very little genetic diversity (Pastor et al. 2004, 2007; Karamanlidis et 

al. 2014). Microsatellite variation in Mediterranean monk seals is among the lowest reported for 

any mammal, and similarly low levels of variation have only been documented in a handful of 

severely bottlenecked species, such as the northern hairy-nosed wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii 

(Taylor et al. 1994). Among pinnipeds, only the Hawaiian monk seal (Gemmell et al. 1997, 

Kretzmann et al. 2001) and northern elephant seal Mirounga angustirostris (Garza 1998) have 

similarly low genetic variability, and both of those species have experienced well-documented 

reductions in population size. Despite the Mediterranean monk seals’ small population size, the 

amount of variability in the number of polymorphic loci and its allelic diversity are higher than 

that exhibited by the Hawaiian monk seal and northern elephant seal (Pastor et al. 2004). 

Trends in the data show a loss of genetic diversity over the last few centuries (Karamanlidis and 

Dendrinos 2015). Genetic and skull morphology data suggest substantial genetic differences 

between the Atlantic and Mediterranean subpopulations of Mediterranean monk seal 

(Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). While genetically isolated, all haplotypes are closely 

related, suggesting an evolutionarily recent dispersal event from one ancestral population, 

followed by a human driven reduction of monk seals into many subpopulations—most of which 

have been extirpated (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015, Karamanlidis et al. 2016). The distinct 

mtDNA subpopulations support observations that this species has a high rate of philopatry 

(Karamanlidis et al. 2016). 

The species’ lack of genetic diversity is likely due to reduced effective population size, severe 

population bottlenecks, and fragmentation (Pastor et al. 2004, 2007; Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

Inbreeding depression and reduced fitness often occur at such low levels of genetic diversity and 

may be occurring in the various subpopulations (Jimenez et al. 1994, Keller et al. 1994, Madsen 

et al. 1996). Ultimately, there is uncertainty related to how this low genetic diversity contributes 

9
 
 

 

 

 

 

Table 1. Regional estimates of abundance and annual pup production (pups∙year-1) for the Mediterranean monk seal. 

Annual Pup 

No. of Production 

Area Country Subpopulation Individuals (pups∙year-1) Source(s) 

Gyaros island Greece Eastern Mediterranean 65-70 9.75 Dendrinos et al. 2008, 

MOm 2015 

Northern Greece Eastern Mediterranean 52 8.4 Dendrinos et al. 1999, 

Sporades Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 

2009, Notarbartolo di 

Sciara and Kotomatas 2016 

Kimolos and Greece Eastern Mediterranean 49 7.9 Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 

Polyaigos islands 2009, Notarbartolo di 

Sciara and Kotomatas 2016 

North Karpathos Greece Eastern Mediterranean 23 3.7 Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 

and Saria islands 2009, Notarbartolo di 

Sciara and Kotomatas 2016 

Ionian islands Greece Eastern Mediterranean 20 -- Panou 2009 

Northern Aegean Turkey Eastern Mediterranean 35 -- Güçlüsoy et al. 2004 

Southern Aegean Turkey Eastern Mediterranean 28 -- Güçlüsoy et al. 2004 

Mediterranean Turkey Eastern Mediterranean >40 -- Gücü et al. 2009b 

Coast 

(Levantine Sea) 

-­ Cyprus Eastern Mediterranean <10 1 Demetropoulos 2011, 

Marcou 2015, Gücü et al. 

2009a 

Cilician Basin Turkey Eastern Mediterranean 22 2 Gücü et al. 2004 

Foça Turkey Eastern Mediterranean 9 1 Güçlüsoy and Savaş 2003

-­ Mauritania Cabo Blanco 317 51 Gazo et al. 1999 

(before 1997) 

-­ Mauritania Cabo Blanco 109 25 González et al. 2002 

(after 1997) 

-­ Portugal Madeira 20 3 Neves and Pires 1998, Pires 

et al. 2007 

Black Sea Turkey -­ 2-3 -- Güçlüsoy et al. 2004 

Sea of Marmara Turkey -­ 1 -- Güçlüsoy et al. 2004 

to the extinction risk of the species. Although it leaves the species vulnerable to catastrophic 

events, such as disease outbreaks and toxic algal blooms (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015, 

Karamanlidis et al. 2016), many pinniped species have been able to recover from severe 

bottlenecks and small population sizes (Stewart et al. 1994, Atkinson 1997, Gerber and Hilborn 

2001). 

2.3.1.4 Taxonomic classification or changes in nomenclature: 

There are no changes in the taxonomic classification or nomenclature for the Mediterranean 

monk seal. 

10
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kingdom: Animalia
 

Phylum: Chordata
 

Class: Mammalia
 

Order: Pinnipedia
 

Family: Phocidae
 

Genus: Monachus
 

Species: Monachus
 

The Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus is the only representative of the genus
 

Monachus. Their closest taxonomic relatives are seals of the genus Neomonachus: the Hawaiian
 

monk seal Neomonachus schauinslandi and the extinct Caribbean monk seal Neomonachus
 

tropicalis. The genus Monachus previously included all three species until research showed that 

molecular, morphological, and temporal divergence between the Mediterranean and New World
 

monk seals (i.e., Hawaiian and Caribbean) was equivalent to or greater than between sister
 

genera of other phocids (Scheel et al. 2014). As a result, Caribbean and Hawaiian Monk Seals
 

were reclassified together in the new genus Neomonachus.
 

There is some debate regarding the origin of the three species as a whole, as well as the 

processes giving rise to the disjunct distribution of the Mediterranean monk seal (e.g., Fyler et al.
 

2005, Fulton and Strobeck 2010, Schultz 2011). However, the most recent research suggests the 

Neomonachus and Monachus genera diverged approximately 6.3 million years ago (Scheel et al.
 

2014). This split between the new world monk seals and the Mediterranean monk seals is likely
 

far older than the basal divergence within any other genus of modern seals (Scheel et al. 2014). 

2.3.1.5 Spatial distribution, trends in spatial distribution (e.g. increasingly fragmented, 

increased numbers of corridors, etc.), or historic range (e.g. corrections to the historical 

range, change in distribution of the species’ within its historic range, etc.): 

Mediterranean monk seals were once continuously distributed throughout the Black Sea, the 

Mediterranean Sea, and the Northeastern Atlantic from Spain to the Cabo Blanco peninsula, 

including the Azores, Madeira, and the Canary Islands (Figure 2). But human exploitation 

drastically reduced and fragmented the seal population (Johnson and Lavigne 1999b, Johnson 

2004, Stringer et al. 2008, Brito 2012, González 2015), and now the seals exist as three (possibly 

four) fragmented subpopulations (i.e., eastern Mediterranean, Cabo Blanco, and Madeira and 

possibly Morocco/Algeria; Figure 2; Mo et al. 2011, Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

In the Mediterranean, the species is found mainly along the mainland coasts of Greece, Cyprus, 

and western and southern Turkey and around islands in the Ionian and Aegean Seas. The species 

previously occupied the Black Sea, but individuals have not been observed there since 1997 

(Kıraç and Savaş 1996, Kıraç 2011). Some individuals still occupy the Sea of Marmara (Inanmaz 

et al. 2014). 

11
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.3.1.6 Habitat or ecosystem conditions (e.g., amount, distribution, and suitability of the 

habitat or ecosystem): 

Historically, monk seals hauled out on open beaches to rest and pup (Johnson and Lavigne 

1999b, Johnson 2004), but centuries of persecution have relegated the species to remote marine 

caves. Usually found along cliff-lined coasts, these caves are isolated and often inaccessible to 

humans. Cave selection by monk seals is influenced by a variety of parameters including, the 

cave’s internal morphology, the tide (in the Atlantic populations), number of entrances, etc. In 

Cabo Blanco, less than five neighboring caves are used (González et al. 1997) compared to the 

hundreds used by seals in Madeira (Karamanlidis et al. 2004) and the eastern Mediterranean 

(Gücü et al. 2004, MOm 2007, 2008, 2009). 

There are a few protected areas where human pressure is minimal and where beach haul outs and 

births still frequently occur, such as the Desertas Island Nature Reserve in the Madeira 

archipelago (Pires and Neves 2001) and the island of Gyaros in Greece (Dendrinos et al. 2008). 

Industrial development and increased tourism activity, particularly in the Mediterranean, have 

further displaced the seals. Construction of power plants, roads, and houses along the coast have 

made many of the remaining beaches unsuitable (Kıraç and Güçlüsoy 2008, Karamanlidis and 

Dendrinos 2015). Increased tourism activities, especially diving, has also driven seals from 

hauling out on open beaches and has even caused them to vacate otherwise preferred marine 

caves (see Section 2.3.2.1 for more information on destruction, modification, or curtailment 

of habitat or range). 

2.3.2 Five-Factor Analysis (threats, conservation measures, and regulatory mechanisms) 

Threats to the Mediterranean monk seal vary regionally, but the primary threats to the species are 

displacement and habitat deterioration, deliberate killing by humans, and fisheries bycatch and 

entanglement (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). 

2.3.2.1 Present or threatened destruction, modification or curtailment of its habitat or 

range: 

Although the Mediterranean monk seal was historically distributed throughout the Mediterranean 

and the Northeast Atlantic, the species is now considered functionally extinct throughout much 

of this historical range, including Albania, Egypt, France (including Corsica), Israel, Italy 

(including Sardinia and Sicily), Lebanon, Libya, Spain (including the Balearic and Canary 

Islands), Syrian Arab Republic, Tunisia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Montenegro, 

Romania, and Slovenia (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). Greece, Turkey, and Cyprus 

represent the species’ last strongholds in the Mediterranean (Johnson and Lavigne 1999a). 

The curtailment of the Mediterranean monk seal’s range is largely due to habitat deterioration 

and human encroachment. Anthropogenic pressures forced the species to shift from hauling out 

on open beaches to inaccessible marine caves (Karamanlidis et al. 2015), which had devastating 

effects on pup survival. Increasing human presence in the forms of tourism and development 

12
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(largely to support the tourism industry) has reduced the availability of suitable habitat, 

particularly in the Mediterranean (Johnson and Lavigne 1999a). 

In Turkey, the construction of hotels, roads, houses, and thermal and nuclear power plants has 

been linked to substantial decreases in pup survival (Johnson and Lavigne 1999a, Karamanlidis 

and Dendrinos 2015). Some hotels have even been constructed directly atop marine caves used 

by the seals for breeding. These projects are assumed to have major impacts on the occupation of 

nearby caves, although changes in cave usage have not been formally documented. 

While construction represents a substantial threat to the seals, tourism (and the construction it 

prompts) is arguably the largest threat monk seals now face. Disturbance by high-intensity 

tourism may be responsible for somewhat recent extirpations of small surviving populations in 

the Mediterranean. In Turkey, diving tourists frequent monk seal habitat and pupping activity has 

ceased at many of these sites. In addition to abandonment of caves, disturbance caused by 

tourists has led to the separation of pups from the mother (Ronald and Yeroulanos 1984), 

severance of the maternal bond (van Haaften and Reiner 1984, Israëls 1992), and even to the 

abortion of pups (Ronald and Duguy 1979). Increased boat activity (for pleasure boating, 

recreational fishing, diving, etc.) has led to a number of boat strikes and has allowed tourists to 

reach even the most isolated areas. Tourism continues to threaten this species in Morocco, 

Greece, and Turkey (Johnson and Lavigne 1999a). 

The Mediterranean is one of the most popular vacation destinations in the world. The area 

attracts over 110 million people each year, mostly in the months of July and August (Johnson 

and Lavigne 1999a). This peak influx of tourists partially coincides with the breeding season of 

seals, which can exacerbate the impact of tourism on the eastern Mediterranean subpopulation 

(Johnson and Lavigne 1999a). 

In addition to curtailment of habitat by tourism and construction, Jepson and Law (2016) found 

that contamination from polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in apex predators, such as marine 

mammals, poses a particular threat in the Mediterranean and the Iberian Atlantic. Seals of the 

Western Sahara subpopulation were found to exhibit very low levels of PCBs (lower than levels 

found in most pinnipeds) that were unlikely to cause any deleterious effects (Borrell et al. 1997, 

Borrell et al. 2007). However, the eastern Mediterranean subpopulation exhibited much higher 

levels of PCBs that have been associated with impairment of immune function and a reduction in 

reproductive fitness in other seal species (Helle et al. 1976, Reijnders 1980, Baker 1989, 

Brouwer et al. 1989, Swart et al. 1994, 1995). The relative proportion of different congeners in 

relation to the total PCB load (congener/tPCB) also suggests that the pollutants in seals of the 

eastern Mediterranean subpopulation are of primarily agricultural origin (Borrell et al. 2007). 

Lastly, the invasion of Lessepsian fishes, such as the silver-cheeked toadfish Lagocephalus 

sceleratus (a toxic pufferfish), could have a negative impact on Mediterranean monk seals. In 

addition to their spines that become a hazard to predators when the fish expand, these pufferfish 

also carry the strong paralytic toxin, tetrodotoxin. Hence, consuming a pufferfish can prove fatal 

(Beköz 2013). Thus far, pufferfish have been implicated in only one monk seal death in Cyprus 

(Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). 

13
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.3.2.2 Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes: 

Historically, Mediterranean monk seals were exploited for their fur, oil, meat, and for medicinal 

uses. Initial exploitation occurred in small numbers not likely to influence the species’ 

persistence (Johnson et al. 2006). The seals were easy to capture because of their gregarious 

nature. Exploitation of the seal grew and peaked during the Roman era (~27 BC-476 AD) likely 

depleting the species. Following the fall of the empire, the monk seal may have staged a 

temporary recovery, but not to earlier population levels. Commercial exploitation peaked again 

in the Middle Ages in the Madeira and Canary Islands, and the Bay of Dhakla (Western Sahara). 

It was at this time that the seals began to seek refuge in remote caves (Johnson et al. 2006). 

The seals continued to be heavily persecuted by fishermen for most of the 20th century. However, 

during this time, interactions with fishermen transitioned from exploitation to deliberate killings, 

mostly in retaliation for lost catch or ruined gear. Currently there is no commercial exploitation 

of the species (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). 

Mediterranean monk seals made relatively frequent appearances in traveling shows, fairs, zoos, 

and aquaria, and capture of the seals for the entertainment industry has been linked to their 

disappearance from certain areas, including Croatia and the Black Sea (Kıraç and Savaş 1996, 

Kıraç 2001, Johnson 2004). The appearance of Mediterranean “sea calves” in circuses has been 

documented as far back as ancient Rome (Johnson and Lavigne 1999a). The capture of monk 

seals for various zoos and aquaria continued across Europe during the 20th century (Mursaloglu 

1964). 

Historical evidence suggests that the seals did poorly in captivity (Johnson 2004); due to a poor 

understanding of the seals’ diet and unsanitary conditions, the seals often survived only a few 

weeks or months (Johnson and Lavigne 1994). Because of this, the captive breeding of monk 

seals has been met with substantial opposition from the scientific and conservation communities 

(Johnson and Lavigne 1994). Currently, there have been no known successful attempts at captive 

breeding, and with the exception of orphaned monk seal pups detained for rehabilitation, there 

are currently no Mediterranean monk seals in captivity (Johnson and Lavigne 1994). 

2.3.2.3 Disease or predation: 

Disease 

Viral outbreaks (particularly of morbilliviruses) and paralysis following paralytic shellfish 

poisoning are the primary disease-related threats. An outbreak of morbillivirus was previously 

indicated in the mass die-off of two indigenous seal species in northwestern Europe in 1988 

(Osterhaus et al. 1997), causing the death of about 20,000 seals. Morbillivirus may also be the 

cause of another mass die-off of Mediterranean monk seals in 1997 that devastated the Cabo 

Blanco subpopulation. The cause of the 1997 die-off has never been explicitly determined, but a 

viral strain closely related to the morbillivirus implicated in a mass die-off of striped dolphin 

Stenella coeruleoalba in 1991 was discovered in many of the seals, including asymptomatic pups 

who were rescued after their mothers died. Unlike previous morbillivirus-associated events, 

many of the deceased seals were in good condition and did not exhibit any overt signs of the 

virus (Hardwood 1998, Hernandez et al. 1998). However, the seals did exhibit symptoms 

14
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

consistent with exposure to paralytic shellfish poison saxitoxins. Three toxic dinoflagellate 

species were identified in high concentration in waters near the seal colony, and fish collected 

from known feeding grounds were positive for the saxitoxins (Hernandez et al. 1998). Thus, 

paralysis following the consumption of fish contaminated with the saxitoxins may have been the 

cause of or contributed to the mass die-off (Hernandez et al. 1998). 

Unfortunately, a limited understanding of the effects of saxitoxins on marine mammals has 

prevented biologists from attributing the mass die-off to the saxitoxins and paralytic shellfish 

poisoning. Ultimately, both the saxitoxins and morbillivirus may have been contributors 

(Harwood 1998). Regardless of the cause, mass mortalities can have far-reaching impacts on 

population biology, and the 1997 mass die-off reduced the breeding population in Cabo Blanco 

to fewer than 77 individuals, which further reduced the population's genetic variability and may 

have compromised the species’ persistence (Forcada et al. 1999, Fire et al. 2012). 

Viral outbreaks represent a dangerous (albeit not the most imminent) threat to the seal population 

for several reasons. First, the proximity of seals during the breeding season, especially in the 

Cabo Blanco subpopulation that uses only a handful of caves, creates the perfect atmosphere for 

extensive transmission of the virus between seals. Second, each of the subpopulations 

demonstrates a severe lack of genetic diversity. Thus, mounting a defense to a virus is 

substantially harder (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). Finally, there are so few individuals to 

begin with, that the death of only a few seals could represent a substantial loss to any 

subpopulation (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). 

Predation 

Although predation by sharks has been a cause for concern in the Hawaiian monk seal 

population (particularly for pups; Bertilsson-Friedman 2006, C. Littnan personal 

communication) and has been documented in the Mediterranean (Pujol 2015), predation is not 

considered a significant source of mortality for the Mediterranean monk seal. 

2.3.2.4 Inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms: 

The Mediterranean monk seal has been classified as “Endangered” by the International Union for 

the Conservation of Nature (IUCN; Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015) and is legally protected 

throughout its range via regional, national, and international legislation, including the 

Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals, Convention on the 

Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, Barcelona Convention, Convention on 

Biological Diversity, and Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 

Fauna and Flora. Countries with jurisdiction over the species’ strongholds have designated 

numerous protected areas, including the Desertas Islands Nature Reserve (Madeira), the National 

Marine Park of Alonnisos-Northern Sporades Islands (NMPANS; Greece), the marine protected 

area in Northern Karpathos–Saria (Greece), the 3-mile no-take zone at the Island of Gyaros 

(Greece), the no-fishing area of the Cabo Blanco peninsula, and a participative reserve 

surrounding pupping caves in Cabo Blanco. In the 2014 National Action Plan for the 

Conservation of the Mediterranean Monk Seal in the Aegean and Mediterranean Sea, Turkey 

began piloting five “Monk Seal Protection Areas (MSPAs),” including Gökçeada-Bocaada-Baba, 

Foça-Yeni Foça and Karaburun-Mordoğan, Çeşme-Alaçatı, Küdür Yarımadası-Bodrum 

15
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yarımadası, and Gazipaşa-Taşucu. In addition to some site-specific protections, the MSPA 

designation prohibits the entering of monk seal caves by any means, all types of construction, 

and exceeding defined speed limits while in an MSPA. The designation also regulates fishing 

and the operation of fish farms within MSPAs. 

Additionally, the European Union’s Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) lists the Mediterranean 

monk seal in the directive’s Annexes II and IV. Via Annex II the monk seal is designated as a 

species of Community interest whose conservation requires the creation of Special Areas of 

Conservation (SAC). The Directive mandates Member States to designate SACs to protect 

species listed in Annex II, and those sites are then linked together to create a coherent European 

ecological network called Natura 2000. As of 2015, the Mediterranean monk seal is mentioned in 

102 Natura 2000 sites within the European Union (82 sites in Greece, 10 in Italy, 5 in Spain, 3 in 

Portugal, and 2 in Cyprus). Annex IV requires Member States to take measures to establish a 

system of strict protection for the species, and they must establish a system to monitor the 

incidental capture and killing of such species (Notarbartolo di Sciara et al. 2009). 

Numerous international entities, including the Regional Activity Centre for Specially Protected 

Areas (RAC/SPA) and the General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean, have 

constructed and passed proposals to ameliorate current threats to the Mediterranean monk seal. 

For instance, the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) has a Mediterranean Action 

Plan (most recently updated in 2013) in force for the conservation and management of monk 

seals throughout the Mediterranean, Greece has the “National Strategy and Action Plan for the 

Conservation of the Mediterranean Monk Seal in Greece: 2009-2015,” and in Turkey the 

National Monk Seal Committee drafted a “National Action Plan for the Conservation of 

Mediterranean Monk Seal Monachus monachus in Turkey” that has been approved by the 

Turkish Ministry of Forest and Water Works (Kıraç et al. 2013). There is also an Action Plan for 

the recovery of monk seals in the eastern Atlantic under the Migratory Species of Wild Animals 

Convention (Bonn Convention). Furthermore, many workshops and conferences have brought 

together scientists and managers to discuss monk seal conservation issues and problems. 

However, despite the numerous agreements, conventions, and treaties in force to protect the 

species, the existing mechanisms do not afford the species and its habitat sufficient protection for 

the species’ recovery. Illegal fishing (including the use of explosives) and overfishing routinely 

occur throughout the species’ range, including in protected areas containing important habitat for 

the species. Humans continue to deliberately kill monk seals without prosecution, and 

encroachment on monk seal habitat continues relatively unabated by current legislation. 

Ultimately, many of the protections afforded to the seals and their habitat are poorly 

implemented, and many important sites lack any formal protection (Notarbartolo di Sciara and 

Kotomatas 2016). 

The failure of many conservation efforts seems to be related to three factors (Notarbartolo di 

Sciara and Kotomatas 2016). First, there is limited political will or ability to enforce relevant 

legislation. Lack of financial resources, labor, and public interest have plagued the ability of 

institutions to properly implement conservation efforts. Second, ineffective international 

coordination has resulted in a piecemeal conservation strategy. Third, the focus of conservation 

16
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

actions has emphasized monk seal ecology and biology rather than ameliorating human 

interactions. 

Most successful conservation measures have been implemented by NGOs rather than by 

governmental institutions. For instance, systematic monitoring of incidental captures and killings 

of monk seals—mandatory for all European Member States under the provisions of the Habitat 

Directive—has been carried out by NGOs, such as MOm and SAD-AFAG (Sualtı Araştırmaları 

Derneği - Akdeniz Foku Araştırma Gurubu or Underwater Research Society - Mediterranean 

Seal Research Group), a Turkish NGO. MOm and SAD‐AFAG have also developed a joint 

Species Specific Contingency Plan for mass mortality events in the Eastern Mediterranean, 

including a plan in response to oil spills. The Plan is pending adoption by the authorities of both 

countries. 

2.3.2.5 Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence: 

Fisheries Interactions 

The frequency of fishery‐related deaths (i.e., deliberate killings and entanglements) are 

considered one of the main threats prohibiting the recovery of the Mediterranean monk seal. 

Deliberate killings are usually committed by fishermen in response to damage to fishing gear or 

lost catch. Although the deliberate killing of a monk seal is illegal, fishermen have been 

observed shooting seals and using explosives in occupied caves (Johnson 1988). Deliberate 

killing is primarily a threat to this species in the areas of Greece, Turkey, and Cabo Blanco. 

Deliberate killing of monk seals was responsible for a third of recorded mortalities in Greece 

from 1991 to 1995 (Androukaki et al. 1999), and is often considered the single most important 

source of mortality in the eastern Mediterranean (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). Deliberate 

killings may also be responsible for the extirpation of monk seals on open beaches across the 

Cabo Blanco peninsula (González and Fernandez de Larrinoa 2012). 

Accidental entanglement in fishing gear and drowning as a result of entanglement (especially in 

static nets) is a major source of mortality, particularly for sub-adult monk seals in the eastern 

Mediterranean. Tempted by an easy meal, younger seals tend to be less cautious and experienced 

than adults when approaching nets and often are not strong enough to disentangle themselves. 

Monk seals can become entangled in a wide variety of fishing gear, including set-nets, trawl nets, 

and long lines. Of the three major subpopulations, negative seal-fishery interactions seem to be 

the lowest in the Madeira region, likely due to the prohibition of gill nets in the area and strict 

enforcement of other protective fishing regulations around the main pupping sites at the Desertas 

islands (Hale et al. 2011). However, negative interactions with fishermen are still regularly 

recorded (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015), and the fact that the species is repopulating the 

main island of Madeira means that fisheries interactions are likely to increase (Pires et al. 2008). 

Reduction and overexploitation of forage due to fishing, in combination with negative fishery 

interactions, has caused some problems for the species. Generally, reductions in forage have 

driven seals away from natal areas, which has affected growth, reproduction, and juvenile 

survival and mortality rates throughout the Mediterranean (Isräels 1992). Reductions in forage 

have also caused some extreme issues, including the near extirpation of a colony in southern 

17
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Turkey (Karamanlidis and Dendrinos 2015). Reductions in forage also exacerbate “stealing” 

catch from fishing operations (Johnson and Karamanlidis 2000, Karamanlidis et al. 2008). 

Shipping Interactions 

Mediterranean monk seals are also at an unknown (but suspected high) level of risk from oil 

tanker and other ship accidents, spills, and groundings. Increases in tanker traffic increase the 

possibility of accidents, disturbance, and collisions near important habitat. Four accidents or 

spills have occurred near seal habitat in the past, including a supertanker that spilled oil off 

Morocco in 1989 (Isräels 1992), an oil spill in the Madeira Islands in 1990 (UNEP 2005), and 

the grounding of a bulk carrier near Cabo Blanco in 2003 (UNEP 2005). None of these spills or 

accidents had any known impacts on Mediterranean monk seals. However, a ship accident that 

occurred at Çavuş Island near Bodrum in southwest Turkey in 1996 directly affected monk seals 

and their habitat (Kıraç 1998). A yearlong clean-up operation was required to restore the habitat 

to its original quality. In response to this accident, Turkey has taken regulatory measures to 

reduce the threat from oil spills (Kıraç and Güçlüsoy 2007). 

Other 

Additional threats to the Mediterranean monk seal and its recovery include negative effects 

resulting from political instability, the challenge of implementing effective conservation in a 

multi-national environment (see section 2.3.2.4 Inadequacy of existing regulatory 

mechanisms), stochastic events (e.g., toxic algal blooms - see section 2.3.2.3 Disease or 

predation, viral outbreaks - see section 2.3.2.3 Disease or predation, rock slides, and cave 

collapses[González et al. 1997]), and climate change (Otero et al. 2013). 

Sovereignty over Western Sahara (and consequently part of the Cabo Blanco peninsula) has been 

contested by Morocco, Mauritania, and the Polisario Front (the national liberation movement 

opposing outside control of the region). Claims of sovereignty by Morocco and Mauritania began 

in the early 1960’s and grew following Spain’s withdrawal from the region in 1975. Mauritania 

eventually left the conflict in 1979, abandoned their claim to the region, and recognized the 

Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic in 1984. Morocco immediately took the territory previously 

occupied by Mauritania, and conflict over the sovereignty of Western Sahara remains unresolved 

today between Morocco and the Polisario Front. This political instability has important 

conservation implications for the Mediterranean monk seal, as the Western Sahara currently does 

not participate in many of the international conservation agreements that provide protection to 

the seals (e.g., CITES). Furthermore, the lack of a consistent, recognized authority can create 

inconsistent conservation standards and policies for this important subpopulation. 

Although there is limited evidence on the exact implications, climate change will also affect the 

Mediterranean monk seal. As sea levels rise, the number of and available space within breeding 

and resting marine caves will become increasingly scarce (Otero et al. 2013). Furthermore, there 

have been reports of a shift in the pupping season from end-of-summer months to autumn and 

winter months, which coincides with a period of more frequent sea storms (UNEP/MAPRAC/SPA 2006). 

18
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.4 Synthesis 

As of 2015, fewer than 700 Mediterranean monk seals are estimated to remain throughout the 

Mediterranean and Northeast Atlantic (Karamanlidis et al. 2015). The species’ primary threats— 

displacement and habitat deterioration, deliberate killing by humans, and fisheries bycatch and 

entanglement—have led to severely reduced abundance and fragmentation of the species. In 

some places, the species’ current abundance is predicted to represent only about 3% of historical 

abundance (UNEP/MAP–RAC/SPA 2006), and the species is confined to three small, isolated 

subpopulations in the eastern Mediterranean, the archipelago of Madeira, and the Cabo Blanco 

peninsula. However, the species is showing signs of localized recovery in each of the three 

subpopulations, and the current estimate of abundance is greater than the 350-450 individuals 

estimated in 2010 (Aguilar and Lowry 2010). For example, until recently the subpopulation 

located in the archipelago of Madeira was restricted mostly to the Desertas Islands, but seals 

have now begun recolonizing the main island of Madeira (Pires 2011). Additionally, vagrant 

animals have been sighted throughout the Mediterranean providing support that, given the 

opportunity, there is potential for recolonization of these areas. 

These small, localized recoveries are likely the result of several factors (see Section 2.3.1.2; 

Notarbartolo di Sciara and Kotomatas 2016), including the involvement of NGOs in 

conservation, shifting paradigms on environmental welfare, a reduction in fisheries employment, 

and the inaccessibility of the seals due to their habitat. Unfortunately, there is much uncertainty 

surrounding the continuance of these localized recoveries and their translation to a recovery for 

the species as a whole, particularly given the population’s susceptibility to mass die-offs and the 

imminence of new threats such as climate change. Additionally, conservation efforts have 

suffered from lack of cooperation among nations to effectively enact a range-wide strategy, lack 

of capital, and limited political willingness to enforce relevant legislature. For these reasons, we 

conclude the Mediterranean monk seal is currently in danger of extinction throughout its range. 

3.0 RESULTS 

3.1 Recommended Classification: 

____ Downlist to Threatened 

____ Uplist to Endangered 

____ Delist (Indicate reasons for delisting per 50 CFR 424.11): 

____ Extinction 

____ Recovery 

____ Original data for classification in error 

X No change is needed 

3.2 New Recovery Priority Number: N/A 

3.3 Listing and Reclassification Priority Number: N/A 

19
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE ACTIONS 

As the species’ range falls solely outside the jurisdiction of the United States, NMFS should, in 

coordination with the State Department, continue to encourage Mediterranean countries to 

conserve the Mediterranean monk seal. Conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal primarily 

falls to those countries with jurisdiction over the species’ strongholds, namely Greece, Turkey, 

Mauritania, Western Sahara, and Portugal (Madeira). However, if a full recovery of the species is 

to be realized, there will need to be cooperation of countries throughout the Mediterranean on 

concerted conservation actions. NMFS should examine the conservation priorities and actions for 

the Mediterranean and Northeast Atlantic subpopulations (e.g., see Table 1; Karamanlidis et al. 

(2015) to determine if there are ways to support high priority conservation actions. 

In addition to the ESA, several domestic instruments may promote the conservation of the 

Mediterranean monk seal. The first is via the United States’ recent rule (81 FR 54390, August 

15, 2016) implementing the import provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act. The rule 

states that trade partners must show that killing or injuring marine mammals incidental to fishing 

activities, or bycatch, in their export fisheries do not exceed the United States’ standards. The 

rule will go into full effect following a 5-year exemption period in 2022. By the end of the 

exemption period and every four years thereafter, a harvesting nation must have applied for and 

received a comparability finding for its fisheries to export fish and fish products to the United 

States. To receive a comparability finding, the harvesting nation must demonstrate (1) it has 

prohibited the intentional mortality or serious injury of marine mammals in the course of 

commercial fishing operations, unless the intentional mortality or serious injury of a marine 

mammal is imminently necessary in self-defense or to save the life of a person in immediate 

danger and (2) its regulatory program with respect to incidental mortality and serious injury of 

marine mammals in the course of commercial fishing operations is comparable to the United 

States’ regulatory program. While the majority of the United States’ fish and fish products may 

not be imported from this area of the world, the United States imported over $100 million worth 

of fish and fish products in 2016 from Cyprus, Greece, Mauritania, Portugal, and Turkey 

(National Marine Fisheries Service Fisheries Statistics and Economics Division 2017; 

http://www.st.nmfs.noaa.gov/commercial-fisheries/foreign-trade/applications/annual-product-bycountryassociation; Table 2), so there may be some economic foundation on which to encourage 

conservation. 

Regulations (50 CFR Part 300) enacted under the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium 

Protection Act allow the United States “to identify and certify nations whose vessels are engaged 

in illegal, unreported, or unregulated fishing or whose fishing activities result in bycatch of 

protected living marine resources (PLMRs). PLMRs include non-target fish, sea turtles, or 

marine mammals that are protected under United States law or international agreement, 

including the Marine Mammal Protection Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Shark Finning 

Prohibition Act, and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora 

and Fauna. Identified nations that do not receive a positive certification may be subject to trade 

restrictive measures for certain fishery products. The Moratorium Protection Act also authorizes 

cooperation and assistance to nations that are taking action to combat illegal, unreported, or 

unregulated fishing or reduce bycatch of protected living marine resources. 

20
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/ia/iuu/msra_page/highseas_final_rule.pdf)” Thus, we may be able to 

incentivize nations to protect the monk seal in order to avoid trade restrictions. 

Lastly, as more information on the Mediterranean monk seal and its various subpopulations 

becomes available, future 5-year reviews may consider whether the Mediterranean monk seal 

subpopulations represent two Distinct Population Segments (DPSs): the eastern Mediterranean 

DPS consisting of the eastern Mediterranean subpopulation and the Northeast Atlantic DPS 

consisting of the Madeira and Cabo Blanco subpopulations. Genetic studies comparing the 

eastern Mediterranean subpopulation and the Northeast Atlantic subpopulations show that the 

two groups exhibit genetic (Stanley and Harwood 1997, Pastor et al. 2007, Karamanlidis et al. 

2015) and morphological differences (van Bree 1979). The two groups are also separated by 

approximately 4,000 km (Aguilar and Lowry 2013)—much farther than any recorded distance 

traveled by a Mediterranean monk seal. Furthermore, there are differences in management and 

conservation of the species across international boundaries. For instance, in Madeira, use of 

certain fishing gears found to entangle seals has been completely banned. Additionally, 

management of subpopulations in Madeira and Cabo Blanco requires cooperation among fewer 

entities. Each of these factors describes marked separation between the groups. However, 

Congress indicated that DPS listings should be used sparingly. NMFS should weigh whether the 

Mediterranean monk seal would gain an overriding conservation benefit by being listed as DPSs. 

Application of the DPS policy to this species may confer the most conservation benefit if 

differences in management throughout the species’ range begin to recover the subpopulations at 

different rates. 

5.0 REFERENCES 

Acevedo-Gutiérrez, A. 2009. Group behavior. Pages 511-520 in W. F. Perrin, B. Würsig, and J. 

G. M. Thewissen, editors. Encyclopedia of marine mammals (second edition). Elsevier 

Science, Burlington, Massachusetts. 

Aguilar, A. 1999. Biological factors affecting variability of persistent pollutant levels in 

cetaceans. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 1:83-116. 

Aguilar, A., L. H. Cappozzo, M. Gazo, T. Pastor, J. Forcada, and E. Grau. 2007. Lactation and 

mother-pup behaviour in the Mediterranean Monk Seal Monachus monachus: an unusual 

pattern for a Phocid. Journal of Marine Biology Association of the United Kingdom 87:93­

99. 

Aguilar, A., and L. Lowry. (IUCN SSC Pinniped Specialist Group). 2010. Monachus monachus. 

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 

Aguilar, A. and L. Lowry. (IUCN SSC Pinniped Specialist Group). 2013. Monachus monachus. 

The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 

Androukaki, E., S. Adamantopoulou, P. Dendrinos, E. Tounta, and S. Kotomatas. 1999. Causes 

of mortality in the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in Greece. Contributions 

to the Zoogeography and Ecology of the Eastern Mediterranean Region 1:405–411. 

Androukaki E., E. Fatsea, L. Hart, A. Osterhaus, E. Tounta, S. Kotomatas. 2002. Growth and 

development of Mediterranean monk seal pups during rehabilitation. The Monachus 

Guardian 5. 

Atkinson, S. 1997. Reproductive biology of seals. Reviews of Reproduction 2:175-194. 

21
 
 

 

 

 

 

Badosa, E., E. Grau, F. Aparicio, J. F. Layna, and M. A. Cedenilla. 1998. Individual variation 

and sexual dimorphism of coloration in Mediterranean monk seal pups (Monachus 

monachus). Marine Mammal Science 14:390–393. 

Badosa, E., T. Pastor, M. Gazo, A. Aguilar. 2006. Moult in the Mediterranean monk seal from 

Cap Blanc, Western Sahara. African Zoology 41:183–192. 

Baker, J. R. Pollution-associated uterine lesions in grey seals from the Liverpool Bay area of the 

Irish Sea. Veterinary Record 125:303-303.

Beköz, A. B., S. Beköz, E. Yilmaz, S. Tüzün, and Ü Beköz. 2013). Consequences of the 

increasing prevalence of the poisonous Lagocephalus sceleratus in southern Turkey. 

Emergency Medicine Journal 30:954–955. 

Berkes, F., H. Anat, M. Esenel, and M. Kislalioglu. 1979. Distribution and ecology of Monachus 

monachus on Turkish Coasts. Pages 113-128 in K. Ronald and R. Duguy, editors. First 

International Conference on the Mediterranean Monk Seal, Rhodes, Greece, 2-5 May 1978. 

Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK. UNEP Technical Series. 

Bertilsson‐Friedman, P. 2006. Distribution and frequencies of shark‐inflicted injuries to the 

endangered Hawaiian monk seal (Monachus schauinslandi). Journal of Zoology 268:361­

368. 

Borrell, A., A. Aguilar, and T. Pastor. 1997. Organochlorine pollutant levels in Mediterranean 

monk seals from the Western Mediterranean and the Sahara Coast. Marine Pollution Bulletin 

34:505-510. 

Borrell, A., G. Cantos, A. Aguilar, E. Androukaki, and P. Dendrinos. 2007. Concentrations and 

patterns of organochlorine pesticides and PCBs in Mediterranean monk seals (Monachus 

monachus) from Western Sahara and Greece. Science of the Total Environment 381:316­

325. 

Brito, C. 2012. Portuguese sealing and whaling activities as contributions to understand early 

northeast Atlantic environmental history of marine mammals. Pages 207-222 in A. Romero 

and E. O. Keith, editors. New Approaches to the Study of Marine Mammals. InTech, 

dx.doi.org/10.5772/54213. 

Brouwer, A., P. J. H. Reijnders, and J. H. Koeman. 1989. Polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)­

contaminated fish induces vitamin A and thyroid hormone deficiency in the common seal 

(Phoca vitulina). Aquatic Toxicology 15:99-106. 

Cedenilla, M. A., L. M. González, H. M’Barek, M. Haya, A. Maroto, M. Muñoz Cañas M, P. 

Fernandez de Larrinoa. 2007. Evolution of pup production and pup mortality rate of the 

Mediterranean monk seal colony of Cabo Blanco (Mauritania-Morocco) after a mass 

mortality episode. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the European Cetacean 

Society. 

Demetropoulos, A. 2011. National action plan for the conservation of the Mediterranean monk 

seal in Cyprus. 

Dendrinos, P. 2011. Contribution to the study of the Mediterranean monk seal’s (Monachus 

monachus) ecology and biology at the island complex of Northern Sporades, Greece. 

National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. 

Dendrinos, P., A. A. Karamanlidis, S. Kotomatas, A. Legakis, E. Tounta, and J. Matthiopoulos. 

2007. Pupping habitat use in the Mediterranean monk seal: a long‐term study. Marine 

Mammal Science 23:615-628. 

22
 
 

 

 

 

Dendrinos, P., A. A. Karamanlidis, S. Kotomatas, V. Paravas, and S. Adamantopoulou. 2008. 

Report of a new Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) breeding colony in the 

Aegean Sea, Greece. Aquatic Mammals 34:355. 

Dendrinos P., S. Kotomatas, and E. Tounta. 1999. Monk seal pup production in the National 

Marine Park of Alonissos‐N. Sporades. Contributions to the Zoogeography and Ecology of 

the Eastern Mediterranean Region 1:413‐419. 

Fire, S. E., and F. M. Van Dolah. 2012. Marine biotoxins: emergence of harmful algal blooms as 

health threats to marine wildlife. Pages 374-389 in A. A. Aguirre, R. S. Ostfield, and P. 

Daszak, editors. New directions in conservation medicine: applied cases in ecological health. 

Oxford University Press, New York. 

Forcada, J., and A. Aguilar. 2000. Use of photographic identification in capture-recapture studies 

of Mediterranean monk seals. Marine Mammal Science 16:767-793. 

Forcada, J., P. S. Hammond, and A. Aguilar. 1999. The status of the Mediterranean monk seal 

Monachus monachus in the Western Sahara and the implications of a mass mortality event. 

Marine Ecology Progress Series 188:249-261. 

Fulton, T. L., and C. Strobeck. 2010. Multiple fossil calibrations, nuclear loci and mitochondrial 

genomes provide new insight into biogeography and divergence timing for true seals 

(Phocidae, Pinnipedia). Journal of Biogeography 37:814-829. 

Fyler, C. A., T. W. Reeder, A. Berta, G. A. Antonelis, A. Aguilar, and E. Androukaki. 2005. 

Historical biogeography and phylogeny of monachine seals (Pinnipedia:Phocidae) based on 

mitochondrial and nuclear DNA data. Journal of Biogeography 32:1267-1279. 

Garza, J. C. 1998. Population genetics of the northern elephant seal. Doctoral dissertation, 

University of California, Berkeley, California. 

Gazo, M., and A. Aguilar. 2005. Maternal attendance and diving behavior of a lactating 

Mediterranean monk seal. Marine Mammal Science 21:340-345. 

Gazo, M., F. Aparicio, M. A. Cedenilla, J. F. Layna, and L. M. González. 2000. Pup survival in 

the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) colony at Cabo Blanco Peninsula 

(Western Sahara-Mauritania). Marine Mammal Science 16:158-168. 

Gazo, M., J. F. Layna, F. Aparicio, M. A. Cedenilla, L. M. González, and A. Aguilar. 1999. 

Pupping season, perinatal sex ratio and natality rates of the Mediterranean monk seal from 

the Cabo Blanco colony. Journal of Zoology 249:393-401. 

Gemmell, N. J., P. J. Allen, S. J. Goodman, and J. Z. Reed. 1997. Interspecific microsatellite 

markers for the study of pinniped populations. Molecular Ecology 6:661–666. 

Gerber, L. R., and R. Hilborn. 2001. Catastrophic events and recovery from low densities in 

populations of otariids: implications for risk of extinction. Mammal Review 31:131–150. 

Gilmartin, W. G., and J. Forcada. 2002. Monk seals Monachus monachus, M. tropicalis, and M. 

schauinslandi. Pages 756-759 in W. F. Perrin, B. Würsig, and J. G. M. Thewissen, editors. 

Encyclopedia of Marine Mammals. Academic Press, San Diego, California. 

González, L. M. 2015. Prehistoric and historic distributions of the critically endangered 

Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in the eastern Atlantic. Marine Mammal 

Science 31:1168-1192. 

González, L. M., A. Aguilar, L. F. López-Jurado, and E. Grau. 1997. Status and distribution of 

the Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus on the Cabo Blanco peninsula (Western 

Sahara-Mauritania) in 1993–1994. Biological Conservation 80:225-233. 

23
 
 

 

 

 

 

González, L. M., M. A. Cedenilla, P. F. Larrinoa, J. F. Layna, and F. Aparicio. 2002. Changes in 

the breeding variables of the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) colony of 

Cabo Blanco Peninsula after a mass mortality episode. Mammalia 6:173–182. 

González, L. M., and P. Fernandez de Larrinoa. 2012. Mediterranean monk seal Monachus 

monachus distribution and fisheries interactions in the Atlantic Sahara during the second half 

of the 20th century. Mammalia 77:41-49. 

González, L. M., E. Grau, L. F. López-Jurado, A. Aguilar, and R. Samaranch. 1996. Variation 

with age and sex of pelage coloration in monk seals (Monachus monachus) from Cabo 

Blanco. Pages 313-315 in P. G. H. Evans, editor. Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference 

of the European Cetacean Society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 

Grau, E., A. Aguilar, J. González, M. San Felix, L. M. González, L. F. López-Jurado. 1994. 

Photo-identification of Mediterranean monk seals (Monachus monachus) in the coast of the 

southern Sahara. Pages 279-280 in European Cetacean Society, editor. Proceedings of the 8th 

Annual Conference of the European Cetacean Society. Cambridge University Press, 

Cambridge, UK. 

Güçlüsoy, H., C. O. Kıraç, N. O. Veryeri, and Y. Savaş. 2004. Status of the Mediterranean monk 

seal, Monachus monachus (Hermann, 1779) in the coastal waters of Turkey. Journal of 

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 21:201-210. 

Güçlüsoy, H., and Y. Savaş. 2003. Interaction between monk seals Monachus monachus 

(Hermann, 1779) and marine fish farms in the Turkish Aegean and the management of the 

problem. Aquaculture Research 34:777-783. 

Gücü, A. C., G. Gücü, and H. Orek. 2004. Habitat use and preliminary demographic evaluation 

of the critically endangered Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in the Cilician 

Basin (Eastern Mediterranean). Biological Conservation 116:417-431. 

Gücü, A. C., M. Ok, and S. Sakinan. 2009a. A survey of the critically endangered Mediterranean 

monk seal Monachus monachus (Hermann, 1779) along the coast of Northern Cyprus. Israel 

Journal of Ecology and Evolution 55:77–82. 

Gücü, A. C., S. Sakinan, and M. Ok. 2009b. Occurrence of the critically endangered 

Mediterranean monk seal, Monachus monachus (Hermann, 1779), at Olympos-Beydağları 

National Park, Turkey. Zoology in the Middle East 46:3–8. 

Hale, R., R. Pires, P. Santos, and A. A. Karamanlidis. 2011. Mediterranean monk seal 

(Monachus monachus): fishery interactions in the Archipelago of Madeira. Aquatic 

Mammals 37:298–304. 

Harwood, J. 1998. What killed the monk seals? Nature, 393:17-18. 

Helle, E., M. Olsson, and S. Jensen. 1976. PCB levels correlated with pathological changes in 

seal uteri. Ambio 5:261-263. 

Hernández, M., I. Robinson, A. Aguilar, L. M. González, L. F. López-Jurado, M. I. Reyero, E. 

Cacho, J. Franco, V. López-Rodas, and E. Costas. 1998. Did algal toxins cause monk seal 

mortality? Nature 393:28-29.

Inanmaz, Ö. E., Ö. Değirmenci, and A. C. Gücü. 2014. A new sighting of the Mediterranean 

monk seal, Monachus monachus (Hermann, 1779), in the Marmara Sea (Turkey). Zoology in 

the Middle East 60:278-280. 

Israëls, L. D. E. 1992. Thirty years of Mediterranean monk seal protection: a review. Netherlands 

Commission for International Nature Protection, Mededelingen 28:1‐65. 

Jepson, P. D., and R. J. Law. 2016. Persistent pollutants, persistent threats. Science 352:1388­

1389. 

24
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Jimenez, J. A., K. A. Hughes, G. Alaks, L. Graham, and R. C. Lacy. 1994. An experimental 

study of inbreeding depression in a natural habitat. Science 266:271–273. 

Johnson, W. M. 1988. The monk seal conspiracy. Heretic Books, London. 

Johnson, W. M. 2004. Monk seals in post-classical history. The role of the Mediterranean monk 

seal (Monachus monachus) in European history and culture, from the fall of Rome to the 

20th century. Mededelingen 39. The Netherlands Commission for International Nature 

Protection, Leiden. 

Johnson, W. M., and A. A. Karamanlidis. 2000. When fishermen save seals. The Monachus 

Guardian 3:18-22. 

Johnson, W. M., A. A. Karamanlidis, P. Dendrinos, P. Fernandez de Larrinoa, M. Gazo, L. M. 

González, H. Güçlüsoy, R. Pires, and M. Schnellmann. 2006. Monk Seal Fact Files. Biology, 

behaviour, status and conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal, Monachus monachus. 

The Monachus Guardian. Available at: http://www.monachus-guardian.org/factfiles/ 

medit01.htm. (March 2017). 

Johnson, W. M., and D. M. Lavigne. 1994. Captive breeding and the Mediterranean monk seal ­

a focus on Antibes Marineland. International Marine Mammal Association Inc., Guelph, 

Ontario. 

Johnson, W. M., and D. M. Lavigne. 1999a. Mass tourism and the Mediterranean monk seal: the 

role of mass tourism in the decline and possible future extinction of Europe’s most 

endangered marine mammal, Monachus monachus. The Monachus Guardian 2:31-60. 

Johnson, W. M., and D. M. Lavigne. 1999b. Monk seals in antiquity. The Mediterranean monk 

seal (Monachus monachus) in ancient history and literature. Mededelingen 35. The 

Netherlands Commission for International Nature Protection, Leiden. 

Karamanlidis, A. A. 2009. 20 years of monitoring populations of Mediterranean monk seals in 

Greece. MOm/Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the Monk Seal, Greece. 

Presentation at the Who are our seals? Workshop, European Cetacean Society Annual 

Conference, Istanbul, Turkey. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., S. Adamantopoulou, V. Paravas, M. Psaradellis, and P. Dendrinos. 2013. 

Demographic structure and social behavior of the unique Mediterranean monk seal colony of 

the island of Gyaros. Proceedings of the 20th Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine 

Mammals. Dunedin, New Zealand. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., E. Androukaki, S. Adamantopoulou, A. Chatzispyrou, W. M. Johnson, S. 

Kotomatas, A. Papadopoulos, V. Paravaz, G. Paximadis, R. Pires, E. Tounta, and P. 

Dendrinos. 2008. Assessing accidental entanglement as a threat to the Mediterranean monk 

seal Monachus monachus. Endangered Species Research 5:205-213. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., P. J. Curtis, A. C. Hirons, M. Psaradellis, P. Dendrinos, and J. B. III 

Hopkins. 2014. Stable isotopes confirm a coastal diet for critically endangered Mediterranean 

monk seals. Isotopes in Environmental and Health Studies 50:332-342. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., and P. Dendrinos. 2015. Monachus monachus. The IUCN Red List of 

Threatened Species. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., P. Dendrinos, P. Fernandez de Larrinoa, A. C. Gücü, W. M. Johnson, C. O. 

Kıraç and R. Pires. 2015. The Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus: status, 

biology, threats, and conservation priorities. Mammal Review 46:92-105. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., S. Gaughran, A. Aguilar, P. Dendrinos, D. Huber, R. Pires, J. Schultz, T. 

Skrbinšek, and G. Amato. 2016. Shaping species conservation strategies using mtDNA 

25
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

analysis: The case of the elusive Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus). Biological 

Conservation 193:71-79. 

Karamanlidis, A. A., R. Pires, N. C. Silva, and H. C. Neves. 2004. The availability of resting and 

pupping habitat for the critically endangered Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus 

in the archipelago of Madeira. Oryx 38:180-185. 

Keller, L. F., P. Arcese, J. N. M. Smith, W. M. Hochachka, and S.C. Stearns. 1994. Selection 

against inbred song sparrows during a natural population bottleneck. Nature 372:356–357. 

King, J. E. 1956. The monk seals (genus Monachus). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural 

History) Zoology 3:201–256. 

Kıraç, C.O. 1998. Oil Spill at Cavus Island. The Monachus Guardian 1:24-28. 

Kıraç, C.O. 2001. Witnessing the monk seal’s extinction in the Black Sea. The Monachus 

Guardian 4:204. 

Kıraç, C. O. 2011. Conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus in Turkey 

and the role of coastal and marine protected areas. The 2nd International Conference on 

Marine Mammal Protected Areas, Ankara, Turkey. 

Kıraç, C.O., and H. Güçlüsoy. 2007. Regulation on ships navigation to reduce risk of marine 

accidents in favour of marine and coastal ecosystems on the Aegean coasts in Turkey. 

Rapport Commission International pour l'exploration scientifique de la Mer Mediterranée 38. 

Kıraç, C. O. and H. Güçlüsoy. 2008. Foça and Mediterranean Monk Seal: conservation and 

monitoring of the Mediterranean Monk Seals (Monachus monachus) in Foça Special 

Environment Protection Area. Environmental Protection Agency for Special Areas (EPASA) 

Publications, Ankara, Turkey. 

Kıraç, C., and Y. Savaş. 1996. Status of the monk seal (Monachus monachus) in the 

neighborhood of Eregli, Black Sea coast of Turkey. Zoology in the Middle East 12:5–12. 

Kıraç, C. O., Y. Savaş, H. Güçlüsoy, and N. O. Veryeri. 2002. Observations on diving behaviour 

of free ranging monk seals Monachus monachus on the Turkish coasts. Available at: 

http://www.monachus-guardian.org/mguard09/09scien2.htm. (March 2017). 

Kıraç C. O., N. O. Veryeri, H. Güçlüsoy, and Y. Savaş. 2013. National Action Plan for the 

Conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus in Turkey. UNEP MAP 

RAC/SPA and Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Forest and Water Works, Ankara, Turkey. 

Kretzmann, M. B., N. J. Gemmell, and A. Meyer. 2001. Microsatellite analysis of population 

structure in the endangered Hawaiian monk seal. Conservation Biology 15:457-466. 

Langford, I. H., M. S. Skourtos, A. Kontogianni, R. J. Day, S. Georgiou, and I. J. Bateman. 

2001. Use and nonuse values for conserving endangered species: the case of the 

Mediterranean monk seal. Environment and Planning A 33:2219–2233. 

Ling, J. K. 1970. Pelage and molting in wild mammals with special reference to aquatic forms. 

Quarterly Review of Biology 45:16–54. 

Madsen, T., B. Stille, and R. Shine. 1996. Inbreeding depression in an isolated population of 

adders Vipera berus. Biological Conservation 75:113–118. 

Marchessaux, D. 1989. Recherches sur la Biologie, l’Ecologie et leStatut du Phoque Moine, 

Monachus monachus, GIS Posidonie Publication, Marseille, France. 

Marcou, M. 2015. The Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus in Cyprus. The Monachus 

Guardian. Available at: http://www.monachus-guardian.org/wordpress/2015/05/21/themediterranean-monk-seal-monachus-monachus-in-cyprus/. (March 2017). 

Martínez-Jauregui, M., G. Tavecchia, M. A. Cedenilla, T. Coulson, P. Fernández de Larrinoa, M. 

Muñoz, and L. M. González. 2012. Population resilience of the Mediterranean monk seal 

26
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Monachus monachus at Cabo Blanco peninsula. Marine Ecology Progress Series 461:273­

281. 

Mo, G., H. Bazairi, A. Bayed. and S. Agnesi. 2011. Survey on Mediterranean monk seal 

(Monachus monachus): sightings in Mediterranean Morocco. Aquatic Mammals 37:248-255. 

MOm. 2007. Status of the population of the Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in 

Greece. MOm/Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the Monk seal, Athens, 

Greece. 

MOm. 2008. Annual technical report 2007, on the status of the Mediterranean monk seal 

(Monachus monachus) in Greece. MOm/Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the 

Monk seal, Athens, Greece. 

MOm. 2009. Annual technical report 2008, on the status of the Mediterranean monk seal 

(Monachus monachus) in Greece. MOm/Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the 

Monk seal, Athens, Greece. 

MOm, 2015. Second annual conservation status report of the Mediterranean monk seal 

population in the island of Gyaros. Publication prepared as part of the LIFE-Nature Project 

“CYCLADES LIFE: Integrated Monk Seal Conservation in the Northern Cyclades” (LIFE12 

NAT/GR/000688). Hellenic Society for the Study and Protection of the Monk Seal (MOm). 

43 p. 

Monod, T. 1932. Phoques Sahariens [Saharan seals]. La Terre et la Vie 12:257–261. 

Mursaloglu, B. 1964. Occurrence of the monk seal on the Turkish Coasts. Journal of 

Mammalogy 45:316-317. 

Mursaloglu, B. 1986. Pup-mother-environment relations in the Mediterranean monk seal, 

Monachus monachus (Hermann, 1779), on Turkish coasts. Communications of the Faculty of 

Science of the University of Ankara, Series C, 4:1–8. 

Neves, H. C., and R. Pires. 1999. O Lobo Marinho no Arquipelago da Madeira. Parque Natural 

da Madeira. 

Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., S. Adamantopoulou, E. Androukaki, P. Dendrinos, A. A. 

Karamanlidis, V. Paravas, and S. Kotomatas. 2009. National strategy and action plan for the 

conservation of the Mediterranean monk seal in Greece, 2009–2015. MOm, Athens. 

Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., S., and S. Kotomatas. 2016. Chapter twelve-are Mediterranean monk 

seals, Monachus monachus, being left to save themselves from extinction? Advances in 

Marine Biology 75:359-386. 

Osterhaus, A., M. van de Bildt, L. Vedder, B. Martina, H. Niesters, J. Vos, H. van Egmond, D. 

Liem, R. Baumann, E. Androukaki, S. Kotomatas, A. Komnenou, B. A. Sidi, A. B. Jiddou, 

and M. E. O. Barham. 1998. Monk seal mortality: virus or toxin? Vaccine 16:979-981. 

Otero, M., J. Garrabou, and M. Vargas. 2013. Mediterranean marine protected areas and climate 

change: a guide to regional monitoring and adaptation opportunities. IUCN, Malaga, Spain. 

Panou, A. 2009. Monk seal sightings in the central Ionian Sea: a network of fishermen for the 

protection of the marine resources. Archipelagos—environment and development, Greece, 

presentation at the “Who Are Our Seals?” workshop. European Cetacean Society Annual 

Conference, Istanbul, Turkey. 

Pastor, T. and A. Aguilar. 2003. Reproductive cycle of the female Mediterranean monk seal in 

the Western Sahara. Marine Mammal Science 19:318-330. 

Pastor, T., J. C. Garza, A. Aguilar, E. Tounta, and E. Androukaki. 2007. Genetic diversity and 

differentiation between the two remaining populations of the critically endangered 

Mediterranean monk seal. Animal Conservation 10:461-469. 

27
 
 

 

 

 

Pastor, T., J. C. Garza, P. Allen, W. Amos, and A. Aguilar. 2004. Low genetic variability in the 

highly endangered Mediterranean monk seal. Journal of Heredity 95:291–300. 

Pastor, T., M. Gazo, M. J. Aramburu, M. A. Cedenilla, F. Aparicio, J. F. Layna, E. Grau, L. M. 

González, and A. Aguilar. 1998. Reproductive parameters of the Mediterranean monk seal: 

new data for an old species. Proceedings of the World Marine Mammal Science Conference. 

Workshop on the Biology of the World’s Endangered Monk Seals. The Society for Marine 

Mammalogy and The European Cetacean Society. 

Pierce, G. J., G. Hernandez-Milian, M. B. Santos, P. Dendrinos, M. Psaradellis, E. Tounta, E. 

Androukaki, and A. Edridge. 2011. Diet of the monk seal (Monachus monachus) in Greek 

waters. Aquatic Mammals 37:284-297. 

Pires, R. 2011. Lobos-marinhos do arquipélago da Madeira. Edições do Serviço do Parque 

Natural da Madeira, Funchal, Madeira. 

Pires, R., and H. C. Neves. 2001. Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus conservation: a 

case study in the Desertas Islands. Mammalia 65:301–308. 

Pires, R., H. C. Neves, and A. A. Karamanlidis. 2007. Activity patterns of the Mediterranean 

monk seal (Monachus monachus) in the archipelago of Madeira. Aquatic Mammals 33:327­

336. 

Pires, R., H. C. Neves, and A. A. Karamanlidis. 2008. The critically endangered Mediterranean 

monk seal Monachus monachus in the archipelago of Madeira: priorities for conservation. 

Oryx 42:278-285. 

Pujol, J. A. 2015. On an old case of adult Mediterranean monk seal Monachus monachus 

(Hermann, 1779) predation by white shark, Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758) in 

Balearic Islands, Spain. Boletin de la Real Sociedad Espanola de historia Natural (Seccion 

Biologica) 109:71–74. 

Reijnders, P. J. H. 1980. Organochlorine and heavy metal residues in harbour seals from the 

Wadden Sea and their possible effects on reproduction. Netherlands Journal of Sea Research 

14:30-65. 

Ronald, K., and R. Duguy. 1979. The Mediterranean monk seal. First International Conference 

on the Mediterranean monk seal, Rhodes, Greece, 2-5 May, 1978. United Nations 

Environment Programme. Pergamon Press, Oxford. 

Ronald, K., and M. Yeroulanos. 1984. A conservation plan for Monachus monachus on Greek 

Islands and Coasts. Pages 31-40 in K. Ronald and R. Duguy, editors. Second International 

Conference on the Monk Seals, La Rochelle, France, 5-6 October 1984. Annales de la 

Societé des Sciences Naturelles de la Charente-Maritime. 

Salman, A., M. Bilecenoglu. and H. Güçlüsoy. 2001. Stomach contents of two Mediterranean 

monk seals (Monachus monachus) from the Aegean Sea, Turkey. Journal of the Marine 

Biology Association of the United Kingdom 81:719-720. 

Samaranch, R. and L. M. González. 2000. Changes in morphology with age in Mediterranean 

monk seals (Monachus monachus). Marine Mammal Science 16:141-157. 

Scheel D. M., G. J. Slater, S-O. Kolokotronis, C. W. Potter, D. S. Rotstein, K. Tsangaras, A. D. 

Greenwood, and K. M. Helgen. 2014. Biogeography and taxonomy of extinct and 

endangered monk seals illuminated by ancient DNA and skull morphology. ZooKeys 409:1­

33. 

Schultz, J. K. 2011. Population genetics of the monk seals (genus Monachus): a review. Aquatic 

Mammals 37:227-235. 

28
 
 

 

 

 

 

Stanley, H. F., and J. Harwood. Genetic differentiation among subpopulations of the highly 

endangered Mediterranean monk seal. The role of genetics in conserving small populations. 

Joint Nature Conservation Committee 97-101. 

Stewart, B. S., P. K. Yochem, H. R. Huber, R. L. Delong, R. J. Jameson, W. J. Sydeman, S. G. 

Alle, and B. J. Le Boeuf. 1994. History and present status of the Northern elephant seal 

population. Pages 1-27 in B. J. Le Boeuf and R. M. Laws, editors. Elephant seals: population 

ecology, behavior, and physiology. University of California Press, Los Angeles, California. 

Stringer, C. B., J. C. Finlayson, R. N. E. Barton, Y. Fernandez-Jalvo, I. Caceres, R. C. Sabin, E. 

J. Rhodes, A. P. Currant, J. Rodriguez-Vidal, F. Giles-Pacheco, and J. A. Riquelme-Cantal. 

2008. Neanderthal exploitation of marine mammals in Gibraltar. Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences 105:14319-14324. 

Swart, R. L. de, P. S. Ross, H. H. Timmerman, H. W. Vos, P. J. H. Reijnders, J. G. Vos, and D. 

M. E. Osterhaus. 1995. Impaired cellular immune response in harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) 

fed environmentally contaminated herring. Clinical and Experimental Immunology 101:480­

486. 

Swart, R. L. de, P. S. Ross, L. J. Vedder, H. H. Timmerman, S. H. Heisterkamp, H. Van 

Loversen, J. G. Vos, P. J. H. Reijnders, and D. M. E. Osterhaus. 1994. Impairment of 

immune function in harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) feeding on fish from polluted waters. 

Ambio 23:155-159. 

Taylor, A. C., W. B. Sherwin, and R. K. Wayne. 1994. Genetic variation of microsatellite loci in 

a bottlenecked species: the northern hairy‐nosed wombat Lasiorhinus krefftii. Molecular 

Ecology 3:277-290. 

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2005. Action plan for the recovery of the 

Mediterranean monk seal (Monachus monachus) in the eastern Atlantic. Convention on the 

Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (Bonn Convention) CMS/ScC.13/Inf.3. 

Thirteenth Meeting of the CMS Scientific Council. Nairobi, Kenya. 

UNEP-MAP-RAC/SPA. 2006. Report of the International Conference on Monk Seal 

Conservation. Antalya, Turkey, 17–19 September 2006. Available at: http://www.racspa.org/sites/default/files/doc_monackus/report_int_monk_ seal_conf_antalya_2006.pdf. 

(March 2017). 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and NMFS. 2006. 5-Year review guidance: procedures for 

conducting 5-year reviews under the Endangered Species Act. 74 pages: 

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/laws/esa/policies.htm. 

Van Bree, P. J. H. 1979. Notes on differences between monk seals from the Atlantic and the 

western Mediterranean. Pages 99 in K. Ronald and R. Duguy, editors. The Mediterranean 

Monk Seal. Pergamon Press, Oxford; New York. 

van Haaften, J. L., and F. Reiner. 1984. Monk seals in Portuguese waters. Newsletter of the 

League for the Conservation of the Monk Seal 7:13-14. 

29
 
NATIONAL MARINE FISHERIES SERVICE 

5-YEAR REVIEW 

species 

Current Classification: 

Recommendation resulting from the 5-Year Review 

Downlist to Threatened 

__ Uplist to Endangered 

Delist 

_X No change is needed 

Review Conducted By: 

Assistant Administrator, NOAA Fisheries 

__ Concur Do Not Concur 

Signature ate~.1/~<m30